TomA1
Jul 17, 2003, 04:19 AM
I (used to) post as TomA, and I just wanted to come back and let you guys know that I was banned from MacRumors. Why? Well the problem started here: " http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32389&perpage=25&pagenumber=7 " Let's take a look at the rules to figure out which one I violated:
1) Keep posts on topic ==== Was I off topic? I was discussing Apple's problems with Ti book paint in a thread called "Greg Joswiak's Feature Presentation". Is that off topic? Maybe. But 95% of the discussion in the thread dealt with WHY Apple SHOULD have included a new PowerBook in Jos' presentation. In addition no one ever SAID that I or anyone else in the thread was off topic, in fact the moderator that banned me was involved in the same discussion.
2) The profanity filter is there for a reason. ==== Did I use profanity? No.
3) PLEASE try to post threads in the PROPER area. ==== N/A--I didn't start the thread.
4) Do not post multiple messages with the same content. One post in the proper area is sufficient.====Nope didn't do this.
5) No Warez/Serials talk. ==== Absolutely not.
6) In the end, use common sense. When you are about to post 30 messages in a row just to increase your post count. ==== NO, I was not posting to increase my count. No one EVER accused me of this.
I didn't violate ANY of them! So why WAS I banned?
Because I dared to challenge the comments of a moderator that goes by the handle "Rower_CPU".
We were discussing the Powerbook G4 paint problems. He stated that because he knew of four Ti books that did not have a paint problem, that there could not be a widespread problem. Here is his statement: "I've never seen a "severe paint problem" on a TiBook. My 1.5 year old rev A has a couple of nicks, but that's it. The rev B and C models that co-workers have are just fine, as is my rev D 1GHz. Paint issues are nothing more than isolated cases and now FUD." I count four 'books mentioned. And he says he has "never seen a "severe paint problem" on a Ti book."
My response was: "You obviously don't know much about the issue at all. Perhaps you should educate yourself on the matter before making false statements" I also posted a list of sites that document the problem. You can see my full response here: " http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32389&perpage=25&pagenumber=8 " Harsh? Probably... but that's not against the rules. Why harsh? Because I suspected he was lying when he said, "I've never seen a "severe paint problem" on a TiBook." He confirmed my suspicion later--we'll come back to that.
Rower_CPU started off his reply with, "If you read back a couple of posts before frothing at the mouth, you'd see that I acknowledge that a few, very vocal people had paint issues." Harsh, but turnabout is fair play. Next he said "I also said that I had a couple of nicks on my own PB, thus showing that I know the inherent dangers of using paint." Well OBVIOUSLY we were talking about more than a "couple of nicks" look at the list in my post! Next he said, "If every single PowerBook had paint issues there would have been a huge recall and it would have been addressed." Sorry, but the fact that Apple has not addressed the issue is not proof that the issue does not exist. This is very poor logic. And "The 4 machines that I have regular contact with represent every rev Apple made and if the issues were as prevalent as you seem to believe they would have showed up." Like his sample of four (ONLY ONE PER REV. nonetheless) is enough to judge the issue. But the real kicker in this post was the emergence of this power trip: "Nice try with the uneducated line, though. That's a great foot to start off on here." A subtle threat? You'd better believe it.
I ignored the threat, and I responded with, "Buddy, you have a sample of ONE from each rev! At least I have a sample of two. (The first one they replaced and the new one.) Again, you REALLY need to check out the links. It is a WIDESPREAD problem. The fact that Apple hasn't recalled them notwithstanding."
His response, "Like I said, I've seen all that." Remember earlier when I said that I thought he LIED about "never seeing a 'severe paint problem'"? You go to one of my links and be the judge. ( http://www.djedwhite.com/photo/photo.php?dir=Defective_Powerbook ) Are those "severe paint problems"? I think most people would say that they are, and he admits to seeing "all that". He ended with something about jumping "down the throat of people who haven't had the same problems as you."
