Gustav Temp Banned For Foul Words?

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Anarcho Union, May 12, 2011.

?

Should foul word use be grounds for a ban?

  1. Yes, it should.

    9 vote(s)
    31.0%
  2. No, it should not.

    12 vote(s)
    41.4%
  3. Other. (Please explain)

    8 vote(s)
    27.6%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,677
    Yes there is. But when the rhetoric becomes spam and what can only be described as trolling, it's another thing altogether.

    People are going to interpret it as they see fit. Sandy would not be the best example, but yeah, we can only tell you what we know and how we see it. Sure there will be some (probably only Sandy herself) who could claim that she was banned for her political views, but when we consider that even other bible thumping and Bush loving conservatives were asking us why and how she could be allowed to remain on this forum due to her trolling, it kind of gives some indication that she came here to goad and flame people with her trolling. When she returned as Diane, she was given a second chance and monitored. But within a few posts, she was back to the same old spam and trolling. While the words "political rhetoric" may not have been the best choice, at the end of the day she was banned for spamming and trolling with the exact same crap that had her thrown out the last time. Had we listened to the other Bible thumping Bush loving conservatives on this forum, she'd probably have been banned much sooner.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,188
    @Bells, [Re: Post #190]

    I honestly do not know where to go from here. I have followed this thread everyday, every post, from day one. I did not even enter the fray nor express any opinion until May 15th around 7:00 P.M. when things appeared to be winding down.

    My first post was pretty much innocuous, consisting of a synopsis of my take on the situation and an attempt to join the others kicking back around a virtual campfire.
    Presumably there are no problems with this particular post, right? At that point I had no real issues with anything that had transpired, no desire to pursue anyone, prove any point, really no agenda at all. Everything of any substance that I wanted to say was encapsulated in that one post and this is where it would have ended. Right there – excepting a peculiar set of circumstances that followed shortly thereafter.

    About an hour and a half later, I noticed a locked thread in the “Today’s Posts” search, which is usually my primary method of navigating this board. I generally do not check any particular Sub Fora or do any specific searching by term, etc. - I take the posts as they come, on a good night I can keep up with every single last thread, at least to some degree. Naturally I spend more time on a thread that appeals to a specific interest of mine, but by and large I just follow the above method, and it works for me.

    I’m here a great deal of time without even logging in. I just like to watch the ebb and flow of things, usually manage to learn a new factoid or two, but occasionally I’ll log in to make a post here and there. On average, no more than two or three posts a night, but I read hundreds.

    Anyway, back to the locked thread. I consistently check these, maybe because I’m just nosy, but I like to think that this practice offers the best way of understanding how things actually work here, as opposed to relying on the “Rules” as they are written. I read the Mod notices religiously, as well as Tiassa’s action notes. (which, by the way, I think are an excellent idea, I wish all the Mods maintained similar threads) This allows me to see the “Rules” in practice rather than in the abstract.

    Considering the content of the Gus thread, I was absolutely amazed at the terminal post in Skaught’s locked thread on morning sickness. I found it incredible in the sense that a normally mild mannered member went over the edge like that, especially since the spotlight is currently shining so brightly on “Offensive Language”.
    I fully expected Skaught to be banned for such blatant abuse of “The Rules” as I understand them, again mindful of the environmental context currently in place regarding just the sort of behavior he exhibited. Hence my second post in the Gus thread, consisting almost solely of a one line opinion: “Oh my - Skaught is like so gone...”

    Despite the normal inconsistency that occurs here on a regular basis, I really believed that this one was just too easy, that no one on the Mod team would risk anything less than a token 24 hour ban. From my perspective, this single post was so egregious compared to Gus damning a dictionary that there would seem to be little choice in the matter. I mean, directly, explicitly saying that certain members were “dumb cunts [who] should piss off and take your assumptious asses elsewhere.”? Seriously?

    I realize that Gustav has basically made a career out of attacking what he apparently perceives as illogical and inconsistent behavior on the part of the Mod and Admin team, and he’s not shy about it, whereas I have never observed Skaught act in this manner, but really? His post is simply “sanitized” and life goes on? I believe the only term to describe my state of mind at that point would be “flabbergasted”.

    I stewed on it a bit, and slowly felt a real sense of injustice begin to envelope me. In other words I started to get really pissed off. After becoming sufficiently emotionally invested in the issue, I foolishly decided that I just had to say something. Mind you, I had no idea at this point that S.A.M. was going to play such a central role in what followed, but if not her, I guess it would have been someone else.

