Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by hypewaders, Jun 23, 2010.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
What hate speech does the ban refer to? I would like to see the specific post.
OK coming soon- got a flight training thingy going on atm..
I've no time for explanations, folks. I'll hash it out for anyone who still cares tomorrow...:truce::booo::fright:
Yes, please. On the face of it, it seems like a gross injustice.
I'll review this one later. Right now, I have to leave for a few hours.
Thanks for looking at the case, James. Sorry - again - to gripe, but it just doesn't seem right.
Quadro flipped out, uncharacteristically, and started ranting and insulting and telling people to shove thing things up their ass and so forth - interspersed with trolling posts ostensibly in in line with some other poster's style but in fact crude and dishonest and destructive to an actual discussion.
All of this without anything like appropriate provocation - flying off the handle on very slight pretext, it was. It's exactly the situation the moderator is supposed to handle, and more or less the way it is supposed to be handled, as far as I can see.
What's the problem?
Well, it sounds to me as though he was goaded by a fair degree of cognitive dissonance and misrepresentation. That, too, happens constantly here. It happens to me every single day.
Most of which he supplied himself, and none of which justified his response.
He was in the wrong. So were you, by the way, and I note that no one of the many people you have "goaded" in this fashion has been allowed to address you, treat your posts, etc, as Quadro addressed Billy and Hype and SAM and the thread itself.
As I have approximately the same opinion of your posts in that thread as Quadro appears to have had of Billy's, perhaps we could call a moratorium on the standards of response, and you can contemplate the creative possibilities of the English language with regard to every one of your posts on the topic from now on, along with your character and antecedents and general worth, for the foreseeable future, with all the diligence and repetitiveness and persistence I can muster to the task?
Lord, not this sniping crap again. Would you care to go back to that thread and show me what I was wrong about? Take a good run at it: apparently I have 24 hours to show my credentials or be summarily dismissed from the forum.
That was fine inference, but no substance. I agree, though: let's go back, shall we? You may call me to answer, and I will answer.
Hardly the point. Your agreement carries no weight in the matter, and answer is of course irrelevant.
What we are referring to is treating you in such a way that answer is denied, made impossible, etc - and continuing to do so, destructively to the thread and argument and so forth, indefinitely.
Says you? Hah!
Moderator note: I have reviewed quadraphonics' ban, and have decided to reduce it from 7 days to 1 day.
Most of the objectionable posts were parody of another poster's style and content. As such they amount to trolling, but it cannot be said that this was entirely unprovoked.
The remaining ban time is for insulting other members, and in particular telling another member what to do with himself.
Comments (taking off moderator hat now):
The "other poster" in question has learned to sail very close to the line where s/he will get banned. Most of the time s/he manages to avoid crossing that line. However, his/her style is intended to provoke angry reactions from other posters. It is often misleading and invariably presents only one extremist side of a complex argument. quadraphonics is not the first post to react angrily to these tactics, and I'm sure he won't be the last.
Agreed. And not just from the "other poster" mentioned here.
I have not requested "credentials". I have requested a quote and a link to a particular statement of fact alleged by two posters, yourself being one. If you can't back up your statements with any evidence, you ought not to make them. And, especially, you ought not to make them and complain about other people making similarly unsupported statements.
:shrug: True enough.
Fine with me; I have so done.
Off topic for this thread, but I note that the issue of evidence that arose in the other thread has been resolved in GeoffP's case. I am now waiting on pjdude1219.
It was quite an uncharacteristic flipping out by quadro, although I initially thought he was just being sarcastic as he sometime is, then I realised he is doing it to everyone. It was also his first ban, so one day is fair, although people have got away with calling worse names and insults to other forum members in WEP.
I assume [rightly or wrongly] that James is pointing at me as the s/he whose style quad is presumably imitating, however when I was reading the thread, I noted he started flipping out here when Billy T provided an analogy between CIA rendition and the flotilla massacre.
He then responded to a post I had made yesterday in response to noodler in the following manner:
I thought he was being sarcastic, because I had missed his response to Billy T at that point in time. It was only later that I read hypes comments and realised it had started a few posts back. He made some comments to me about mods participating in contempt and himself reciprocating but that post has been edited. [I recommend mods do not edit posts but soft delete them to avoid such loss of information]
It was only when he called me "bitch" [the post has been deleted by editing] in response to another post I made [which also seems to be misplaced] that I realised that his angst was generic and when he started spamming all the I-P threads in the forum with the same nonsense that I realised he was flipping out. It was early morning so I wasn't paying too much attention. Then I came back and saw hypes mod edits and realised it was escalating. So I left him to it.
And he said that since the discussion didn't amount to anything but the same bunch of usual trolls masquerading as posts he would show in like and he did. Wasn't as if he wasn't aware of what he was doing.
An 'uncharacteristic flipping out'? Ha! That's rich coming from you since you are one of the people who he was parodying. It is your style in particular but not exclusively that he was protesting against.
And I think he did a damn good job!!!
Hear that Quad? A drink to you! Well done mate!:cheers:
The fact that Hype focused on him and not the usual assholes that drain those threads is 'rich' indeed...just covered with rhinestonesPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Yes it was highly uncharacteristic. quadraphonics is one of the few people who doesn't flip out - he doesn't complain or whine, he usually stands up for what he believes in even if everyone disagrees with him [like spidergoat for example]. And in response to what Billy T said it was really extreme. Even my posts to noodler were hardly inflammatory.
Anyway, when I saw the 7 day ban, I thought it was excessive, but my first ban was 14 days so who am I to judge whats adequate? The plain fact is that he and Geoff were wrong in what they said and thats going to be de rigueur for pro-Israelis for a long long time, until the situation in Palestine leads to some level of justice. If they are already flipping out, they are going to be very unhappy people in the future.
And this comment of yours proclaiming his 'generic angst'. He wasn't being 'generic' Sam. He called you a bitch and meant it as I and others have called you in the past.
Stop pretending as if Quad lost his presence of mind or something. He was illustrating something and he did a fantastic job of it. The fact that he was banned for it is well just icing on the cake. It was a well earned ban and he's not the one looking like an asshole for it!
He responded to a post I made with something like:
bitch don't pretend you know me.
And then went on to explain his POV, but after the abuse, I wasn't interested in it, so I just responded with some inanity after going back up and seeing his responses to Billy T and hype. It wasn't worth it to get into whatever argument he was trying to have [too early in the morning] A lot of the inflammatory posts have been edited/deleted so it matters little what anyone "looks like" - only the ones present at the time know what the argument was like.
Separate names with a comma.