Not all.
You should already know about it since you're a mod and can view my infractions. In fairness some were deserved whilst others weren't.
So Brad has gone and the race is on to take his place!
- Thread starter WeasteDevil
- Start date
- Status
Not all.
You should already know about it since you're a mod and can view my infractions. In fairness some were deserved whilst others weren't.
I have 8 pages of them, I would like to reach 10 without being perma-banned.
You are all very, very gay.
i see them, yes. one was a one point infractcion on september 2008 for posting a rapidshare link
the other one on november 2007 for telling someone to rape a girl, wich was reversed
bad mods, bad!
I was once
i see them, yes. one was a one point infractcion on september 2008 for posting a rapidshare link
the other one on november 2007 for telling someone to rape a girl, wich was reversed
bad mods, bad!
It was clearly intended to be sarcastic...thats why it was reversed after some clarification.
Im not saying all mod decisions are bad but some are (not related to me offcourse).
I'm currently getting my head around the V-bulletin software and all I can say is, the way this site is run is incredible. The admin panel is confusing enough but to run it with almost 30,000 members must be a nightmare.
We've adapted a pretty good system over the years. Before the CAF was on VBulletin, we were using the old UBB (Ultimate Bulletin Board) software, which was a bit more user friendly, but naturally, not as advanced in capability.
The options are incredible in their depth, we're using the full vbulletin suite with cms, but it's really a a mixture of cms, board modding and php editor. The learnig curve is steep just in the infinite amount of options available. I havea new found respect for you bunch of mini dictators.
Always found vb admincp very user friendly and quite easy to adjust too. Some stuff, like making skins might take a bit of time depending on mods you have installed as well, or fixing the occasional database issue, but more time consuming than being hard to figure out.
We're not saying that.
There's a lot of factors that contribute to whether an infraction is warranted or not. Who is it for, modmin, what is it for, modmin mood, modmin beef with said person etc.
There is not one standard followed by everyone.
Just to be clear, I gave Brad his last infraction and it had nothing to do with any of those. He had been asked not to do it before and IMO was taking the piss (or trying to), he knew he was on 14 infraction points and that 1 more would lead to a permanent ban.
I treated him as i would anyone else who engages in personal abuse, it derails threads and isn't necessary.
Brad wasn't banned for the insult, he was banned for accumulating 27 infraction points, even if some of them were 'unfair' that still takes some doing. Even at that there was a multipage debate over it and vote in the mod forum. A decision was made and it's not going to be changed. Obviously some people are going to disagree with this and it's unfortunate that a liked long term poster is now gone, but despite what he or anyone might think his fate was in his own hands.
This is going round in circles now, IMOthis thread should be closed and we should all move on, I'm sure Brad has.
I treated him as i would anyone else who engages in personal abuse, it derails threads and isn't necessary.
Brad wasn't banned for the insult, he was banned for accumulating 27 infraction points, even if some of them were 'unfair' that still takes some doing. Even at that there was a multipage debate over it and vote in the mod forum. A decision was made and it's not going to be changed. Obviously some people are going to disagree with this and it's unfortunate that a liked long term poster is now gone, but despite what he or anyone might think his fate was in his own hands.
This is going round in circles now, IMOthis thread should be closed and we should all move on, I'm sure Brad has.
Chances are hes made a newbie account anyway right? He'll be back is my guess. Either that, or he has multiple accounts anyway and is already with us.
(Thats not a hint, dont get any ideas
)
(Thats not a hint, dont get any ideas
)The thing I said about the standard still stands in this case. Wibble did not take offence to it and thought it wasn't worthy of an infraction, while you did.
i wasnt saying that to you, i was replying to vidared and he was saying that
Personal insults are against the rules, so are worthy of an infraction. Brad knew that.
Are you suggesting mods check who is and who isn't offended by what before we enforce the site rules? Sorry but I don't have time for that. Of course if posters just follow the rules which are there for everyone to see then its not an issue.
Are you suggesting mods check who is and who isn't offended by what before we enforce the site rules? Sorry but I don't have time for that. Of course if posters just follow the rules which are there for everyone to see then its not an issue.
I didn't take offense in that I'm pretty hard to offend and I've been called a cnut by professionals before. The issue is not if I personally can be called a cnut repeatedly without the forums suffering (I can for the record) but the modmins need to be afforded a bit of decorum and respect for the place to function surely?
In this case, dearest Eyepopper, you did not need to waste your time and find out who was or wasn't insulted, you could have simply left it up to Wibble to deal with it.
Nevertheless we're talking about the standard not Brad specifically.
What I said stands, there is not one unified set of "rules" which modmins follow when handing out infractions.
Just a few quick ones. Most (not to say all) people would not take offence to being called cnuts on here. Wibble did not. GB said he would infract/ban any insult as long as it's not in the general IIRC. You've called many on here cnuts and all sorts of vulgar associations and I doubt you've ever been banned or infracted. Dwayne has been many times off topic (including in this thread) and I doubt he was ever infracted, repeatably.