    In any event, this brings me to the third and last post of mine which I will quote here in its entirety. In response to Chimpkin:
    Now, cue S.A.M., whose only response to the above post was:
    Lol? Lol? For real S.A.M.? That’s all you have to say?

    I am very good at being condescending - not so good at taking it – yeah, I know, quite the character flaw.
    (BTW, my condescension can, and often is, equally applied to anyone or everyone, it’s not a sexist thing Bells, as you try to assert below. It’s just pushing whichever buttons work – in your case, I figured the, dear, baby, honey stuff would do the trick, and I was apparently right – I actually have a great deal of respect for you and what you do / did with your career)

    So anyway, I’m smarting from those three little letters of S.A.M.’s, plus the lack of any substantive reply other than a perceived “pish posh, little one, run along now. ‘I think the way Hercules handled it was just fine’. No explanation, no elaboration as to why that should be considered fair when Gus is banned for something much less egregious, regardless of his history, by a Mod known to be, well, let’s just say cranky, from time to time, and allows said crankiness to influence his conduct. (Of course, we’re all human…)

    This creates a target. A big target. I know how S.A.M. operates, and I know you know that it is incredibly difficult to get a concise answer out of her when it comes to matters of opinion, whether you admit it or not. We all know this about SAM, so that became my focus. I was then determined to, quote, “run her to ground” on this one. She was going to come up with some answers this time.

    Until I was able to get the emotional aspect under control, I was relentless in this pursuit. Acting out of emotion is rarely, if ever, a good idea if you’re trying to get someone to cooperate, but, nonetheless, that was the state of affairs existent at the time, and I ran with it.

    None of the above is intended to be offered as an excuse, merely as a little back-story. So please try to refrain from the “wahhh” thing, I’m honestly trying to communicate with you. And that’s pretty much the whole story; you know where it went from there…

    ========================================================
    One last tete-a-tete, then let’s give this up shall we? It’s tiresome, time consuming and nonproductive, much like the allegations you are making vis a vis my treatment of SAM. I’m tired of playing the game, aren’t you, Bells? If you choose not to let it end here, I will respond of course, but meanwhile I’m going to try to diffuse the situation. ‘K?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    You tell me. Herc was referenced in our (SAM and I) little flame war, he stepped in, said his piece, and left. Fine. With you though, it’s like SAM departed the battlefield, out of frustration or just good sense, whatever the case may be, and you step in to take her place. Even escalating the situation is some ways.


    Well, I really was hoping to get an actual “yes” or “no” response to my questions, with or without elaboration on the reasoning. That’s not going to happen, SAM is SAM. So onward and (hopefully) upward – other fish to fry and all…


    Bells, there. was. no. demand. Simply an attempt to keep our sampling accurate in a totally unrelated discussion. I did not make the demand request in the first place that either of should survey the next ten women on their knowledge of basic human biology. I really am trying to focus on the thread topic, so please just drop this unfounded allegation. Thank you.


    Yeah, I was kind of at a loss there…


    Again, irrelevant to this thread. You do genuinely seem interested in the subject though, so if you would like to open a relevant thread, I will participate. I will attempt to gather citations on the answers to many of the questions raised during this current digression – e.g. How many pharmacies refuse to sell which contraceptives where in the US, and which sell dildos.

    That way you will be armed with a map the next time you visit the states.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Yes, that was another attempt at humor, ever how poor


    This is actually my point – this is not the thread for her to be discussing “early pregnancy knowledge issue with Lucy”. Once again.


    Already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section.


    Bells these are opinions based on sheer speculation on your part. I acknowledge that this is what you perceive that I am feeling, but I think maybe, just in this instance I may be better qualified to answer the allegation(s). No, I am not being paranoid, just tired. Yes, I may be gloating a little, but not for the reasons that you apparently think I am.


    Already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section.


    Randwolf has neither the desire nor the stamina to gain that title. Although I may attempt to bag another one at a some time in the future, I certainly do not intend to make a career of such.


    While I still maintain that I am unable to find any yes or no answers, I really don’t care. The only one I ever cared about was “Do you think that the actions vis a vis Gustav, Skaught and chosenbygrace were equitable?” As in: Yes or No + optional “elaboration on why you feel that way”. Period.


    Frankly, she treated me the way she chose to, which apparently differs from the way you would conduct yourself. Fine.