I was fed up with this obvious lie and lack of knowledge about the issue, and replied with something like, "I only jump down the throat of people who don't know what they are talking about." I can't post my exact quote because Rower_CPU deleted it. I said, "Now we're deleting posts that we don't like? Lovely." He deleted that too. (At this point I had a strong suspicion that I would get banned before the conversation was over.)
A few minutes later, an Apple tech came in and said that "This *is* an isolated issue". BUT he also said, "there was at one point an actual issue with the lighter colored paint" [emphasis added]. Since this was the EXACT issue I was addressing, I posted, " Straight from the Apple tech's mouth! This is the EXACT ISSUE I am talking about. Please tell the moderator. He doesn't seem to believe me."
Rower_CPU apparently didn't like the possibility of being wrong, because he said "I already said I knew about the issue, and here we have an Apple saying exactly what I did." Did the Apple tech say the exact same thing? I certainly don't think so. REMEMBER, Rower_CPU said "I've never seen a "severe paint problem" on a TiBook". He said that the issue was mainly a "couple of nicks". Yet the APPLE TECH said, "there was at one point an actual issue with the lighter colored paint" [emphasis added]
Rower_CPU was very annoyed with the challenge to his authority, too. He couldn't STAND to be wrong and ended with the typical bully's response, "Drop it or you're out of here."
Sorry, Rower_CPU, but you are WRONG and I am NOT the type to just drop it. So I wanted to get clarification from the Apple tech. I posted something like, "Could you please define what you mean by "an actual issue with the lighter colored paint". At this point Rower_CPU's "Demi-God" status went completely to his head and he banned me and deleted the question. Why did that question threaten him so much? Was he afraid to find out that there MAY HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE AFTER ALL? Why not let the tech answer the question? BECAUSE ROWER_CPU, in my opinion, was afraid of the answer, and deleted the evidence.
Now I fully expect that this post will be deleted as soon as Rower_CPU sees it. I fully expect that this new handle I created will also be banned. And I fully expect that, if he has any sense, he will also ban my IP. Not that it matters--I'm moving to another state in a week. But don't worry, if Rower_CPU is representative of the way things operate around here, I have no interest in coming back anyway. Apparently, he cannot tolerate a fair discussion. Apparently, he thinks that banning and deleting means that he wins the argument.
Why am I posting this? I am posting this to make other users (and perhaps the management) aware of the issues with free speech on this board. Many of you won't even agree with my analysis of the TiPaint situation, and you have that right. But that's NOT the point. The point is not who was right and who was wrong. The point is that I WAS BANNED BECAUSE A MODERATOR DID NOT LIKE WHAT I SAID AND HOW I SAID IT. The point is that this moderator DELETES POSTS HE DOESN'T LIKE! The point is that if a moderator doesn't like where a conversation is headed, he might just selectively delete posts--and you would never know.
Hell, the MacWhispers guy that you all constantly attack of doesn't even delete DIRECT PERSONAL ATTACKS, unless people use profanity. But Rower_CPU cannot tolerate even a VERY small amount of criticism for speaking about something that he (obviously) knew little about. And let me make one thing perfectly clear: Do I think he had the right to do what he did? ABSOLUTELY! If the owners of this board want to run things that way, then by all means they have that right. It IS their board after all. They pay for it; they sweat over it; and if they want strict controls on dissent, they have that right. But does that make it right? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
If and when this is deleted here, I will repost it word-for-word on MacWhispers so that you can refer others to it. I have a feeling that THEY won't delete it.
Well, unless powers HIGHER than Mr. "Demi-God" step in and do the right thing, you won't be seeing my posts around here any more. Some of you will be relieved. Some of you want NO DISSENT when it comes to Apple. But is that what free speech is really about? Apparently around here the answer is YES.
In conclusion, I would like you to think about one thing: Apple doesn't like the fact that boards like MacRumors even exist. Apple would LOVE to ban this entire site and others like it. Apple only wants ITS version of a story to be heard. Would that be a good thing? Your call.
