Banlist

Discussion in 'THE TEMPLE' started by Maljonic, Aug 18, 2005.

  1. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    [quote:517c7675ba="Jauntyangle"][quote:517c7675ba="Rincewind"][quote:517c7675ba="Jauntyangle"]I really tried to find an email honestly!

    i even considered emailed maljonics dream email thing. But thought it was a bit too invasive.

    [quote:517c7675ba="Buzzfloyd"][quote:517c7675ba="Rincewind"]What is it about Garner![/quote:517c7675ba]
    He has Mercury and several other planets in Leo.

    ...What? ;)

    Seriously, I basically agree with everything that Ba has said in this thread. Do go back and read his comments and take them on board.[/quote:517c7675ba]

    i can't, i'm banned :([/quote:517c7675ba]

    How can you both post and quote but not read BA's comments![/quote:517c7675ba]


    i mean i can't read and takr the comments on board, as i'm banned. Me taking the comments on boardmeans nothing as as soon as this account is banned, i can't post. See what i mean about my comments being taken the wrong way.



    oh, and thanks rincewind for not banning me. unless you can't in which case ummm.[/quote:517c7675ba]


    That 'not thinking' is why you've got banned. This is a board for thinkers. Based on Books written by a thinker. You can be silly here, and you can talk crap, but We don't have time for people who won't THINK! Especially those how can't THINK about how there actions could effect others.

    You taking comments on board means SOMETHING. Becuase it's advice as to stop things like this happening to you agian. To help you THINK.

    I'm sorry if this seems harsh to you. Just let it go, man. The way you are just isn't right for here. Go to the stamp board or to another board. You'll enjoy it more somewhere else.
  2. Jauntyangle Banned

    [quote:2f19fab120="Garner"]We have not suddenly told you new ways to fix your wretched personality since your previous account was banned here. You've registered a new account which can indeed see all the posts that are made, and, here's a blinding flash of the obvious, you could LOG OUT and view everything as a guest!

    Honestly, Jaunty, you are a sniveling, whining, pathetic cur who bites and attacks where other lap dogs would simply sniff and lick. When you're sent out to the doghouse for it, you cringe and whimper because you know some people never learn and will let you back in.

    The thing is, we'll put mad dogs down now.

    You are an annoying dick who's never shown any sign of improvement and only gotten worse.[/quote:2f19fab120]


    hahaha, you make me sound so bad. Bites and attacks? What are you talking about. Oh, and i knew i was being dense, but there is no log out button that i could find anywhere. I registered this account to post in my defense, i delted a cookie so i wouldn't automatically log in to read posts "discussing" my banning, while i was banned. I thought it a little unfair.
  3. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    "Oy! TEll me the next book!" is hostile.

    "Why should I have to apologize to you jerks" is hostile

    these are biting. Jaunty, you are one of the most stubornly idiotic people I've ever met. You simply deny that you've done anything wrong, and for you, that means you haven't done anything wrong.

    I will not argue this any further, and I motion that moderators delete all posts by JauntyAngles after his first one in this thread. Seconds?
  4. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I say 'no'. I don't like the idea od deleting posts. What said is said. Whats done is done. We don't need to erase him. If anything what he's said here has prove why he should be banned. Plus it will confuse people who come back later and know whats happened. Just get mal to ban him.
  5. Jauntyangle Banned

    [quote:b971c1a3c5="Garner"]"Oy! TEll me the next book!" is hostile.

    "Why should I have to apologize to you jerks" is hostile

    these are biting. Jaunty, you are one of the most stubornly idiotic people I've ever met. You simply deny that you've done anything wrong, and for you, that means you haven't done anything wrong.

    I will not argue this any further, and I motion that moderators delete all posts by JauntyAngles after his first one in this thread. Seconds?[/quote:b971c1a3c5]


    the first thread was a joke though, on any other board it wold of been seen as such, especially as i said so as soon as people got annoyed. It was just the atmosphere of the trolling that made people react as they did. And i never said the second quote, that's something you've made up. If you feel i've acted that way i'm sorry, some of the time i didn't feel like apoligising, but there was no element of aggression in it. only pride, and issues with allocation of blame.
  6. Jauntyangle Banned

    I DONT DENY I HAVENT DONE ANYTHING WRONG. I JUST DENY THAT WHAT I DID IS AS TERRIBLE AS YOU MAKE OUT.


    meh, i hate internet shouting, as if it makes it more emphatic. Seriously though, all i'm saying with these posts is that i did one thing wrong, then it got out of control, you say you've given me enough chances, but you can't have. Because if you had, you would of seen i can be a good poster, as i know i am, because i already post on message boards.

    god. i've already lost, i'd just like someone who reads my posts the chance to not think of me as bad as you already do.
  7. Maljonic Administrator

    Okay, for one I hate that you feel the need to posts two are three messages in a row, it's very irritating.