    Whether this is true or not, personally I simply would have humored someone who requests 7 whole questions be answered with a minimum of either “yes” or “no”. This amounts to a total maximum of 21 letters. Yes, Bells, 21 letters. That’s seven yes’s, any no’s would lower that number. It’s not so much that she didn’t answer the question at all, which is, I suspect, what you are alluding to, but rather that her answers were ambiguous and open to interpretation.

    As to the Rhino reference (your word, just for the record, before that bites me in the backside somehow), please don’t tell me that I hurt her feelings, did I? Seriously?


    As do I.


    I was and I did.


    I’m not, but thank you for your concern.


    You’re not telling me anything I don’t already know. I took it upon myself to bitch about that situation, because, really, when it comes down to it, that’s all I can do if I have an issue with the “way things are”. I accept this.


    Ummm – greater consistency across the multiple fora? Increased clarity as to what, exactly, is considered acceptable and what is not? And personally, for everyone to relax a little, but that’s more of a straight up wish than any sort of reasonable “request”.


    Is this an option?
    And yes, that was yet another attempt at humor. Please do not try to twist it into some sort of “threat”.


    Already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section.


    Actually, yes, if you would care to participate. Only the central question though…
    “Do you think that the actions vis a vis Gustav, Skaught and chosenbygrace were equitable?” As in: Yes or No + optional “elaboration on why you feel that way”.


    Extremely so, and represents all of what I would have liked SAM to provide. Was it very difficult? (For real) Wouldn’t it have been easier all-round if the conversation with SAM had gone like that?


    No, but what is it with your obsession with blood tonight? That’s a least two references in one post. Are you alright?


    This stuff was covered in my opening statement. (Cite “condescending”)


    If you say so…


    Perhaps. But not in relation to Skaught and whatsername grace, and the incongruity amongst the three’s “punishments”.


    I did. I believe I comprehended the great majority of it as well, but see last point for clarification on the actual question I was posing. You know, the whole “Do you think that the actions vis a vis Gustav, Skaught and chosenbygrace were equitable?” thingie. As in: Yes or No + optional “elaboration on why you feel that way”.


    Already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section.


    Whatever you’d like, baby Stewie…

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    Already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section, Stewie Bells.


    Already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section.


    This stuff was covered in my opening statement. (Cite “condescending”)


    Actually quite the converse, as was already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section.


    This stuff was covered in my opening statement. (Cite “condescending”)


    Yes. Yes, I do actually. I’m sorry, the role of “victim” never has played well for me. I try now and again, but it never seems to work out for me.


    No. Just one exhausting one at the moment, and I wouldn’t say that Mod was being, well, mean exactly. Just exhausting.


    This was already explicitly addressed – see point two here in this section.


    Thank you. I can’t help but wonder at the sincerity, though. I will however, take it at face value, I just wonder whence cometh this opinion…


    No, I swear SAM has never been beneath me. And that, my esteemed colleague, is my last attempt at lame humor for today.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    So, for the edification of members, what are the sacred tomes/scriptures which must not be profaned in the linguistics forum?

    The OED is one. What about Roget's Thesaurus? Elements of Style by Strunk and White? Eats Shoots and Leaves by Lynne Truss? And what are the foul words to be avoided while addressing these tomes?
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,558
    Everyone should take the note

    I'm actually reminded of the delightful film version of How to Train Your Dragon:

    Gobber: If you ever want to get out there to fight dragons, you need to stop all ... this. [gestures]

    Hiccup: But you just pointed to all of me!

    Gobber: Yes! That's it! Stop being all of you!

    • • •​

    Stoick: When you carry this axe, you carry all of us with you. Which means you walk like us, you talk like us, you think like us. No more of ... this. [gestures]

    Hiccup: You just gestured to all of me.

    Stoick: Deal?

    Hiccup: This conversation is feeling very one-sided.

    Stoick: [insistently] Deal?

    Hiccup: [sighs] Deal.

    And now you know the problem, and what you're expected to do about it.
     
