Reason for User Ban

CheapLikeAFox

CheapLikeAFox

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1483 (100%)
So user 

icedragon15

Asked me to see if he could get a reason he was banned so I'm just relaying the message here.  He claims he was just banned with no reason given to him by the mods and asked me to ask the mods about it.  

I have no horse in the race, just relaying his request.  

 
Probably has a lot to do with the volume of reported posts that are generated as a result of him being here. I don't know who or why he was banned, but his act has worn thin.

 
CaseyRyback said:
Probably has a lot to do with the volume of reported posts that are generated as a result of him being here. I don't know who or why he was banned, but his act has worn thin.
Click to expand...
It's worth asking though, how many of those reported posts were actually breaking rules?

If you can get banned for bad grammar and inside jokes, you guys may want to add that to the forum rules.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cheaplikeafox 3.0 said:
Yeah, I guess I was hoping for a more concrete reason, but I guess it is what it is.
Click to expand...
A "concrete reason" can't be explained if there never was a concrete reason behind the ban in the first place. That could very well be the case.

If a high quantity of reports against a user are made, even if said user isn't breaking forum rules, apparently he can get banned, from what we can see. So basically CAG can "vote to kick" a user.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
pitfallharry219 said:
Why were you hoping for anything? You said you didn't "have a horse in the race".
Click to expand...
I don't, but I was hoping to be able to relay a concrete reason one way or another. If they say it's because he did X or Y to break the rules then at least you convey that to him. So far it just seems the reason is people didn't like him/found him annoying. Nothing one can really do about that.

 
Cheaplikeafox 3.0 said:
I don't, but I was hoping to be able to relay a concrete reason one way or another. If they say it's because he did X or Y to break the rules then at least you convey that to him. So far it just seems the reason is people didn't like him/found him annoying. Nothing one can really do about that.
Click to expand...
Actually, if you read the rules, being annoying is specifically mentioned. It's not like Casey or Cheapy are just making shit up as they go along.

 
pitfallharry219 said:
Actually, if you read the rules, being annoying is specifically mentioned. It's not like Casey or Cheapy are just making shit up as they go along.
Click to expand...
Community Rules

CAG Registration & Membership
You may not register or access CAG if you are under the age of thirteen (13). Upon registration, you agree to provide truthful and accurate information about yourself as requested, and to promptly make any updates as to keep such information current. You may not impersonate any person or entity or misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity, or disguise the origin of any content transmitted through CAG. The Management may suspend or terminate your account and refuse use of the CAG in the event that you provide false information about yourself, fail to keep information current, or create multiple accounts. You can change your display name here.

Language & Disruptive Behavior
You may not use CAG to make available content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, tortious, defamatory, obscene, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable. You may not engage in any behavior that interferes with the operation of CAG or its enjoyment by other users.

Trademarks, Copyrighted Material, and Confidential Information
You may not use CAG to make available content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights of another. You may not use CAG to make available content which you have no right to make available under any law or under contractual or fiduciary relationships (including but not limited to inside information and proprietary or confidential information disclosed in employment relationships or under nondisclosure agreements).

Trolling & Harassment
Posting unsubstantiated negative commentary intended solely to annoy and/or offend other users is not allowed. You may not "stalk" or otherwise harass or harm another user in any way.

Spam & Solicitation
You may not use CAG to make available unsolicited or unauthorized advertising, promotional materials, "junk mail," "spam," "chain letters," “stock touts,” “pyramid schemes,”, "affiliate links", "cookie stuffing", or any other form of solicitation. For more information on affiliate links and why we only allow CAG Affiliate links, please read this.

Viruses & Data Collection
You may not use CAG to make available software viruses or any other computer code, files or programs designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment. You may not collect or store personal data about other users of CAG.

Piracy & Other Illegal Acts
You may not use CAG to make available information on the acquisition or use of pirated content, circumvention of copy protection, and software or hardware which enables the use of pirated content. Requesting or providing links or invitations to web sites which contain this information or content is not allowed. You may not use CAG to discuss, buy, sell, or trade pirated content or hardware which enables the use of pirated content.
You may not use CAG to violate local, state, national or international law, including but not limited to administrative regulations and any other regulations having the force of law.

