Wow, Mods, this is really beneath you.

B_Nick8

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
11,403
Media
0
Likes
298
Points
208
Location
New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
I'm not sure who changed Hung Jon's signature but I agree that it's a pretty immature thing to do. Completely unnecessary and solves nothing. I'm disappointed.

So am I. Apparently it still stands and to me it's utterly petty and childish. I imagine it's there so that it will put the lie to each post in which he addresses the time he was a mod but that's just an absurd way to deal with this.

Threads like this, and the Two Sets of Rules thread, in which Rob and the other mods have openly addressed my and other member's questions ought to stand as the answers and rebuke to Jon's accusations, not some ridiculous scarlet letter branded on every post ever made by HungJon.

Nick, how do we know that now?:confused:

I guess we don't.
 

Mem

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
7,912
Media
0
Likes
54
Points
183
Location
FL
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I guess I wouldn't be completely opposed to putting that in the signature of everyone that gets banned and then linking to the rules of the site. But to do that to just him and the thread as to why? Not good.

It seems childish and makes the Mods/Admins look bad instead of the intended target. Perhaps after Mod meetings they will agree to take it down.

It seems like something a clever member would place themselves to make the Mods/Admins look bad, or like what an angry parent who doesn't know how to parent and instead yells, blames and accuses, would say.

Also reminds me of something that Bart Simpson would have to write on a chalkboard in class. :'I lied to the members and moderators of LPSG. For that I was banned. See http://www.lpsg.org/288926-2-sets-of-rules-apparently-4.html#post3987691 for more information. and in his signature it doesn't even create a hyperlink.

here is some advice "never let them see you sweat"
 
Last edited:

B_Nick8

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
11,403
Media
0
Likes
298
Points
208
Location
New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
It seems childish and makes the Mods/Admins look bad instead of the intended target. Perhaps after Mod meetings they will agree to take it down.

It seems like something a reasonable Mod would take down immediately to make the Mods/Admins look like the mature adults they are .

Fixed that for ya, Mem. :wink:
 

Mem

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
7,912
Media
0
Likes
54
Points
183
Location
FL
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I didn't know HungJon but I would not defend a person who uses stolen pics. They are insecure liars and deceivers and they lose my trust, especially as far as being a Mod goes. Once you lie about your pics everything else you say can also be held against you.
 

B_Nick8

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
11,403
Media
0
Likes
298
Points
208
Location
New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
I didn't know HungJon but I would not defend a person who uses stolen pics. They are insecure liars and deceivers and they lose my trust, especially as far as being a Mod goes. Once you lie about your pics everything else you say can also be held against you.

I'm not defending him although I admit that when I started this thread the only fake I had in mind was the blink-and-you-missed-it one he posted, was called out on, and immediately removed which, as I remember, happened before he became a mod (and which ought to have disqualified him from becoming one if you ask me). The point I'm making is that I believe the more salient reason he's been banned is his violation of the Mod secrecy policy and that the timing of the discovery of his fake gallery pics is a convenient excuse. Certainly the former is the more egregious transgression and ought to be openly acknowledged as the primary charge for which he's been convicted.
 

Mem

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
7,912
Media
0
Likes
54
Points
183
Location
FL
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I'm not defending him although I admit that when I started this thread the only fake I had in mind was the blink-and-you-missed-it one he posted, was called out on, and immediately removed which, as I remember, happened before he became a mod (and which ought to have disqualified him from becoming one if you ask me). The point I'm making is that I believe the more salient reason he's been banned is his violation of the Mod secrecy policy and that the timing of the discovery of his fake gallery pics is a convenient excuse. Certainly the former is the more egregious transgression and ought to be openly acknowledged as the primary charge for which he's been convicted.

I agree, it seems the fake pics are not the reason he was banned, it's the excuse. I remember someone complaining that their signature was changed or removed and someone in the Mod staff saying that it can't even be done by them. :rolleyes:

As far as his new signature posted...looks like sour grapes. Passive aggressive ...I can go on and on, and not say one positive thing about it.
 

Kotchanski

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Posts
2,850
Media
10
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
England (United Kingdom)
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Female
I agree, it seems the fake pics are not the reason he was banned, it's the excuse. I remember someone complaining that their signature was changed or removed and someone in the Mod staff saying that it can't even be done by them. :rolleyes:

As far as his new signature posted...looks like sour grapes. Passive aggressive ...I can go on and on, and not say one positive thing about it.