  8. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    It puts me in mind of a discussion I was reading elsewhere on using computer keywords to block profanity - the consequences of some of the words chosen were ludicrous - choosing rape had the effect of censoring grape as g**** and whore resulting in computer as com****r [pute being latin for whore i.e. overedumacated computer program] - which just goes to show that profanity is indeed a point of view - even for a computer
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2011
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,558
    It could be worse ... really

    Just be glad you're not Rick Santorum.
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Hahaha, I used to be a regular reader of Savage Love at one point

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Dan is like Gustav on sex 'roids
     
  11. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,677
    Made you look like a bit of a sexist douche. You reminded me of the typical sleazy employer with his hands permanently placed on his crotch, who would put down his female employees by calling them "baby", etc. It didn't "hit my buttons" as you may wish it had. I've dealt with your kind before and probably will in a professional context in the future. I am just surprised you are the type to stoop to such a tactic. Takes all kinds I guess and now I know you are that type and will treat you accordingly from now on.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    There comes a time in the pursuit where the answers you sought had already passed you by, by which point you're running just for the hell of it.

    She had answered your questions. Possibly not in the format you demanded (repeatedly) but she had answered them. Your running her to ground just made you look like a bit of a twat.

    Maybe it is because you took offense to the fact that I pointed out she had answered the questions already.

    I know, I know, you were running her to ground. I could have let you carry on spamming and trolling the same question repeatedly and banned you accordingly for trolling or I could have advised you she had answered the questions and to cease and desist.

    The last time she answered your question in quite a bit of detail, you asked her the same questions 6 times. In your world this is apparently not a demand? Okay then.

    She actually gave you more detail.

    Funny that, huh?
     
  12. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    man
    that's some goddamn weird shit
    interesting timeline too
    what the hell is a "profile infraction"?

    /cackle

    there is an easy workaround
    eyeball....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    This image is meant for educational purposes only. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.



    why would frag assume that he is the jackass?
    some rigor please, frag
    a billion forums, a trillion nazi mods frantically editing shit....you get the picture, ja?

    maybe it just comes naturally

    edit: hmm on second thoughts, i doubt if the disclaimer will work here
    i mean while it may suffice for shit in the outside world, we all know that dumbfucksci is special with its own set of rules that are randomly pulled out of one's ass.............
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2011
  13. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    ....case in point.....



    lets establish a context for the book, hercules "frothing at the mouth" Rockefeller, throws at me

    lets do the first

    1. General
    H. Be Polite and Respectful


    the post was certainly not any of that
    yet.....bans for omitting a "please" and "thank you"?
    as frag's condition deteriorates.....a resounding yes!
    herc seems to be an enthusiastic supporter of that rule
    ja
    it can be intepreted anyway they see fit

    now the second....

    2. Personal Attacks or Abusive Ad Hominems

    lets expand on that rule...

    Posts which attack a person rather than his or her views will be edited to remove the unnecessary personal remarks, or deleted in entirely

    Examples of acceptable posts include:
    · You are wrong to say that Islam is a violent religion, because ...
    · You obviously don't understand the situation, because ...
    · Saying what you said clearly displays your ignorance of ...

    Examples of unacceptable posts include:
    · You are a stupid liberal, because you say Bush is wrong.
    · You're just another DubyaTard who doesn't know anything about foreign relations.
    · Anybody who'd write what you wrote must have severe psychological problems.


    hmm
    this mod has poor comprehension and lacks any semblance of an intellect since he asserts i violated that rule. there are no personal attacks or ad homs in my post. you are unfit to moderate mr herc

    the 3rd

    3. Stereotyping, Insulting and name-calling

    goddamn ridiculous. there was none of that in my post
    i am doing 2 weeks and herc ups the ante?
    stirs the pot?
    what a fucking troll

    the 4th

    4. Goading, flaming and trolling

    learn to read
    i was making a fucking point

    the 5th

    13. Repeat offenders

    lets take a look at the instances
    soon
     
  14. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,188
    Yes, it probably did make me appear that way. Though I would hope that understanding the underlying mechanism which influenced this behavior might mitigate the "labeling" that you are now applying. That and three year's history of interaction without you forming this opinion.

    Be merciful, I really do not want to adversely affect our relationship based on one interaction. Try applying the same rationale that you are advocating as acceptable moderation of Skaught - just edit it out of your consciousness. It never happened. OTH, I realize choices bring consequences. Obviously your decision in the end, of course.


    Maybe so. Which part of admitting to reacting based on emotion rather that rationality do you not get though? Are you saying that the way a person behaves during times of irrationality (by definition) somehow shows their "true colors"? I mean, what?


    Honestly, it didn't really have anything to do with anything that you did, so much as simply carrying on what was already happening with SAM. Which was wrong in the first place, as I already admitted. She just happened to be a convenient target, it could have been anyone. To borrow an allusion from your earlier post, I was simply out for blood - somewhat stereotypical American male behavior.


