Why was MickeyLee banned?

[HazelGod]

Seriously, why?
(For you pedants, know that I've read the Warren report on the matter.)

MickeyLee was about the furthest you could get from being a disruptive or antagonistic or harassing personality on this site. Even when she and I had clashed over our polar opposite viewpoints regarding a matter close to her, she never descended to incivility.

As a member struggling to make some sense of the almost incomprehensibly inchoate application of the rules, I'm once again asking for some clarification.

Posting content from another site to harass a member

First, there isn't any provision in the TOS that corresponds to this reason. The best I can guess is that it's a mashup of two separate sections:

These violations are subject to a sanction up to and including, permanent ban, depending on (cumulative) severity:

Linking to sites used to defame this site or any of its members - This includes links or any other methods used to direct members to off site material that in any way defames the site or its membership

Harassment of, or threats against, other LPSG members - This applies to the main forum, thread tags, PMs, chat room, IMs, visitor comments and galleries.

I've seen the "offending" images that were placed in her gallery. The images themselves were of the member's own words, which could hardly be considered defamatory. They were not links, and she was careful to remove all traces of visible URLs so that nobody unfamiliar with the source could follow them back...considering there was no action at all taken against a member who directly linked to a known white-supremacist hate site in the recent past, I can't see how there was any actionable violation of the TOS here.

That leaves the nebulous and highly subjective "harassment" claim. There were no threats made. MickeyLee did not post these images in a public forum, and she also obfuscated the names of the posters involved. She did not call public attention to this gallery, but posted it to demonstrate in a manner that would not link outside of LPSG to another member that the principal in question was not, in fact, the always-happy-love-everyone caricature he portrayed. She had no confrontation with the principal himself (nor any other interaction at all, to my knowledge) and he was never contacted in any way, so any claim that the images were somehow harassing to him stretches the bounds of reason.

Then, there's the inexplicably sudden and severe punishment for this highly dubious infraction: the immediate and permanent banning of a member who previously had never received so much as a warning for any reason, much less for harassing this particular member. It runs completely contradictory to the process of incremental sanctions explained by the administration recently, not to mention the supposedly cumulative nature of offenses as described in the TOS.

The gravity of an offense will also be taken into consideration. It may require only a heads up and may follow the steps through to warning, temp ban then perm ban. Or it may require a skipping of steps and go straight to perm ban.

What are we, as members, to think of this? A reasonable person is likely to conclude that the rules are basically enforced at the whim of whomever has his hand on the button at a given moment, and that little, if any, consideration is being given to the effect of such actions to the broader climate of the site. A conclusion furthered by the final note from the same administrator's post:

the ToS are not looked upon as Law, but rather as a guideline

 

[798686]

Ugh. Don't know if I can be arsed wading through all of that...

 

[HazelGod]

Ugh. Don't know if I can be arsed wading through all of that...

What valuable input. Thanks so much for your time and thoughtful consideration.

 

[798686]

What valuable input. Thanks so much for your time and thoughtful consideration.

Always a pleasure. :wink:

 

[Enid]

I disagree with her permanent banning for multiple reasons which HG elucidated quite well, and want to stress that she was not given any warnings. None at all. I know that mods here have a tough job, but I believe strongly that she should have been given a warning first. Maybe a one week ban. A perm ban right off the bat? Harsh, very harsh IMO.

A one week ban was MR's first punishment regarding the harassment issue, do I have that right? If that is the case, IMO it would have made much more sense to apply same level of action to ML since their bannings were brought about by similar issues.

 

[dannyrankin]

Couldn't be fucked.

 

[SilverTrain]

Perfectly formulated OP, by Hazel. I doubt these questions will ever be answered publicly. But I share the bewilderment.

 

[798686]

I dunno, maybe it is harsh?

But the thing is, she posted content from a site which most ppl realise gets you banned if you link to it. Is it somehow unbannable because she posted the actual content rather than just linking to it?!

Also, what was her reason for doing so? To make certain members look bad, or not? I liked Mickey, from what I knew of her - but it wasn't the wisest thing to do. No idea if it should be a perm ban or not - what's the usual punishment for linking to defamatory sites (regardless of what content ur linking to), and is it always immediate?

Tbh, I'm really sick of all the endless picking over the bones of this whole subject. :/

 

[Bbucko]

Perfectly formulated OP, by Hazel. I doubt these questions will ever be answered publicly. But I share the bewilderment.

More to come, but you captured my sentiments to the word, sir.

 

[thetramp]

Because she said one of my pictures was embarrassing :crying:
Serves her right :biggrin1:

But on a serious note, i don't know what she posted or in what context.
But i do know that i feel sorry that she is gone, while i do not know her i can at least say i have never seen aggressive or harassing tendencies in her posts.
So i join the OP in his wondering why this happened.

 

[HazelGod]

what was her reason for doing so?

Perhaps if you'd spent a bit more time reading my post before whinging about the fact that I posted, you wouldn't stupidly ask questions that have already been answered:

She...posted it to demonstrate in a manner that would not link outside of LPSG to another member that the principal in question was not, in fact, the always-happy-love-everyone caricature he portrayed.