That's because they can't...
 

Guy-jin

Legendary Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Posts
3,836
Media
3
Likes
1,367
Points
333
Location
San Jose (California, United States)
Sexuality
Asexual
Gender
Male
I was in a situation like this one once, only I was the administrator in question, and I was the one coming under attack from specific members of the forum community for banning said individual when he started abusing his power behind the backs of the other moderators and administrators of said forum.

There are men and women behind the scenes. Nobody besides them knows what's going on back there. To presume you know is to be incorrect.

They do not have to give you a reason why a particular person is banned. For the same reason, you may not understand why a particular person is banned. In this case, you were provided with a valid reason--that this particular individual was engaging in deceptive practices generally--and evidence that doesn't involve pulling back the curtain--that this particular individual was using pictures that weren't his own to represent himself.

When I was the administrator at another forum, I banned a relatively well known individual for hacking the forum. But it wasn't just for hacking the forum. His reason for hacking the forum was to try to obtain evidence from a moderators-only forum that the site owner wanted to ban particular popular people that he didn't like on the forum (which wasn't true). He actually found a backdoor into the moderator forums and had been visiting it regularly for some time with the tacit knowledge of an administrator and another moderator (it was a large group in control of that forum).

The general population didn't know he hacked the forum or what his motives were for doing so and I wasn't about to report to them the particulars of what he did. They also didn't know what the other administrator and moderator who were "on his side" were doing. That banning, however, led to a thread much longer than this one of people questioning my actions, questioning what's going on "behind the scenes", and so forth. In the end, we simply said that he had hacked the forum, which was ban-worthy, and the admin and mod that had been in the know with him were asked to leave the team and the site on their own (which they did--they were in on it b/c they didn't like the site owner anyway).

Anyway, long convoluted story, but my point is that there is more behind the curtain than you might think. And sometimes not everything needs to be revealed to the general population on the forum because it would serve no beneficial purpose. And sometimes an excuse can be found for banning a troublesome person that might not be the full reason, but rather the simplest one to explain.
 

B_Nick8

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
11,403
Media
0
Likes
298
Points
208
Location
New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
That's because they can't...

You know how much I like and respect you but I'm more than confused. Are you saying HungJon posted his signature himself? Even if he meant it as some sort of (counter-intuitive) sarcastic comment, how could he make reference to a post by Rob after his banning??

I lied to the members and moderators of LPSG. For that I was banned. See http://www.lpsg.org/288926-2-sets-of-rules-apparently-4.html#post3987691 for more information.

Edit: Sorry, I didn't see Mem had asked the same question.
 
Last edited:

bobg4400

Loved Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Posts
2,718
Media
1
Likes
521
Points
258
Location
UK
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
I'm confused about the sig thing too.
The only way it makes sense if if the Mods can't change them. But the Administrators/Rob can.
It seems likely Rob can alter the site any way he wants to given that he runs the technical side of it. That just leaves the question of whether the Admins can alter sigs too or if it's just Rob.
 

IntoxicatingToxin

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Posts
7,639
Media
0
Likes
246
Points
283
Location
Kansas City (Missouri, United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
I'm not defending him although I admit that when I started this thread the only fake I had in mind was the blink-and-you-missed-it one he posted, was called out on, and immediately removed which, as I remember, happened before he became a mod (and which ought to have disqualified him from becoming one if you ask me). The point I'm making is that I believe the more salient reason he's been banned is his violation of the Mod secrecy policy and that the timing of the discovery of his fake gallery pics is a convenient excuse. Certainly the former is the more egregious transgression and ought to be openly acknowledged as the primary charge for which he's been convicted.

I understand the point you are making here, and if I had not previously been a moderator I would probably feel similarly. But in reality, he didn't violate any sort of "mod secrecy policy" because everything he said was lies or at least a twisted misconception of what happens 'back there'.

I agree, it seems the fake pics are not the reason he was banned, it's the excuse. I remember someone complaining that their signature was changed or removed and someone in the Mod staff saying that it can't even be done by them. :rolleyes:

As far as his new signature posted...looks like sour grapes. Passive aggressive ...I can go on and on, and not say one positive thing about it.