System Abuse
CAG has various features which are designed to help the community, but can be negatively affected by malicious user input. These features include (but are not limited to): thread and blog tagging, trade-in value tracker, reporting posts, user reviews, trading, feedback, marketplace, private messages, price tracker and the game database. Those users who abuse the Site features will find their privileges or account revoked at the administrator's discretion.
Click to expand...
No, trolling is against the rules. That's intentionally posting shit to anger or annoy someone. That does not include posts simply with bad grammar that happen to annoy someone. That's not "intended" to annoy someone. Hell, MysterD (a user who constantly talks about the same things) annoys the shit out of me sometimes because he's a broken record, but is that a banworthy offense? No, it's not. Annoyance is subjective. Trolling is not.

 
Idiotekque said:
No, trolling is against the rules. That's intentionally posting shit to anger or annoy someone. That does not include posts simply with bad grammar that happen to annoy someone. That's not "intended" to annoy someone. Hell, MysterD (a user who constantly talks about the same things) annoys the shit out of me sometimes because he's a broken record, but is that a banworthy offense? No, it's not. Annoyance is subjective. Trolling is not.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing this is the clause:

"You may not engage in any behavior that interferes with the operation of CAG or its enjoyment by other users"

As you said, it's hard to abide by those rules because "enjoyment" is subjective. Clearly he was having the time of his life. ;)

Any word on whether or not this is temporary?

I'm not in favor of harassing moderators who do a thankless job (I've got a good chunk of experience in that field). It would just be nice to have some transparency so as to avoid an Invasion of the Body Snatchers scenario. :beer:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
hal said:
I'm guessing this is the clause:

"You may not engage in any behavior that interferes with the operation of CAG or its enjoyment by other users"

As you said, it's hard to abide by those rules because "enjoyment" is subjective. Clearly he was having the time of his life. ;)

Any word on whether or not this is temporary?

I'm not in favor of harassing moderators who do a thankless job (I've got a good chunk of experience in that field). It would just be nice to have some transparency so as to avoid an Invasion of the Body Snatchers scenario. :beer:
Click to expand...
Maybe, that's just way, way too vague. Really though, that clause sounds to be more along the lines of a situation where someone impedes and screws up a giveaway, or sabotages a thread somehow, etc. Not simply bugging some people.

If anything, it's this clause (which I already talked about in my last post):

Trolling & Harassment
Posting unsubstantiated negative commentary intended solely to annoy and/or offend other users is not allowed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cheaplikeafox 3.0 said:
I don't, but I was hoping to be able to relay a concrete reason one way or another. If they say it's because he did X or Y to break the rules then at least you convey that to him. So far it just seems the reason is people didn't like him/found him annoying. Nothing one can really do about that.
Click to expand...
/like

which violates the rule about abusing the reporting feature. from my experience, they ignore you hoping you go away.

pitfallharry219 said:
Why were you hoping for anything? You said you didn't "have a horse in the race".
Click to expand...
You're interfering with my enjoyment of CAG.

Idiotekque said:
No, trolling is against the rules. That's intentionally posting shit to anger or annoy someone. That does not include posts simply with bad grammar that happen to annoy someone. That's not "intended" to annoy someone. Hell, MysterD (a user who constantly talks about the same things) annoys the shit out of me sometimes because he's a broken record, but is that a banworthy offense? No, it's not. Annoyance is subjective. Trolling is not.
Click to expand...
/like

well said.

ran out of likes again

need to go back to checking this daily again.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I mean if its just a matter of the mods or Cheapy found him annoying so they banned him, then it is what it is.  It doesn't really happen often (that I can tell) so I don't really see it as a huge problem, but I am a fan of more clear cut rules.  There's definitely much more annoying posters on the site (like the white knight in this thread), but it's usually the annoying people that are quick to report others and they don't get reported themselves because most people have learned to just ignore others if they find them annoying.    

 
Cheaplikeafox 3.0 said:
I mean if its just a matter of the mods or Cheapy found him annoying so they banned him, then it is what it is. It doesn't really happen often (that I can tell) so I don't really see it as a huge problem, but I am a fan of more clear cut rules. There's definitely much more annoying posters on the site (like the white knight in this thread), but it's usually the annoying people that are quick to report others and they don't get reported themselves because most people have learned to just ignore others if they find them annoying.
Click to expand...
I have reported one person in my entire stay here on CAG.

Myself.

Really though, me and Blade got into some stupid off topic argument. I asked the mods to clean it up, and reporting Blade's post would have been assholey.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I never once reported Tebow/icedragon.

Mainly because I couldn't find the button.