    But really, this board is ours, it has nothing to do with any official harper collins or terry pratchet thing - if people don't want you here what's the point in going on and on about it? It doesn't matter what the reason are, we could just make them up, it wouldn't make any difference - why would you or anybody for that matter want to hang around a place where peole wish you wouldn't? It doesn't make any sense.

    Making Garner out to be the bad guy just isn't going to wash here, we all moved here specifically to get away from that kind of thing - narrow minded, single track thinking; but that still doesn't matter, this really is our board now, we're not just saying it, we really can do whatever we like. Being annoying on the harper collins site is one thing, we had no real affiliation with the owners of the site - on here we are the owners of the site.

    Just post on the sites you are welcome on and get over it; there's nothing special about this place, it's just another website. There'll be a whole bunch of new people on the HP site before long who don't know anything about you, why not wait around for that or keep posting on the stamp place?

    No hard feelings, just good luck and please leave us alone is all. :)
  8. Jauntyangle Banned

    Oh come on, give me more than that. none of the stuff you said there is true. That's a rubbish reason.

    I can't believe i lost. I expect i'll be banned soon.
  9. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    Rinso, my reasoning for urging deltion is that he's going to come back with a new account every time we ban the old one until he cries himself to sleep too many nights in a row and finally slits his wrists.
  10. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Right, you've said that you've done a anoying stuff. You have. That anoyed us. Now [i:25a0f25e46]maybe[/i:25a0f25e46] it was part of the atmostphere at the time, but thats not the point. After you did something anoying, we'd tell you off, you react flippantly/ aggressive to it or give a crap sorry which you didn't really mean. Then go on to do something else that was anoying. Nothing that big but lots of little things that piss us off. Not that bad, no. But why should we tolerate it. If you can't be bothered to THINK, why should we put up with it. Dane (sorry for using you as an example) was *far* more anoying than you. But he listened to what we said, and made an effort to fit in, then we made an effort to make him feel like he can fit in. You have done nothing. You post style is always the same. You're not listening, you're not changing, you're not willing to THINK.

    We've already agreed to banning him.

    Mal please Ban this acount and anyother accounts he opens.

    No, Hard feelings, your just not right for here. Maybe it is *just* us, we're to picky and will moan at you for crap stuff. You can go and find people who can accept you, people with more patience.
  11. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    [quote:a6384ee074="Garner"]Rinso, my reasoning for urging deltion is that he's going to come back with a new account every time we ban the old one until he cries himself to sleep too many nights in a row and finally slits his wrists.[/quote:a6384ee074]

    But if we just detele it can't he still keep coming back?
  12. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    we, as moderators, cannot ban his accounts. only administrators can. what we can do is delete his posts as and when he makes them until an administrator can ban the account.

    at that time, the deleted posts can be restored, and the account in question won't be able to make any new ones.

    we've also got his ISP info, and if worst comes to worst, we might even want to look at limiting who can register/post from that ISP, but that's going to be a very drastic step for one little pain in the butt.

    I'm going to move this discussion to a new thread though, specificly about jaunty.
  13. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    I agree with Rinso. It's one thing to do annoying stuff; it's another thing to do annoying stuff repeatedly, especially when you've been warned that you're annoying people; but worst of all is to refuse to acknowledge any responsibility on your part for people being annoyed with you - as if being annoyed with you was their basic state of being before you ever met them or did anything in their presence.

    Jaunty, nothing you can do or say will redeem the situation here. Nothing. Do not press Reply. Do not try to respond. Just go back to one of your other messageboards and post there, or find a different board to post on, where you haven't screwed things up and where the people have more patience.
  14. Maljonic Administrator

    His ip is banned now; let's see what, if anything happens.
  15. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    his ISP uses a dynamic IP, Mal.