--
Well it's late and I am going to bed. Goodnight! :)
1) Keep posts on topic ==== Was I off topic? I was discussing Apple's problems with Ti book paint in a thread called "Greg Joswiak's Feature Presentation". Is that off topic? Maybe. But 95% of the discussion in the thread dealt with WHY Apple SHOULD have included a new PowerBook in Jos' presentation. In addition no one ever SAID that I or anyone else in the thread was off topic, in fact the moderator that banned me was involved in the same discussion.
2) The profanity filter is there for a reason. ==== Did I use profanity? No.
3) PLEASE try to post threads in the PROPER area. ==== N/A--I didn't start the thread.
4) Do not post multiple messages with the same content. One post in the proper area is sufficient.====Nope didn't do this.
5) No Warez/Serials talk. ==== Absolutely not.
6) In the end, use common sense. When you are about to post 30 messages in a row just to increase your post count. ==== NO, I was not posting to increase my count. No one EVER accused me of this.
I didn't violate ANY of them! So why WAS I banned?
Because I dared to challenge the comments of a moderator that goes by the handle "Rower_CPU".
We were discussing the Powerbook G4 paint problems. He stated that because he knew of four Ti books that did not have a paint problem, that there could not be a widespread problem. Here is his statement: "I've never seen a "severe paint problem" on a TiBook. My 1.5 year old rev A has a couple of nicks, but that's it. The rev B and C models that co-workers have are just fine, as is my rev D 1GHz. Paint issues are nothing more than isolated cases and now FUD." I count four 'books mentioned. And he says he has "never seen a "severe paint problem" on a Ti book."
My response was: "You obviously don't know much about the issue at all. Perhaps you should educate yourself on the matter before making false statements" I also posted a list of sites that document the problem. You can see my full response here: " http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32389&perpage=25&pagenumber=8 " Harsh? Probably... but that's not against the rules. Why harsh? Because I suspected he was lying when he said, "I've never seen a "severe paint problem" on a TiBook." He confirmed my suspicion later--we'll come back to that.
Rower_CPU started off his reply with, "If you read back a couple of posts before frothing at the mouth, you'd see that I acknowledge that a few, very vocal people had paint issues." Harsh, but turnabout is fair play. Next he said "I also said that I had a couple of nicks on my own PB, thus showing that I know the inherent dangers of using paint." Well OBVIOUSLY we were talking about more than a "couple of nicks" look at the list in my post! Next he said, "If every single PowerBook had paint issues there would have been a huge recall and it would have been addressed." Sorry, but the fact that Apple has not addressed the issue is not proof that the issue does not exist. This is very poor logic. And "The 4 machines that I have regular contact with represent every rev Apple made and if the issues were as prevalent as you seem to believe they would have showed up." Like his sample of four (ONLY ONE PER REV. nonetheless) is enough to judge the issue. But the real kicker in this post was the emergence of this power trip: "Nice try with the uneducated line, though. That's a great foot to start off on here." A subtle threat? You'd better believe it.
I ignored the threat, and I responded with, "Buddy, you have a sample of ONE from each rev! At least I have a sample of two. (The first one they replaced and the new one.) Again, you REALLY need to check out the links. It is a WIDESPREAD problem. The fact that Apple hasn't recalled them notwithstanding."
His response, "Like I said, I've seen all that." Remember earlier when I said that I thought he LIED about "never seeing a 'severe paint problem'"? You go to one of my links and be the judge. ( http://www.djedwhite.com/photo/photo.php?dir=Defective_Powerbook ) Are those "severe paint problems"? I think most people would say that they are, and he admits to seeing "all that". He ended with something about jumping "down the throat of people who haven't had the same problems as you."