I'm sure he's a nice kid and all, but really. Any thread he posted in lost 2-3 postspaces a page with drivel. Either him directly or with people replying in tebowspeek.

He had novelty value for a few days and somehow it just went on. And on. And on. It was a joke that never died despite being terribly unfunny. You don't need rules to point out the disruptive influence it had on any thread he posted in. Ban is justified.

My two pennies of Queen's currency.
 
I understand the desire for transparency as well as the wanting clarification, especially on a permanent action such as this.  I mean a permaban should always include a reason why, at least once.  I can understand if users try to circumvent IP blocks not getting an explanation.  But, are any of you really surprised by this banning?  If you are, you're waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more liberal than I am.  This is just my opinion but if I built my own house, I'd expect a certain code of conduct within, without feeling the need to post it on the walls.  While this is 'the internet', it is also still Cheapy's house and I can respect that.

 
Like most others, I'm not against a banning if the user earned it, and certainly icedragon15 had more than his share of reported posts.  But if it is true that he was banned without an explanation from the mods - or even a warning! - then this is very troubling indeed.  A member of this forum should at least have a chance to improve his behavior, especially one who is as active and has been here as long as tebow.  In many ways I consider this my home on the internet, and I would be very upset if I was suddenly cut off from this community and many people I've come to think of as friends without any reason why, or a chance to make amends.

 
Neuro5i5 said:
I understand the desire for transparency as well as the wanting clarification, especially on a permanent action such as this. I mean a permaban should always include a reason why, at least once. I can understand if users try to circumvent IP blocks not getting an explanation. But, are any of you really surprised by this banning? If you are, you're waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more liberal than I am. This is just my opinion but if I built my own house, I'd expect a certain code of conduct within, without feeling the need to post it on the walls. While this is 'the internet', it is also still Cheapy's house and I can respect that.
Click to expand...
Except this house isn't built by Cheapy, it's built by all the users you post deals and make him money. So yeah, at the end of the day, his site, his rules, his decisions, but this is a community based site which derives its values from community based posts/deals/contributions and the community using his referral links to shop online.

This isn't a house he bought and invited us in after the fact, he's used us to build it and he continues to use us for income.

Like I said, I don't really care one way or another. If some people found him disruptive/annoying then I could see that, but I just skip over any posts I don't find compelling and move on. I don't really think any other regular is at risk of a similar banning so it's really a non-issue.

 
I know there's a crowd here trying to peg it to a specific infraction, e.g. Section 8, Paragraph 23 of CAG Code. To any outsider, anyone other than a scholar of tebonics, Cheapy's post is quite reasonable.

CheapyD said:
Look at that dudes post history.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cyrus386 said:
Like most others, I'm not against a banning if the user earned it, and certainly icedragon15 had more than his share of reported posts. But if it is true that he was banned without an explanation from the mods - or even a warning! - then this is very troubling indeed. A member of this forum should at least have a chance to improve his behavior, especially one who is as active and has been here as long as tebow. In many ways I consider this my home on the internet, and I would be very upset if I was suddenly cut off from this community and many people I've come to think of as friends without any reason why, or a chance to make amends.
Click to expand...
Cyrus said everything I wanted to articulate here. If someone's posts are deemed problematic but a specific (as in, singularly terrible) infraction can't be isolated, that user deserves a warning first. As far as I've experienced, the site doesn't generate any indication that your posts are being reported. Ignoring this particular case, shouldn't JoeUser97 get a heads up that his posts are ruffling feathers before the plug is pulled? I would expect that a vast majority of site users would want that to be standard procedure.

 
Neuro5i5 said:
I understand the desire for transparency as well as the wanting clarification, especially on a permanent action such as this. I mean a permaban should always include a reason why, at least once. I can understand if users try to circumvent IP blocks not getting an explanation. But, are any of you really surprised by this banning? If you are, you're waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more liberal than I am. This is just my opinion but if I built my own house, I'd expect a certain code of conduct within, without feeling the need to post it on the walls. While this is 'the internet', it is also still Cheapy's house and I can respect that.
Click to expand...
The problem is if it's "your house" and you put up a set of rules for everyone to follow, you should be punishing the ones who break THOSE rules. Not unwritten ones.

cyrus386 said:
Like most others, I'm not against a banning if the user earned it, and certainly icedragon15 had more than his share of reported posts. But if it is true that he was banned without an explanation from the mods - or even a warning! - then this is very troubling indeed. A member of this forum should at least have a chance to improve his behavior, especially one who is as active and has been here as long as tebow. In many ways I consider this my home on the internet, and I would be very upset if I was suddenly cut off from this community and many people I've come to think of as friends without any reason why, or a chance to make amends.
Click to expand...
That's not how it works here. Every time I've been silenced or banned (90% of the time by you know who, and I won't get into that), there are NO warnings and NO explanation of why you have been banned. Silences and bans here are knee-jerk with (usually) no reasoning behind them and that's what's frustrating to everyone who frequents this site and makes Cheapy money. That's really not cool.