    Noted and appreciated.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    I suppose that I was "demanding" answers containing either "yes" or "no". It's not so much your characterization I'm hung up on as it is a matter of definition. How can one "demand" something without the power to do so? How about we settle on attempting to demand? I'll go with that...


    Maybe, but it was also coupled with more ambiguity. A yes or no pretty much locks you in and provides an opportunity for being trapped. Which I imagine she is well aware of, and there are some logical inconsistencies to her position(s). But it's done, already. I'm over it. Whether or not you or SAM really care and how long the repair process will take if you do is obviously now out of my hands.

    It seems implied that you do care to some degree based on the characterization set out in the first reply of this post. Let me know, what, if anything, I can do to help. While I may lose my temper (very occasionally, by the way) it is inevitably followed by a period of contrition. This is the point we (I) would be at now.


    Maybe. Perhaps after some period of time I will find it within me to laugh at the situation, but right now I'm just too busy being disgusted with myself, accompanied by vestiges of regret wrapped around my inability to actually do anything about the inconsistency, lack of fairness and capriciousness in moderation that goes on here. And that is not a reference to me, we're back to the Gus / Skaught / whatshername issue again, which in turn is merely symptomatic of the very real underlying systemic disorder(s).

    In this case, I do wish I was in a position to "demand" that something be done, and it's quite frustrating. Especially since I have carved out a situation for myself in the "real world" where I do have the power to affect change, at least in my little pond. Well, maybe even medium pond. The lack of any such power here effectively reduces me to a mere observer, which on most days I completely accept.

    Bottom line, sometimes it just gets to be too much and I lash out. Understandable / excusable? Maybe. Or not.
    :shrug:
     
  15. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    why thank you buddy
    i shall post some new stuff

    here
    a teaser
    i shall layer in some guitar in the final version

    a dedication to the crack mod team here in sci.....
     
  16. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Written and Performed by Gustav
    Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics

    1
     
  17. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    Dude don't you know people profile . You are making your self a target . Repeat after Me . Yes Officer. Yes Sir Officer .
     
  18. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    Nice tune . You could use a little bit of violin sustaining long tones and do a little vibrato on the tones weaving in and out of notation in a mysterious type of trigger to the listener . Yeah that is what I would do.
     
  19. Bebelina kospla.com Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,036
    I'm so confused now...performed by Gustav? But, but, but...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Music linky no worky for me :bawl:

    Will try again later I guess...
     
  21. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    Well Gustav is back so no need to bring Gustav back anymore unless ( I didn't check the ban list ) Gustav is banned already again .

    So I hope I don't get banned for trolling if I talk about the music . There is something to be said about music with minimal sound Like Gustav"s brilliant piece . Seasoned musicians know the value of holding the note to the true value and if you get resonance with a harmony then the sustain has a chance to grow and reach the full potential of vibration . Almost like a super charge with time delayed quality . It can rumble the mid section of a listener . It feels good . I think this is what gives the illusion of heart / verses brain . The good vibration caused in your chest area must send a signal to release endorphins. I know when Mary sings she gets this look on her face and just the look makes you feel happy and then coupled with sound . Blows my mind what music will do for the soul
     
  22. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,558
    A Note for Gustav

    Perhaps it is a bit forward, but I'm going to ask that you call this one done, and consider the point made.

    That is, whether or not the point can actually be made will remain an open question; I cannot so specifically read my colleagues' minds.

    However, the moderators are presently debating in the back room about whether and how to reconsider our rules and infraction policies; this transition is long in coming. I do not believe that your present course will offer any positive influence over the considerations.

    Thus, I would ask that we see what comes. The actual rules and infraction-accumulation procedures are under direct consideration, with no insignificant amount of attention being urged toward individual standards of offense.

    It is, furthermore, my hope to find some way to gather and consider input from the membership. Naturally, in doing so, I will ask certain considerations of decorum, but I'll worry about those as I figure out the process.

    Meanwhile, sir, can we let this one go for now? You have been heard by those who will hear you, and further pressure will only raise the ire of those determined to scorn you.

    Give us room, please. We hear you. And, in truth, if things don't go well, I'm certain we'll give you cause to fly the banners again soon enough.

    Thank ye.
     
  23. Anarcho Union No Gods No Masters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Retracting my previous statement, i will leave the choice to Gustav and will support him in what he decides
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page