    Will the ban you've used stop him from just logging off, rebooting, and coming back on under another name with a new IP?
  16. Maljonic Administrator

    I'm not sure how dynamic a dynamic ip is; usually when you look up someones ip there's only a few different ones, say three or four, so maybe a few more may have to be banned too. I only did one, I'll do the other one that shows up too. :)
  17. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Whats a dynamtic IP, one that consantly changes?
  18. Maljonic Administrator

    [quote:ade5ffc241]Definitions of Dynamic IP on the Web:

    A dynamic IP address changes each time you connect to your Internet Service Provider (ISP). This allows ISPs to keep a pool of addresses available to subscribers. If you disconnect from the ISP, your address is returned to the pool, becoming available to the next computer that connects.[/quote:ade5ffc241]

    So they aren't infinite in number as some people think, judging by one of the trolls' messages from the old boards. I guess it depends on how big this pool is, but I think there's only a few allocated to certain areas - they, or THEY, still have to keep tabs on you somehow. :)
  19. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    *nod* usually an ISP only has a set number of IP addresses available. the major ones, like AOL, have a truely tremendous amount. Smaller start ups only have a few.

    I think by 2000, rights to an individual IP address could be sold for upwards of $15,000 - but I only have that information second hand and it may be grossly inaccurate.

    anyway, we'll see if it works with Jaunty for now. he's probably going through the "crying" stage and will go and post on the old site, or one of his other sites, about how he's gotten such a raw deal... and then he'll come back and try to figure out how to log out so he can read what we're saying.

    at which point he'll read this and sign off to get a new ip address.... i'd say we've got about 2 hours, minimum, of peace and quiet, possibly much more.
  20. Saccharissa Stitcher

    Too bad, I wanted the chance to tell him I think he is a knucklehead.
  21. Electric_Man Templar

    [quote:07f76da7ad="Garner"]Let's go ahead and look at a proposal vote...

    I suggest something along the lines of

    1) Posters who renounced the community in the past should be prohibited from rejoining it
    2) Posters who renounced the community in the past should be allowed to rejoin, but instantly banned if they attack or defame the community in any way
    3) Posters who renounced the community in the past should be given a clean slate [/quote:07f76da7ad]

    That sounds alright as a vote.

    Although JA is an annoying bastard, we need to complete the vote first before banning him. You can't ban someone before they've officially been denounced by the community. I also think that when we have a vote like this, we should announce it in the Boardania forum, as some people may not look at this section too often, even though things like banning are a very important process to everyone.

    I also say no to deleting all his posts, let the evidence lie for all in the future to see and learn from.
  22. Maljonic Administrator

    I think we already established that we aren't going to delete people's posts.

    As for voting for banning JA, didn't we already do that once on the old boards? I agree that we will need to vote on future bannings, but I don't think so with this one as he was already banned in the first place. I think the only reason we're having another vote on him is because some people weren't clear on what he'd done, including me.
  23. Maljonic Administrator

    Oh and I don't think we need to advertise these things in the boardania forums, people aren't stupid they know what's going on - some people would rather not be involved with politics, that's life, and I would rather respect their right to not get involved if they don't want to. People that are interested in politics know where to look, plus I'm sure a few of us check the latest post thing on the front page anyway. And we could use the proclamation box if it's that important.
  24. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    we're not deleting posts.

    we already voted, weeks ago, on jaunty. there's only one objection (there were two, one was overturned), and most people fully support banning him.

    we definately don't need to advertise things in the boardanian forum. for god's sake, i'm not going to expose myself to people complaining about the number of political threads cluttering up the place now that there's a specific forum for them. If people don't want to pay attention and follow along, then that is their loss.
  25. Maljonic Administrator

  26. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I don't think we need to notify everytime we ban people. But would anyone object if i created an announent (I just wanna do cool mod stuff) bringing attention to the temple and how in the up coming weeks important decisions about how this board will run will be made here, and if people want to voice there opinions and have there say they should keep an eye on this forum. Becuase if you don;t post saying you have a problem, it's taken that you've agreed with whats going on?
  27. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    that sounds fine to me, Rinso. i really don't think we should make a thread, or even a post in an announcement thread, every time there's a decision process in the temple forum. if we have to hand hold people into taking an interest, then they probably WEREN'T that interested, and it's not like they can't tell there's new posts in the forum to begin with.

    I think just a simple announcement, like you suggest, saying "Please be aware we talk about things that matter in this other forum. Paying attention there is not crap. People who don't pay attention there are all named Kenny and live inside Dolphin Lundgren.", or words to that effect.

    then, after that, if they don't pay attention to the political stuff, that's their problem.

    course, that could be me being rod-and-axes again
  28. Pepster New Member

    [quote:c4c073d7b2="Garner"]So, I have no problem with banning tony, cat, silmaril, etc. I wouldn't want to ban Leather Monkey, he appears to have left us for the stamps forum before the Tonyland exodus, but he never specificly said he was leaving. I wouldn't want to ban Chris Jordan or Pepster, because they didn't quit the community, they quit the old boards. There's a difference.[/quote:c4c073d7b2]

    Thankyou.
  29. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    Quite welcome pepster. Glad to see you've rejoined us, by the way.
  30. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    Okay, we know Brorien is lurking, and he's also said he doesn't expect or [b:f1f8a7ab5a]want[/b:f1f8a7ab5a] a voice here in our community.