Also, once you are silenced or banned, the system is broken. Not only do you receive no warning or information towards why you were punished, you can't communicate with the moderators whatsoever. Back when I was banned once (completely unjustly) I made a new account (with an obviously temporary name) and ONLY PMed Shrike for information about my ban. I even made it clear to him "I only made this account to message you and ask what happened, not to circumvent my ban." What happened? No reply, I received an IP ban immediately. The only option you have is to email Cheapy, which is a bit silly. That's the moderators' job, not his.

There truly is no logic behind the moderating system here. I understand these people are doing a thankless, unpaid job (which makes no sense, because they keep order on a FOR profit site), but that doesn't give them a free card to do anything and everything they want to. There still needs to be a level of communication, transparency, and understanding between moderators and users here, and currently there is not. Is that really that much to ask? It really isn't.

But it seems like Cheapy and the mods are more or less ignoring this discussion, and I'd be surprised to see any reply at this point. It's just a "this is how we do it, too bad" situation, and it's really kind of a slap in the face to people who love and support this site. This is why I left for awhile in the first place.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Neuro5i5 said:
Meh.

Don`t do stupid shit, don`t get banned.

So serious up in here.
Click to expand...
It's easy to be apathetic to the matter when you're not on the receiving end of unfair and incorrect moderating. Tebow bugged the shit out of me too, but I've been on the receiving end of that and it's not cool.

 
CheapyD said:
Look at that dudes post history.
Click to expand...
Just a quick nitpick...once a user has been permanently banned, you actually don't have access to their posting history from their username through any of their posts(if you can find them) nor through the member search. Maybe mods can, but not regular users.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am curious about this, since in any thread I saw him post in, no one really expressed anger that he posted like, no one asked for him to delete his posts or for a mod to do something about it. I always thought it was a given that him posting like that as a member of the forums would continue.

It just seems any time he posted, and people said "huh?", everyone else just said "yeah, that's tebow, deal with it". Never really saw anyone actually mad, and if they were, they didn't say anything.

I haven't seen all his posts because the account link is hidden, am I missing something?

TL;DR If a bunch of people had a problem or were complaining about him, I never saw it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dohdough said:
Just a quick nitpick...once a user has been permanently banned, you actually don't have access to their posting history from their username through any of their posts(if you can find them) nor through the member search. Maybe mods can, but not regular users.
Click to expand...
I agree. I have found one way around it and that's if the banned member has a blog. That's to say that the blog was not also removed. Looks like icedragon15 had a blog and here are the most recent posts.

I think Jeremy Barnes is responsible for this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
phantomphoenix said:
I agree. I have found one way around it and that's if the banned member has a blog. That's to say that the blog was not also removed. Looks like icedragon15 had a blog and here are the most recent posts.

I think Jeremy Barnes is responsible for this.
Click to expand...
After reading that, I'm going to have to say the ban was well deserved.

There's only so much of a kid yelling nonsense in a room that you can take before you ask him to leave.

Compared to that guy, slidecage is practically a poet laureate.

Look, if he has mental issues, then I feel bad for him. (Being serious here) But that posting "style" is just really bad.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Confucius said:
After reading that, I'm going to have to say the ban was well deserved.

There's only so much of a kid yelling nonsense in a room that you can take before you ask him to leave.

Compared to that guy, slidecage is practically a poet laureate.

Look, if he has mental issues, then I feel bad for him. (Being serious here) But that posting "style" is just really bad.
Click to expand...
Bad grammar is not against forum rules.

I'm not disagreeing that it could be irritating as hell, but that's what the ignore feature is for. There was likely no legitimate basis behind the ban, and seeing as there has not been one moderator or Cheapy reply since they've been called out on this, that only proves it further.

 
that's not bad grammar.  bad grammar is when you use your instead of you're.

posting just streams of nonsense in response to everything is really irritating.  Sure you can just ignore but sometimes the onus shouldn't be on the community to ignore.  It should be on the person not to be a complete nuisance.