I was fed up with this obvious lie and lack of knowledge about the issue, and replied with something like, "I only jump down the throat of people who don't know what they are talking about." I can't post my exact quote because Rower_CPU deleted it. I said, "Now we're deleting posts that we don't like? Lovely." He deleted that too. (At this point I had a strong suspicion that I would get banned before the conversation was over.)
A few minutes later, an Apple tech came in and said that "This *is* an isolated issue". BUT he also said, "there was at one point an actual issue with the lighter colored paint" [emphasis added]. Since this was the EXACT issue I was addressing, I posted, " Straight from the Apple tech's mouth! This is the EXACT ISSUE I am talking about. Please tell the moderator. He doesn't seem to believe me."
Rower_CPU apparently didn't like the possibility of being wrong, because he said "I already said I knew about the issue, and here we have an Apple saying exactly what I did." Did the Apple tech say the exact same thing? I certainly don't think so. REMEMBER, Rower_CPU said "I've never seen a "severe paint problem" on a TiBook". He said that the issue was mainly a "couple of nicks". Yet the APPLE TECH said, "there was at one point an actual issue with the lighter colored paint" [emphasis added]
Rower_CPU was very annoyed with the challenge to his authority, too. He couldn't STAND to be wrong and ended with the typical bully's response, "Drop it or you're out of here."
Sorry, Rower_CPU, but you are WRONG and I am NOT the type to just drop it. So I wanted to get clarification from the Apple tech. I posted something like, "Could you please define what you mean by "an actual issue with the lighter colored paint". At this point Rower_CPU's "Demi-God" status went completely to his head and he banned me and deleted the question. Why did that question threaten him so much? Was he afraid to find out that there MAY HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE AFTER ALL? Why not let the tech answer the question? BECAUSE ROWER_CPU, in my opinion, was afraid of the answer, and deleted the evidence.
Now I fully expect that this post will be deleted as soon as Rower_CPU sees it. I fully expect that this new handle I created will also be banned. And I fully expect that, if he has any sense, he will also ban my IP. Not that it matters--I'm moving to another state in a week. But don't worry, if Rower_CPU is representative of the way things operate around here, I have no interest in coming back anyway. Apparently, he cannot tolerate a fair discussion. Apparently, he thinks that banning and deleting means that he wins the argument.
Why am I posting this? I am posting this to make other users (and perhaps the management) aware of the issues with free speech on this board. Many of you won't even agree with my analysis of the TiPaint situation, and you have that right. But that's NOT the point. The point is not who was right and who was wrong. The point is that I WAS BANNED BECAUSE A MODERATOR DID NOT LIKE WHAT I SAID AND HOW I SAID IT. The point is that this moderator DELETES POSTS HE DOESN'T LIKE! The point is that if a moderator doesn't like where a conversation is headed, he might just selectively delete posts--and you would never know.
Hell, the MacWhispers guy that you all constantly attack of doesn't even delete DIRECT PERSONAL ATTACKS, unless people use profanity. But Rower_CPU cannot tolerate even a VERY small amount of criticism for speaking about something that he (obviously) knew little about. And let me make one thing perfectly clear: Do I think he had the right to do what he did? ABSOLUTELY! If the owners of this board want to run things that way, then by all means they have that right. It IS their board after all. They pay for it; they sweat over it; and if they want strict controls on dissent, they have that right. But does that make it right? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
If and when this is deleted here, I will repost it word-for-word on MacWhispers so that you can refer others to it. I have a feeling that THEY won't delete it.
Well, unless powers HIGHER than Mr. "Demi-God" step in and do the right thing, you won't be seeing my posts around here any more. Some of you will be relieved. Some of you want NO DISSENT when it comes to Apple. But is that what free speech is really about? Apparently around here the answer is YES.
In conclusion, I would like you to think about one thing: Apple doesn't like the fact that boards like MacRumors even exist. Apple would LOVE to ban this entire site and others like it. Apple only wants ITS version of a story to be heard. Would that be a good thing? Your call.
--
Well it's late and I am going to bed. Goodnight! :)