Standards!
Of course they should be respected, no doubt in that. However my point is about the infractions in general and the standard used in giving them out, which I've made as a point earlier in the thread as well. They do not work for as long as every modmin has a mind of their own on how to deal with things.
It's a free forum with tens of thousands of members moderated by volunteers and it hugely successful. There will be some deviation in how the rules are applied. To expect any more is ludicrous.
Overall it is very successful and Brad's banning is not a glitch, he actively looked for confrontation.
You can get hung on up on the one infraction he may have deserved of the 27, but yet you chose to ignore that more than one mod has said they have chosen not to infract him at times because it wasn't worth the hassle.
Standards!
Wow I've never heard an actual call for faceless bureaucracy before.
edit - everything you are proposing would have seen Brad gone way before this point btw.
There'll never be a standard, we're different people and perspectives involved. Regardless don't break the rules and you don't take any risks.
I don't go round calling people cnuts you might try back that one up.
Oh and if wibble had infracted the post we'd be having a debate about personal vendettas.
I don't go round calling people cnuts you might try back that one up.
Oh and if wibble had infracted the post we'd be having a debate about personal vendettas.
Quick google search says otherwise.
------------------
EDIT
There's over 20 pages worth of Google search where you've used the word cnut in your posts Eyepopper, in most of them aimed at a fellow poster.
Right yeah, I think it's pretty obvious that none of those are intended as insults and that they're all jokes. But whatever.
seriously mate, we are trying to explain brad's banning and you come with this?
next!!!!!!!!
So you've called people cnuts but not to insult them? Or you haven't called them cnuts? Which is it?
Also if Brad called Wibble a cnut but this did not insult him, is that classed as an insult?
I personally am not clear whether you intended to insult all those people you called cnuts but as a measure I would see if any took offence to it in order to weigh the situation. Something that you clearly, as you said don't have the time to do.
Just as a suggestion, maybe you should let someone who has more time to do it next time.
Also if Brad called Wibble a cnut but this did not insult him, is that classed as an insult?
I personally am not clear whether you intended to insult all those people you called cnuts but as a measure I would see if any took offence to it in order to weigh the situation. Something that you clearly, as you said don't have the time to do.
Just as a suggestion, maybe you should let someone who has more time to do it next time.
If you read them in context it's pretty obvious that their jokes in threads in the general.
Brad was insulting Wibble, there was a history to it, he'd been asked to stop it, told he'd be banned if he didn't, and infracted for it before.
Basically what you're saying is, break the rules and you won't always be punished. If you don't want to take the risk don't break the rules, particularly when it's been highlighted to you and you've been asked to stop.
Brad was insulting Wibble, there was a history to it, he'd been asked to stop it, told he'd be banned if he didn't, and infracted for it before.
Basically what you're saying is, break the rules and you won't always be punished. If you don't want to take the risk don't break the rules, particularly when it's been highlighted to you and you've been asked to stop.
Go and look up context, if you don't understand it you are only going to embarrass yourself in this conversation.
Of cousre not.
There are other mods, they all do it when they have the time.
Not used to this type of control panel, normally only used to more cms style cp's, as I said it's just the vast wealth of options you have that taking me time to get my head around, once I do I'm sure it will be a lot quicker and more intuitive.
What a cnut!
Surely you can see his point though here Moses, mods are on one hand saying Brad was given an infraction for insulting another member of the forum.
So you say here, that if this doesn't insult him, that of course it is not classed as an insult.
Wibble said it didn't insult him, therefore you say it isn't classed as an insult, yet he was infracted for insulting.
This goes against what's being said. It doesn't tally.
Noone replied to my earlier post either, which was that did Brad not get infracted for saying 'I miss calling Wibble a cnut' which is quite obviously a joke, he hasn't even called Wibble a cnut, not even close, he's joked about missing the old days, infracted for 'insulting' despite you saying of course that kind of thing isn't seen as an insult yet Popper posts cnut a lot in loads of posts directly at posters and brushes it off as a joke, this isn't a bad thing, if anything it backs up the point made by people that calling people cnut can be a joke, hence loads of examples of Popper doing it and is fine, yet when Brad posts what is obviously a joke it's all of a sudden an insult and he is infracted for it.
I can't understand why we have to understand the context of Poppers 'cnuts' but you can't see the context of Brads.
It most likely doesn't change the overall debate of whether Brad should have been banned or not, I personally think no, but I don't want to debate that anymore as it doesn't lead anywhere. However separate to that is the issue AAA is debating over why mods can say cnut in a joke and it's fine but if another member does it WHAM there's an infraction and it's a personal insult despite having more factors aligning it with a joke than most of Poppers examples.
Again to use GB as an example without any malice to the man, he's come into a thread and said 'feck off Brad' in all seriousness, this is fine? But personal insults are not allowed........ Brad replied with a simple 'Hello Geebs' or 'Evening golden_blunder' or something to that effect. He could easily have sworn back but would have been infracted?