I make special dispensation for people with actual mental problems.   But if you're just an annoying person who rambles for no reason, that gets old real fast.

 
Confucius said:
that's not bad grammar. bad grammar is when you use your instead of you're.

posting just streams of nonsense in response to everything is really irritating. Sure you can just ignore but sometimes the onus shouldn't be on the community to ignore. It should be on the person not to be a complete nuisance.

I make special dispensation for people with actual mental problems. But if you're just an annoying person who rambles for no reason, that gets old real fast.
Click to expand...
I won't deny that Tebow was/is an easy target. I'm even guilty of picking and poking at him to get a "like" at his expense. His obsession with "spanking" and the rambling was enough to drive even the most seasoned user a little nuts, but a warning shouldn't be too much to ask for, especially if there isn't a specific infraction. As far as I could tell, he just wanted to be liked, even though his personality wore thin.

A ban warning is the decent thing to do unless a specific rule has been broken.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Confucius said:
that's not bad grammar. bad grammar is when you use your instead of you're.

posting just streams of nonsense in response to everything is really irritating. Sure you can just ignore but sometimes the onus shouldn't be on the community to ignore. It should be on the person not to be a complete nuisance.

I make special dispensation for people with actual mental problems. But if you're just an annoying person who rambles for no reason, that gets old real fast.
Click to expand...
It's subjective though. Many people didn't care and weren't annoyed, some people thought it was funny, and some people even made friends with him.

Like I said, I agree it's annoying, but it is NOT against forum rules, and banning for unwritten rules has NO place on CAG.

 
eulogywerd21 said:
I won't deny that Tebow was/is an easy target. I'm even guilty of picking and poking at him to get an easy "like" at his expense. His obsession with "spanking" and the rambling was enough to drive even the most seasoned user a little nuts, but a warning shouldn't be too much to ask for, especially if there isn't a specific infraction being violated. As far as I could tell, he just wanted to be liked, even though his personality wore thin.

A ban warning is the decent thing to do unless a specific rule has been broken.
Click to expand...
I can't disagree with that. I think a warning or two is the right way to handle it. But then again, I don't know what happened behind the scenes right? Who knows if he did get a couple warnings. There's three sides to every story, right?

 
Confucius said:
I can't disagree with that. I think a warning or two is the right way to handle it. But then again, I don't know what happened behind the scenes right? Who knows if he did get a couple warnings. There's three sides to every story, right?
Click to expand...
Possibly, I don't know for certain. From the sound of it, though, Tebow was just as confused about the ban as everyone else. I've gotten banned in the past (which was wrongful, seeing as I'm posting right now) and there was zero warning, though, so that seems to be a trend here. I've never heard of someone getting a warning at all.

That's probably the most troubling thing. It's one thing to get banned and not know the reason why. It's another to never even receive a warning for the perceived "wrong" behavior.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tebow seems confused about everything so it's possible he got a warning and didn't understand.

I've been warned before about what specifically was getting me in hot water. which I appreciated.

I've also been temp banned by some over zealous mod who just did it because he didn't understand what I was saying. It was pure BS and really frustrating that I couldnt respond and say "that's not what I said at all...etc" I know when I step over a line and in that case, I did not step over the line. But that's another story. Thankfully it was only temporary.

I think an ability to question a permaban and present your side of things would be useful but from what I understand, permanent bans are discussed and not just knee jerk reactions. They are serious business.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO, if a user is permi-banned, the Mod who swung the hammer and the reason should be listed on the banned user's account, which should still give access to said user's posts. This will inform all other users, as well as the banned, what behavior isn't allowed/won't be tolerated as well as expose any Mods that are abusing their power. Sure, Mods aren't getting paid, but no one is forcing them to mod, either.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Confucius said:
Tebow seems confused about everything so it's possible he got a warning and didn't understand.

I've been warned before about what specifically was getting me in hot water. which I appreciated.

I've also been temp banned by some over zealous mod who just did it because he didn't understand what I was saying. It was pure BS and really frustrating that I couldnt respond and say "that's not what I said at all...etc" I know when I step over a line and in that case, I did not step over the line. But that's another story. Thankfully it was only temporary.