    I suggest we help make sure that's the case and ban him. He's nothing but agressive bad news.

    More to the point though, did we ever get anywhere with deciding to ban or not ban the splitters?

    edit to clarify: by banning, I mean the whole deal, not even able to view posts anymore.
  31. Maljonic Administrator

    He did tell me about his story moving and I don't care that I'm in it or where it is, but I must admit it was a bit petty to lurk here since we moved and wait purposefully for someone to say something negative about him and reply to it in a hurt manner - ingnoring all the positive stuff were're doing and deliberatly picking up on something like this that was mentioned in about two posts out of two thousand, or whatever it is now.

    And, like he says, he doesn't want to have any kind of voice on here so I think we should give him no kind of voice on here.
  32. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    serriously, unless someone has a good objection, or unless we left off the discussion about the splitters at a really could-go-either-way point, I say we ban Brorien now, and we need to decide about the rest of the "we don't like you anymore and have better places to go" crowds
  33. Maljonic Administrator

    That's what my first posts on this thread was all about, it's why I asked - so we have a list of people we don't want here, I knew Brorien was on here but couldn't remember if he left on bad terms or not. We can just deactivate his account the same as Tony, Silmiril and Cat so he can't do anything on the forums if we like, I don't think he'll keep coming back like JA?
  34. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    *Shrug* if he does, we ban him again.

    He clearly chose to leave our community, but he also chose a rather back handed way to do it. He was given several attempts to make amends for his crap behavior, and while actually acknowledging what he was doing wrong (a step up from Jaunty), he also said he saw no reason to apologize for any of it.

    Unrepentant, and he already spat on us, so rather than waste my gob by spitting back, lets just ban him. If anyone objects, we can undo it easy enough.
  35. Maljonic Administrator

  36. Hsing Moderator

    [quote:0bab4119a0="Ba"]Hmm. Well, Tony and Swreader sure as hell should never be given another chance. Ba advocates banning them. What they did... It was just too big. Ba hopes that they find happiness with each other. He does. But he doesn't think they can ever be a part of this community again. There's too much history there.

    He's willing to leave the option of Cat or Silmaril coming back, but only if they really apologize, and then he'd watch 'em like a hawk. They didn't screw up as badly as Tony and Swreader, but they still left on bad terms, and the onus is on them to apologize.

    Jaunty is over. Enough is enough.[/quote:0bab4119a0]

    I'm pretty much with Ba here.
    As far as I remember everyone agreed that we can't see Cat or Silmaril using their accounts for causing damage. Banning them, even though they said they didn't want to take part in this community anymore, would make us look more paranoid than we are - not necessarily to those who are banned, but to those who are still around or to come later. Banning is the ultimate tool on a board, and should be used in such cases where either coventry has been decided, or the damage done is really, really huge. (I mean, some of Tony's and SWreaders suggestions would, in different circumstances, been a case for the court. No question there.)

    As with Silmaril, Cat, and Brorien, there may be open questions and issues left, but some of their posts on their new board (Broriens last one before the Harper Collins thread got deleted over there) have proven that they don't wish any damage done to this Board as a whole. And i think that's what banning should be used for - getting people off the board who spoil it for the rest.
  37. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    Yes, I am still in agreement with Ba.
  38. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I also agree with Ba.

    I also think that ALL banning should be subject to a public vote.
  39. Roman_K New Member

    [quote:da16552c3c="Rincewind"]I also agree with Ba.

    I also think that ALL banning should be subject to a public vote.[/quote:da16552c3c]

    I second that.
  40. drviagra New Member

    Re the issue of banning and banned members.

    Please take this only as advice. I have been moderating a popular online message board, and I hope that what is my experience in these issues will help you, because from reading this thread, I think that you are going the wrong way about banning people.

    Firstly, you have moved, but that shouldnt mean that you ban members who left the old forum. Whatever their reasons for leaving, they should be given that one final chance on this new board (fresh start if you will), and then they should be handled. Certaintly people should not be banned for simply leaving a board, no matter what the circumstances they left. Pre emptive banning is a very dangerous thing, especially in a fledging community that has the potential to grow.