I think people just want to know where they stand, is it one rule for one and one for another? Or mods separate to us?
I'm not sure how anyone can say that calling people cnuts in a joke is fine if you're a mod calling a poster, but if you're a poster calling a mod in a joke it's not fine without realising that it's hypocritical.
It's maybe best put into 2 direct questions so people know where they stand.
Is it okay for a mod to call a poster a cnut in a joke?
-If the answer is yes then why can't posters do it to mods?
-If the answer is no then why does Popper do it?
Is it okay for a poster to call a mod a cnut in a joke?
-If the answer is yes then why was Brad infracted for what was obviously a joke? (ignoring all his other infractions, this isn't an argument about his ban, this is soley about this infraction that triggered the ban, on one hand Moses says that kind of thing is 'of course not' an insult yet other mods say it's a personal insult.
-If the answer is no then why the double standards?
So you say here, that if this doesn't insult him, that of course it is not classed as an insult.
Wibble said it didn't insult him, therefore you say it isn't classed as an insult, yet he was infracted for insulting.
This goes against what's being said. It doesn't tally.
Noone replied to my earlier post either, which was that did Brad not get infracted for saying 'I miss calling Wibble a cnut
' which is quite obviously a joke, he hasn't even called Wibble a cnut, not even close, he's joked about missing the old days, infracted for 'insulting' despite you saying of course that kind of thing isn't seen as an insult yet Popper posts cnut a lot in loads of posts directly at posters and brushes it off as a joke, this isn't a bad thing, if anything it backs up the point made by people that calling people cnut can be a joke, hence loads of examples of Popper doing it and is fine, yet when Brad posts what is obviously a joke it's all of a sudden an insult and he is infracted for it. I can't understand why we have to understand the context of Poppers 'cnuts' but you can't see the context of Brads.
It most likely doesn't change the overall debate of whether Brad should have been banned or not, I personally think no, but I don't want to debate that anymore as it doesn't lead anywhere. However separate to that is the issue AAA is debating over why mods can say cnut in a joke and it's fine but if another member does it WHAM there's an infraction and it's a personal insult despite having more factors aligning it with a joke than most of Poppers examples.
Again to use GB as an example without any malice to the man, he's come into a thread and said 'feck off Brad' in all seriousness, this is fine? But personal insults are not allowed........ Brad replied with a simple 'Hello Geebs
' or 'Evening golden_blunder' or something to that effect. He could easily have sworn back but would have been infracted?I think people just want to know where they stand, is it one rule for one and one for another? Or mods separate to us?
I'm not sure how anyone can say that calling people cnuts in a joke is fine if you're a mod calling a poster, but if you're a poster calling a mod in a joke it's not fine without realising that it's hypocritical.
It's maybe best put into 2 direct questions so people know where they stand.
Is it okay for a mod to call a poster a cnut in a joke?
-If the answer is yes then why can't posters do it to mods?
-If the answer is no then why does Popper do it?
Is it okay for a poster to call a mod a cnut in a joke?
-If the answer is yes then why was Brad infracted for what was obviously a joke? (ignoring all his other infractions, this isn't an argument about his ban, this is soley about this infraction that triggered the ban, on one hand Moses says that kind of thing is 'of course not' an insult yet other mods say it's a personal insult.
-If the answer is no then why the double standards?
As Brad would say, "here's my tuppence worth".....
Ding dong the witch is dead
Which old witch?
The wicked witch
Ding dong the wicked witch is dead!
There are more gays in this thread than at Judy Garlands funeral.
Its only the internet!
Ding dong the witch is dead
Which old witch?
The wicked witch
Ding dong the wicked witch is dead!
There are more gays in this thread than at Judy Garlands funeral.
Its only the internet!
Ok so you're saying, Brad was infracted for not insulting someone, which in the end resulted in his permaban?
Not all people see the sense of humour into being called cnuts tbh, regardless of the context. This all depends on the culture and way of life of said people. If you went to some Eastern European country, you don't normally hear the swearing, name calling and mutual motherfecking that you'd expect to hear from people growing up in the Western "civilization".
However irrelevant this may be to Brads banning, Popper comes out as a big hypocrite in all this name calling fiasco.
Who's winning so far in the race to take over Brad's mantle then?
listen mate, go buy a brain, then, and only then, come back
We full well know Brad isn't coming back, neither are we arguing whether he deserved to be banned or not. We're just arguing about the logic that is used to hand out infractions.
It is only the internet, but it's too hot to go out and I've nothing better to do at the moment.
Might be that "teenage suicide" poster.
This is far more insulting than what Brad said to Wibble in his last four posts.
But don't worry, I don't take offence to it. ♥
I don't know about Popper though, he might just infract you!
we have a winner
Can you reply to the effort I put into my post please Marcos (without an insult
bear in mind none of it is written with any malice or ill intent, just curiosity) I'm genuinely curious. I've written pretty much the same thing out twice now with what I think are reasonable points. Just looking for an answer.Mockers had the early lead but lately AAO is determined to make up ground.
- Status