I think an ability to question a permaban and present your side of things would be useful but from what I understand, permanent bans are discussed and not just knee jerk reactions. They are serious business.
Click to expand...
Possible too, I'd have to ask him (he is on my friends list... *shudder*).

I've been banned once and silenced three times. The first silence was for posting a rather tasteless erotic picture of animated equines. It was a joke, and it was completely censored, but a female mod came across it and didn't find it as funny as others might have. She "warned me" publicly in the thread that if I continued posting anything like that I'd be silenced or banned, yet silenced me at the same time. I thought the warning was odd considering I was silenced anyways, but it was dumb on my part and the silence was fair enough.

The second time I was silenced came about when a certain mod (not going to name any names, it's not a pleasant subject) made a habit of "nuking" a thread when he deemed things were too off-topic. His actions repeatedly frustrated everyone in the thread, because instead of removing the off-topic posts, he would lazily delete multiple pages, including helpful posts, reviews, ongoing on-topic conversations, etc. Myself and another user were bold enough to call him out for it and were vocal in our frustration. He didn't like that, deleted all of our posts as we posted them, left posts of his, literally doctored the discussion, and then silenced both of us (no warning). It was an utter abuse of power simply because he didn't like what certain people had to say. At that time I made a temporary account, just for the purpose of PMing another mod that was involved and asking what happened (I made this clear that I only made the account to message him, not to circumvent the silencing). I was immediately IP banned without warning, and it wasn't until over a week later that Cheapy finally got back to me and unbanned my account.

The other silencing was probably the most confusing, and was a wide silencing of a few regulars. It was the same disgruntled mod as in the situation above. There was no reason behind it, no warning, no explanation, and I believe I contacted Cheapy and he lifted the ban.

So basically, it probably depends on which moderator you get. The first time I was silenced I did at least get a reason behind the silence, as well as a time frame of how long it would last (one week). None of the other occasions came with any of that.

The entire system is unchecked, haphazard, and doesn't even follow its own rules. Granted you CAN appeal a ban by contacting Cheapy, but considering that Cheapy's view towards Tebow was summed up by saying "Look at the guy's posts." I doubt Tebow's coming back.

 
HAHAHA...wow, his posts are terrible...almost to the point of having an actual clinical issue. If he DOES have an issue, I think a ban might be a bit heavy-handed. It's not like we ban every troll on the site with possible clinical issues to begin with.

But yeah, if someone is perma-banned, there should be a note on their profile AND sig as well as link to the offending posts or a reason.
 
Confucius said:
I can't disagree with that. I think a warning or two is the right way to handle it. But then again, I don't know what happened behind the scenes right? Who knows if he did get a couple warnings. There's three sides to every story, right?
Click to expand...
Idiotekque said:
Possibly, I don't know for certain. From the sound of it, though, Tebow was just as confused about the ban as everyone else. I've gotten banned in the past (which was wrongful, seeing as I'm posting right now) and there was zero warning, though, so that seems to be a trend here. I've never heard of someone getting a warning at all.

That's probably the most troubling thing. It's one thing to get banned and not know the reason why. It's another to never even receive a warning for the perceived "wrong" behavior.
Click to expand...
I have talked to Tebow. He messaged me on Steam the night he was banned. From what I understand, he was not warned or given a reason, and the ban is permanent.

eulogywerd21 said:
IMO, if a user is permi-banned, the Mod who swung the hammer and the reason should be listed on the banned user's account, which should still give access to said user's posts. This will inform all other users, as well as the banned, what behavior isn't allowed/won't be tolerated as well as expose any Mods that are abusing their power. Sure, Mods aren't getting paid, but no one is forcing them to mod, either.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree with this. A little more transparency would only be good for this site.

 


