PMSL

[Onslow]

The excised post can be read in full at another site. Why not post the link?

The man is gone. You got what you wanted. Leave him alone. Don't write about him. Don't acknowledge him. Don't follow him to other sites. Be adults. Move on.

If the link is posted then I would be following him {at least in to the degree of reading the removed content} to another link, wouldn't I?

 

[B_Hickboy]

Like most of your b.s. eh?

Facts are what they are Spoleto boy.


Watching the Porky and Petunia shows can be entertaining; but really, the two of you need to get past your inflated senses of superiority. As I also indicate in my earlier post, {and this part was quite coherent} if one or the other or both don't like it here, then leave.

My incoherence is calculated, and goes away when I want it to.

I really am beginning to wonder if you have anything constructive to contribute to this thread.

You're extrapolating the fact that I don't like the way one situation has been handled and twisting it to mean that I have a hatred for LPSG and its moderators. Your suggestion that I fuck off is childish, and a harsh overreaction.

 

[Onslow]

I really am beginning to wonder if you have anything constructive to contribute. I'm not going anywhere. Your suggestion that I do so is childish.

I have offered you a number of constructive suggestions and my suggestion that you leave here, rather than endlessly whine about how disatisfied you are, is not childish. A person with some level of adult thinking, would realize that this site operates in a certain way and is not going to just miraculously change while two individuals whine about it. Again, if it is indeed so awful, then why the hell are you and she still here? If it's that bad, and you both are still here, then that, is what can be and must be deemed childish.

 

[B_Hickboy]

I have offered you a number of constructive suggestions and my suggestion that you leave here, rather than endlessly whine about how disatisfied you are, is not childish. A person with some level of adult thinking, would realize that this site operates in a certain way and is not going to just miraculously change while two individuals whine about it. Again, if it is indeed so awful, then why the hell are you and she still here? If it's that bad, and you both are still here, then that, is what can be and must be deemed childish.

Your view of reality may not be the only one.

 

[Onslow]

Your view of reality may not be the only one.

I never said it was.

 

[B_Hickboy]

I never said it was.

Do yourself a favor and put me on ignore. I'm not going anywhere, and your weak powers of persuasion are not going to influence me to change my mind.

 

[Onslow]

Do yourself a favor and put me on ignore. I'm not going anywhere, and your weak powers of persuasion are not going to influence me to change my mind.

I have no need nor desire to place people on ignore. I prefer open reading of all posts and responding to those I choose to respond to. If you have a problem, then you can just as easily place me on ignore {which of course points back to what I said about you and MB forming a site where you'd end up removing all other posts but your own}.

 

[B_Hickboy]

I have no need nor desire to place people on ignore. I prefer open reading of all posts and responding to those I choose to respond to. If you have a problem, then you can just as easily place me on ignore {which of course points back to what I said about you and MB forming a site where you'd end up removing all other posts but your own}.

You have a label for everything and everybody, don't you?

 

[Onslow]

I have no need nor desire to place people on ignore. I prefer open reading of all posts and responding to those I choose to respond to. If you have a problem, then you can just as easily place me on ignore {which of course points back to what I said about you and MB forming a site where you'd end up removing all other posts but your own}.

You have a label for everything and everybody, don't you?

What label? you said I can place you on ignore, I told you why I won't and said you could do the same for me, placing me on ignore and inidicated an earlier post. No label anywhere.

 

[novice_btm]

novice - there was no name calling...

I get your lovely play on words, but...

...198 posts written by that Dick...

...So that's 4 examples of opposite behaviour off the top of my head, without searching...

And every single one of them relatively ancient history, and definitely before the overwhelming majority of this current group ever became Mods, or in some cases, even joined the site.

I had another full paragraph, but I just realized how much energy I've wasted over this ONE ridiculous, contested post. The only thing that this thread has accomplished, is to push me toward inviting him to apply for readmission.

 

[mitchymo]

This thread has become as interesting as an opera show to the local hoodies.

Stronzo is of no concern to the members here anymore with exception of those who interact with him elsewhere so his post being removed is inconsequential to everybody else and had no right to have been posted to begin (as others have explained).


The sooner that members can show some faith that the mod team makes decisions as a TEAM (something i'm still catching up on) and that issues are discussed and reviewed where necessary to arrive at the best possible position the better.

 

[luka82]

The sooner that members can show some faith that the mod team makes decisions as a TEAM ...

Does this mean if you date one mod, you date them all...or?:biggrin1:

 

[ManlyBanisters]

The man is gone. You got what you wanted. Leave him alone. Don't write about him. Don't acknowledge him. Don't follow him to other sites. Be adults. Move on.

Regarding your comment about following him to other sites, go check when I last posted there and go check when I last addressed a post to him here or there. Aside from laughing about the stupid cunt getting himself banned again, of course.

And, with all due respect, Sam - don't fucking tell me what to do.

And every single one of them relatively ancient history, and definitely before the overwhelming majority of this current group ever became Mods, or in some cases, even joined the site.

Velvet/DF was banned two weeks ago.

January
[...]
24
[...]
Velvet - previously banned as dragonfly20 et al.

Were you a mod 2 weeks ago?

Stronzo is of no concern to the members here anymore with exception of those who interact with him elsewhere so his post being removed is inconsequential to everybody else and had no right to have been posted to begin (as others have explained).

I don't interact with him anywhere - but why is it up to you to tell me what's of concern to me or not?