Tbh, I'm really sick of all the endless picking over the bones of this whole subject. :/

To be honest, nobody gives a flying fuck what you are or aren't sick of. This isn't about you or your silly panda pal. If you don't like getting zapped, then stop sticking your finger into the outlet, genius.

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

I disagree with her permanent banning for multiple reasons which HG elucidated quite well, and want to stress that she was not given any warnings. None at all. I know that mods here have a tough job, but I believe strongly that she should have been given a warning first. Maybe a one week ban. A perm ban right off the bat? Harsh, very harsh IMO.

A one week ban was MR's first punishment regarding the harassment issue, do I have that right? If that is the case, IMO it would have made much more sense to apply same level of action to ML since their bannings were brought about by similar issues.

No it's a perma-ban I think.


If Mickeylee had no warnings and the images she posted gave no clue as to their origin and contained no reference to the site they came from then I think a perma-ban is harsh.

 

[HazelGod]

A one week ban was MR's first punishment regarding the harassment issue, do I have that right?

Yes, you do.

If that is the case, IMO it would have made much more sense to apply same level of action to ML since their bannings were brought about by similar issues.

While I would maintain that the categorization of MickeyLee's album image as harassment is highly dubious, if you presumed for the sake of argument that it was, then yes...the same warning -> temp ban -> permanent ban progression being applied would be consistent.

It's both the tenuous claim of "harassment" and the grossly inconsistent nature of sanctioning for the same violation that are disturbing to me.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

HG - thanks for posting this.

I have been assuming til now that she posted it in a thread, that I missed it and it had been deleted. I also assumed that she'd drawn attention to it. I also assumed that she had left the names clear and obvious.

Even assuming all of that I didn't understand why, seeing as she didn't link to the place, she had not been warned or temp banned.

Now I find that it was a much more subtle protest on her part that, had she not been banned for it, would have gone unnoticed by the vast majority of the active membership, including me.

Way to go, mod team!

Tbh, I'm really sick of all the endless picking over the bones of this whole subject. :/

Sorry, joll, who exactly is twisting your arm and forcing you read all of this and, further more, comment on it?

 

[vince]

I did not see the image in MickeyLee's album. But if it as described in the OP here, then I fail to see how Luka's own words can be considered harassment. Either one owns what one writes, or not. Regardless of the venue.

I don't like repeating myself, but Luka82 didn't have the guts to post his true thoughts openly on this board. MickeyLee exposed his written thoughts in black and white. Thoughts that were contrary to what he wrote here and contrary to the "Luvs Ya!" persona.

I didn't know that exposing a fake was against the ToS.

btw the HG... Trinity didn't link directly to the white supremacy website. It was not a hyperlink. She just gave the address. But all it took was a copy and a paste and one was transported from LPSG to a White Power site and I find that far more dangerous to this site than a bitmap with no address showing what Luka82 wrote on the outhouse wall.

MickeyLee was one of those people who gave character and texture to a site like this. What does it say about us when the poets get summarily banished without warning for the silliest of reasons?

 

[Bbucko]

I disagree with her permanent banning for multiple reasons which HG elucidated quite well, and want to stress that she was not given any warnings. None at all. I know that mods here have a tough job, but I believe strongly that she should have been given a warning first. Maybe a one week ban. A perm ban right off the bat? Harsh, very harsh IMO.

A one week ban was MR's first punishment regarding the harassment issue, do I have that right? If that is the case, IMO it would have made much more sense to apply same level of action to ML since their bannings were brought about by similar issues.

When the place which shall not be named was set up, there was a change in the ToS to reflect that any direct mention of or linkage to that place by name was subject to an immediate permanent banning.

I admit to not keeping up with the ToS and its evolution as often as I should. But HG is perhaps the least disingenuous member of this board, so I take him at his word in the OP that either some change has been made subsequently regarding that other place (which, in reality, has devolved into a cesspool of mental illness and blind, unreasonable hate after having once been a place of serious debate), or else the wording is ambiguous enough to have made ML's ban capricious, to say the very least.

ML's action, as described by HG (I never visited the gallery in question), is patently less obnoxious nor in any way comparable to the quoting of an infamous white supremacist website (and in an OP, no less), which one of the admins told me specifically was best handled by "ridicule" than "official censure".

One involved direct quotation of a member from a place motivated entirely by hate of LPSG (now, not at its inception) and squirreled away in a gallery. The other was an open affront to every African-American, Jew, Asian, Feminist or GLBT member of LPSG. One was condoned, the other resulted in a permaban.

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

No it's a perma-ban I think.


If Mickeylee had no warnings and the images she posted gave no clue as to their origin and contained no reference to the site they came from then I think a perma-ban is harsh.

Oops misread your post Enid, ignore the bolded :redface: HG is more reliable :tongue:

 

[Daisy]

Ugh. Don't know if I can be arsed wading through all of that...

LOL!!! I just love you Joll.

 

[HazelGod]

LOL!!! I just love you Joll.

Didn't you just create a thread this afternoon bemoaning such inane personal exchanges taking discussions completely off-topic?

Unless you were making some very oblique object illustration of gross hypocrisy, I fail to understand what your post here has to do with MickeyLee being banned.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

There is a Dublin expression that springs to mind right now...

Caught rapid! :biggrin:

(oops, now I'm doing it!)