Idiotekque said:
Also, once you are silenced or banned, the system is broken. Not only do you receive no warning or information towards why you were punished, you can't communicate with the moderators whatsoever. Back when I was banned once (completely unjustly) I made a new account (with an obviously temporary name) and ONLY PMed Shrike for information about my ban. I even made it clear to him "I only made this account to message you and ask what happened, not to circumvent my ban." What happened? No reply, I received an IP ban immediately. The only option you have is to email Cheapy, which is a bit silly. That's the moderators' job, not his.
The second time I was silenced came about when a certain mod (not going to name any names, it's not a pleasant subject) made a habit of "nuking" a thread when he deemed things were too off-topic. His actions repeatedly frustrated everyone in the thread, because instead of removing the off-topic posts, he would lazily delete multiple pages, including helpful posts, reviews, ongoing on-topic conversations, etc. Myself and another user were bold enough to call him out for it and were vocal in our frustration. He didn't like that, deleted all of our posts as we posted them, left posts of his, literally doctored the discussion, and then silenced both of us (no warning). It was an utter abuse of power simply because he didn't like what certain people had to say. At that time I made a temporary account, just for the purpose of PMing another mod that was involved and asking what happened (I made this clear that I only made the account to message him, not to circumvent the silencing). I was immediately IP banned without warning, and it wasn't until over a week later that Cheapy finally got back to me and unbanned my account.
Click to expand...
Looks like you did name names anyway. Whoops. ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
r333k0 said:
I am curious about this, since in any thread I saw him post in, no one really expressed anger that he posted like, no one asked for him to delete his posts or for a mod to do something about it. I always thought it was a given that him posting like that as a member of the forums would continue.
It just seems any time he posted, and people said "huh?", everyone else just said "yeah, that's tebow, deal with it". Never really saw anyone actually mad, and if they were, they didn't say anything.
I haven't seen all his posts because the account link is hidden, am I missing something?

TL;DR If a bunch of people had a problem or were complaining about him, I never saw it.
Click to expand...
I find it ironic that people are offended by someone who might be a little unhinged, when 75 85 100% of the members here have disposophobia.
[customspoiler="def. disposophobia"][customspoiler="click here for definition"]Compulsive hoarding (or pathological hoarding or disposophobia) is the excessive acquisition of possessions (and failure to use or discard them), even if the items are worthless, hazardous, or unsanitary. [/customspoiler][/customspoiler]

Idiotekque said:
Bad grammar is not against forum rules.

I'm not disagreeing that it could be irritating as hell, but that's what the ignore feature is for. There was likely no legitimate basis behind the ban, and seeing as there has not been one moderator or Cheapy reply since they've been called out on this, that only proves it further.
Click to expand...
Deja-Vu.jpg


Idiotekque said:
Possible too, I'd have to ask him (he is on my friends list... *shudder*).

I've been banned once and silenced three times. The first silence was for posting a rather tasteless erotic picture of animated equines. It was a joke, and it was completely censored, but a female mod came across it and didn't find it as funny as others might have. She "warned me" publicly in the thread that if I continued posting anything like that I'd be silenced or banned, yet silenced me at the same time. I thought the warning was odd considering I was silenced anyways, but it was dumb on my part and the silence was fair enough.

The second time I was silenced came about when a certain mod (not going to name any names, it's not a pleasant subject) made a habit of "nuking" a thread when he deemed things were too off-topic. His actions repeatedly frustrated everyone in the thread, because instead of removing the off-topic posts, he would lazily delete multiple pages, including helpful posts, reviews, ongoing on-topic conversations, etc. Myself and another user were bold enough to call him out for it and were vocal in our frustration. He didn't like that, deleted all of our posts as we posted them, left posts of his, literally doctored the discussion, and then silenced both of us (no warning). It was an utter abuse of power simply because he didn't like what certain people had to say. At that time I made a temporary account, just for the purpose of PMing another mod that was involved and asking what happened (I made this clear that I only made the account to message him, not to circumvent the silencing). I was immediately IP banned without warning, and it wasn't until over a week later that Cheapy finally got back to me and unbanned my account.

The other silencing was probably the most confusing, and was a wide silencing of a few regulars. It was the same disgruntled mod as in the situation above. There was no reason behind it, no warning, no explanation, and I believe I contacted Cheapy and he lifted the ban.

So basically, it probably depends on which moderator you get. The first time I was silenced I did at least get a reason behind the silence, as well as a time frame of how long it would last (one week). None of the other occasions came with any of that.

The entire system is unchecked, haphazard, and doesn't even follow its own rules. Granted you CAN appeal a ban by contacting Cheapy, but considering that Cheapy's view towards Tebow was summed up by saying "Look at the guy's posts." I doubt Tebow's coming back.
Click to expand...
that pretty much sums up 2013. I was never warned either when I was silenced. I should go back and find the codes I dropped in that thread and repost them since they were part of the great thread dismemberment of '13.

 
I believe that banning people for "no reason" is pathetic and it shows a lack of maturity, at least explain why you're banning that person when you're banning them. I know someone that got banned from here three years ago for "no reason" and he was never told why he got banned

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top