    Making the decision to ban someone public should also be a big no no. While it is a noble idea, it is not within the groups interest to make these decisions, because everyone develops their own network of friends, allies and enemies on a message board, and it is up to the moderator as the chosen people of responsibility to make the decision to ban someone. I think that if someone is doing something that is banworthy, then there shouldnt have to be a potentially damaging forum wide discussion on the issue.

    Banning someone just becaue you dont like them should never be considered though. It causes far more trouble than it is worth.
  41. prettybutterfly New Member

    I totally agree, I think in some cases there may be biased bannings especially if this is put to the vote, one member may say oh yes let's ban him/her because they were really immature or whatever when it was a case of\; yes maybe they were immature but the fact that they have offended you personally can affect your judgement, so I think no one should be banned, this is a new board and a new start, if they troll ban them.
    Also just a little point this not aimed at anyone specific it is just my opinion based on experience on other forums.
  42. Ba Lord of the Pies

    This is a new board. But as Garner said, it's not a new community. This is the [i:408d3c6838]same[/i:408d3c6838] community that they decided to leave. If they want to come back, they should be able to answer why.

    And only crimes can happen in secret. Justice can only happen in the open. The decision to ban [i:408d3c6838]must[/i:408d3c6838] be done in public. It must be a decision by the community as a whole, not just a few people.
  43. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    A biased banning is far more likely if a select few are allowed to take action in secret rather than putting it before everyone.

    Dr Viagra, I think what you're saying would be true in a different community. However, the role of moderators here is significantly different from other communities. We are (as [i:89996494d2]I[/i:89996494d2] said first to Garner :p ), still the same community that has moved. This new board is a new location only. This society is a self-policing one, and that means that everyone has a say.
  44. Cynical_Youth New Member

  45. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

  46. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    wait a minute.. wasn't Dr Viagra persistently annoying and a borderline troll on the old boards?
  47. Ba Lord of the Pies

    Yes, yes he was. However, Ba wouldn't be so crass as to suggest that he's merely suggesting this so as to get people into the idea that the moderators are priviledged posters who should decide the board's actions as dictators, thus fueling anti-Garner sentiment.

    Nope, nope, Ba would never be that crass.
  48. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    The idea to make mods only have the power is stupid. Leaving things open to the community is the only way.
  49. Electric_Man Templar

  50. Cynical_Youth New Member

    [quote:8ec9d9a1f6="Buzzfloyd"]With whom?[/quote:8ec9d9a1f6]

    Gah, should have made that clear. With your post and also Ba's point of view, btw.
  51. drviagra New Member

    [quote:1321494cfe="Buzzfloyd"]A biased banning is far more likely if a select few are allowed to take action in secret rather than putting it before everyone.

    Dr Viagra, I think what you're saying would be true in a different community. However, the role of moderators here is significantly different from other communities. We are (as [i:1321494cfe]I[/i:1321494cfe] said first to Garner :p ), still the same community that has moved. This new board is a new location only. This society is a self-policing one, and that means that everyone has a say.[/quote:1321494cfe]

    If that is the case, then surely there is no need for any specificly set moderators, only a token "Moderator" account that can be logged in by users when things need to be done?

    [quote:1321494cfe]Yes, yes he was. However, Ba wouldn't be so crass as to suggest that he's merely suggesting this so as to get people into the idea that the moderators are priviledged posters who should decide the board's actions as dictators, thus fueling anti-Garner sentiment. [/quote:1321494cfe]

    Please. If you really think that, then you are probably incredibly paranoid. The moderators (if it is decided that they are needed) are obviously going to be those who are most involved with the day to day running of the community, but whether this rubs certain people the wrong way is largely irrelevant.

    And where does all this troll crap come from?
  52. Saccharissa Stitcher

    Have you visited the Harper Collins site lately?
  53. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    Avgi, this dipshit's practically a troll himself. he was asked, politely, and repeatedly, to change an avatar, which he changed to a worse one. he was asked to change it again, and he refused.

    He was also an annoying tosspot, and now he's decided to be "helpful", just like certain other tosspots, and is arguing things we've already argued over ages ago
  54. Saccharissa Stitcher

    Drat, I am not good at conveying sarcasm. I meant it to be a "Duuuuh!" response to his question on why are we so paranoid when it comes to trolls.

    Unhappy Bob cannot help here. I ought to have used Exasperated Sid ( :roll: )
  55. Ba Lord of the Pies

    For any newbies out there, the reason for mods is, primarily, to delete spam. Moderators can't ban people. Technically, only Mal can ban a person. drviagra's just trying to muddy the issue.
  56. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    and the gene pool.

Share This Page