I would suggest if you don't like me bringing this up that you consider the following: seeing as the ToS gives you the power to arbitrarily ban members regardless of whether they have violated the specifics mentioned or not, and that by being a member here I agree to abide by that, and that I have voiced my agreement with the owner's right to ban, via his mod team, whoever the hell he likes, I would suggest you ban me.

 

[mitchymo]

I don't interact with him anywhere - but why is it up to you to tell me what's of concern to me or not?

If you can justifiably tell me WHY it is of concern to you and WHY it has any relevance to joe bloggs who has just joined then i will lobby to have the offending post put back. (but i'll be a one man campaign if i did!)

I would suggest if you don't like me bringing this up that you consider the following: seeing as the ToS gives you the power to arbitrarily ban members regardless of whether they have violated the specifics mentioned or not, and that by being a member here I agree to abide by that, and that I have voiced my agreement with the owner's right to ban, via his mod team, whoever the hell he likes, I would suggest you ban me.

This would serve no purpose but to prove an incorrect perception being bandied about by those like Stronzo that we ban on the basis of whether we like or dislike individual members.
You break the ToS and then we ban, you fail to heed warning then we ban, We will not ban you or anybody else simply for being pernickity.

 

[Kotchanski]

I have a terrible cold right now, and can't think straight, but I'm going to give this a go. I'll try to explain step by step what happens when various types of people are banned (as there are several differences between them all, and trying to gloss over things for the sake of being simple only makes things more confusing)

I shall use examples:

1. Pecker, banned for gender faking / multiple accounts(I'm ill ok)

He returns under a new name and goes about posting in various threads about "her" experiences and such, maybe dabbles in a little politics and generally stays out of peoples way, causing little to no harm outside of getting straight men to wank on cam for him assuming he's a woman.

He's caught however because he happens to join chat while Flamey is in there and he recognises the lines being spun as those used previously by Pecker.

A quick check and there is enough to confirm that he's back and on this new account, so after all the facts have been put in the mod forum, discussed and voted on, we ban him.

We don't remove his posts on the board because they're doing no harm to anyone, don't enable him to continue conning the membership and people have replied, with quotes and removing them would leave things very messy for the sake of "not letting him have his say"

2. Flamey, banned for attacking people in the chat room repeatedly and without any cause.

He comes back under a new name and starts threads, blogs, replies to random threads all bitching about other members, distributing lies and just being a bit of a cunt all round.

Based on the content of these, we obviously have a fair idea of who it is, so we do the usual checks, confirm it and he's gone.

In this case, the posts and his account are flagged up pretty quick and have caused limited disruption to the board, he's been removed and removing the posts stops people responding which only encourages him to return again to reply to said replies. Had he rejoined and stayed under the radar for a few months before losing it all and going on his little rant fest, earlier posts may well remain in tact.

3. Hickboy, banned for being a minor.

He returns and makes 3 posts in various sections, one asking about his size at 14yo, and 2 containing his email addy.

He's banned and his posts are all removed, for obvious reasons.

The long and short of it all is this: Almost every case is different, and as a team we spend hours, sometimes days debating what should and shouldn't be done with x issue. None of us claim to always get it right, but we can say that we always go with what the majority wish at the time. It all comes down to the content of the individual posts, their intent and the possible outcomes of our actions.

I'm sorry that people aren't happy with the decision currently being discussed, and I'm sorry that explaining why it was that way for x member on y account, and this way for y member on z account is so difficult, but the very simple fact is that while consistency is lovely and always something we try to keep up, rigid consistency isn't a good thing... we ban for multiple accounts, but several in this thread alone have had more than one to log on and let us know there seems to be a problem with their accounts, would you have us ban them? Consistency says we should (a bad example maybe, but you get my point I'm sure)

 

[luka82]

Ok guys, I`ll try to lighten up things a bit...
When a certain member was a mod, I asked him-How do you know I don`t have 2 accounts???
He asked-Luka, do you???
I said-NO!!!
He said-GOOD!
Ahahahahahah
Just trying to cheer up things:biggrin1:

 

[helgaleena]

I shall use examples:

1. Pecker, banned for gender faking / multiple accounts(I'm ill ok)

He returns under a new name and goes about posting in various threads about "her" experiences and such, maybe dabbles in a little politics and generally stays out of peoples way, causing little to no harm outside of getting straight men to wank on cam for him assuming he's a woman.

He's caught however because he happens to join chat while Flamey is in there and he recognises the lines being spun as those used previously by Pecker.

A quick check and there is enough to confirm that he's back and on this new account, so after all the facts have been put in the mod forum, discussed and voted on, we ban him.

We don't remove his posts on the board because they're doing no harm to anyone, don't enable him to continue conning the membership and people have replied, with quotes and removing them would leave things very messy for the sake of "not letting him have his say"

Not Pecker our beloved admin??? I am all confused now. Besides the multiple hicks there are multiple peckers?

oh wtf shall go superbowl

 

[HazelGod]

Wow...talk about a tempest in a teacup. :no:

I hope the current mod team is taking this as a lesson in the pitfalls of reinstating members who were permanently banned for non-trivial reasons.

 

[D_Kaye Throttlebottom]

What label? you said I can place you on ignore, I told you why I won't and said you could do the same for me, placing me on ignore and inidicated an earlier post. No label anywhere.

last word freak.
making it about you.
instigator.

Three times the charm I see.