So you are saying that HungJon posted that signature himself and it can't be removed by any Mod or Admin inducing the site owner?

You know how much I like and respect you but I'm more than confused. Are you saying HungJon posted his signature himself? Even if he meant it as some sort of (counter-intuitive) sarcastic comment, how could he make reference to a post by Rob after his banning??

I lied to the members and moderators of LPSG. For that I was banned. See http://www.lpsg.org/288926-2-sets-of-rules-apparently-4.html#post3987691 for more information.

Edit: Sorry, I didn't see Mem had asked the same question.

I feel confident that Rob posted the signature. Would be nice if he'd step forward and admit it if he DID do it, so the moderators and admins don't come under fire for something they didn't do, but that's my 2 cents. Granted, I haven't worked with a few of the current mods but the ones that are there that I have worked with would certainly not do something like this, hence my disappointment. It's completely out of character. That leads me to believe that Rob did it, but meh. None of us know for sure.
 

IntoxicatingToxin

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Posts
7,639
Media
0
Likes
246
Points
283
Location
Kansas City (Missouri, United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
Just saw this post so I thought I'd share it in case anyone else missed it. I almost didn't see it because it was posted to a section of the board that I personally never read. If there was any question on how moderators handled things, this should answer a lot of it. I just finished reading this entire post and this is the same process we used when I was a moderator as well.

http://www.lpsg.org/290197-mods-and-admins-what-do.html
 

Mem

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
7,912
Media
0
Likes
54
Points
183
Location
FL
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I feel confident that Rob posted the signature. Would be nice if he'd step forward and admit it if he DID do it, so the moderators and admins don't come under fire for something they didn't do, but that's my 2 cents. Granted, I haven't worked with a few of the current mods but the ones that are there that I have worked with would certainly not do something like this, hence my disappointment. It's completely out of character. That leads me to believe that Rob did it, but meh. None of us know for sure.

I can understand being so upset and frustrated and to feel so betrayed by someone you trusted to let your anger get the better of you. Still when things cool off, better to remove it.

And are you saying it's not out of character for Rob to do this? I'm only asking because that's how I'm reading it, not to incite.
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
There are men and women behind the scenes. Nobody besides them knows what's going on back there. To presume you know is to be incorrect.

They do not have to give you a reason why a particular person is banned. For the same reason, you may not understand why a particular person is banned. In this case, you were provided with a valid reason--that this particular individual was engaging in deceptive practices generally--and evidence that doesn't involve pulling back the curtain--that this particular individual was using pictures that weren't his own to represent himself.
Thank you.

The point I'm making is that I believe the more salient reason he's been banned is his violation of the Mod secrecy policy and that the timing of the discovery of his fake gallery pics is a convenient excuse. Certainly the former is the more egregious transgression and ought to be openly acknowledged as the primary charge for which he's been convicted.
Please take into consideration what Guy-jin wrote Nick, and re-read what I explained before-

Hung Jon was going down a road that may have led to him divulging either publicaly or privately, information of a confidential nature. It could have been information on individuals or about the site. In fact he admitted talking about discussions inside the mod forum with friends and former moderators. His deception of the membership here through his recent posts, stolen photos and what went on behind the scene in the mod forums were definitely motivated by an ill intent. The stolen, copy-written photos are evidence of that deception and alone are reason enough for a ban.

The true sources of the photos in his album were unknown to us until yesterday. If they had been known earlier, he would have been banned earlier.
I wasn't BS'ing you when I wrote that.

This whole episode has stretched bounds of confidentiality and trust on this site. If you don't believe me that we banned him as soon as we were able and could not do so sooner, there isn't much else I can say. We, all of us members, are lucky the evidence of the photos came to light when it did and he got banned legitimately. Complaining about the modding here is not reason enough to be banned. Formulating and discussing conspiracy theories about the admins is'nt. Nor is the mod team "thinking" he might do something to the site, another member, or just stick around and spread dissent, reason enough for a ban. Believe it or not, we really do follow the ToS and the guidelines the owner has laid out.

You may think the timing was too convenient or opportune and try to fill in non-existent blanks, that's your prerogative. I've done my best to explain what happened without breaching any confidences.