TIME OUT *Blows Whistle*

[Neserk]

I feel like I'm in Kindergarten when I'm on these forums! What the HECK is going on around here? Why the hell did Voltron/Flex get banned? Why are people free to verbally abuse him w/o consequence? Why are we not acting like adults?

I agree with almost nothing he says but I strongly believe in his right to say what he does. I've been in his shoes of being the dissenter both here (on non-political issues, marijuana, *ahem*) and other forums (political issues) and have seen the "logic" used to support the dominate side. I can't really blame him for occasonally acting out. It isn't an easy position to be in.

[skunk]

Couldn't agree more. Bring back SlyFlexTron!

[Neserk]

Couldn't agree more. Bring back SlyFlexTron!


:D

[King Cobra]

Why the hell did Voltron/Flex get banned?
Basically his comment:

Do you even believe half the stuff you post? Because sometimes it seems that you post indefensible opinions simply to aggravate others. It doesn't earn you much respect here, and people are less likely to take you seriously on the odd occasion you do say something intelligent. I know you're not stupid, so why not contribute when you actually have some knowledge and experience to contribute, rather than spouting off on stuff you obviously know nothing about? Or are you so arrogant as to assume you know it all, even more so than the numerous professionals who have attempted to politely correct your misconceptions?

You are an ass who only seems to post to aggravate me. I've yet to see you post anything worth posting, you seem to only like cutting other people down. Fact is I have a defensible arguement. His argument proves that the decay rate changes it does not prove that the flow of time changes. A rather simple thing to see.


Voltron's comment - "You are an ass" - is a direct personal insult. That's an instantly bannable offense. I think that's why he got banned. If Voltron had continued with his posts in a calming manner, right or wrong, I doubt he would have gotten banned. Also, "Flex" is banned, because it's against forum policy to register under a second nickname, especially if your first one is banned. So Voltron, in a sense, was given a break, because "Flex" (which I haven't seen online yet) is his 3rd username.

[Neserk]

Basically his comment:



Voltron's comment - "You are an ass" - is a direct personal insult. That's an instantly bannable offense. I think that's why he got banned. .

NO offense to Pooky, but why wasn't he banned too? And why wasn't the person who attacked me 7 times banned?

[LethalWolfe]

I have to agree w/Neserk here. VolFlexTer biggest "problem" was that he he disagreed w/most of the people that frequent this forum and he stuck to his guns. He took shots because of it and he returned some shots.
I didn't agree w/a lot of what he said but his attitude wasn't different than many of the posters here. Just his opinion was different. If he honestly deserved to get banned then he isn't the only one.


Lethal

[Neserk]

:D Thanks, Lethal.

[Mav451]

Banning is incredibly subjective...and this situation is all too similar to Counter-strike servers. A member of the clan is allowed to mouth off racist comments, accuse players of "hacking", use profanity, among other things while the "new guy on the block" is banned without a second thought when he says "F".

This is why I apply the gum rule to this. If one person is banned for an offense, then ALL offenders should be banned.

Hell, Mac vs. PC arguments constantly have flames going on--but that is understandable. What would be shocking is to have one person banned for flaming, while the other is not. I'm not going to say that I haven't flamed someone before, but likewise, my flaming has never been unprovoked. If I get banned, so should the other guy (who provoked it in the first place). And vice-versa.

However, if we ban everyone who does...I believe we would have a very empty forum.

We are human, we makes mistakes. This is why I personally never believe in a zero-tolerance ban vs. a warning system at least. There is one thing to flame unprovoked, but in a political discussion, I doubt that any flames were unprovoked.

There is simply too much grey area in this matter, and with political discussions, tempers flare and basic civility goes out the window very quickly. Watch the Taiwanese/Chinese news, especially when they do politics. I have seen far too many news reports @ 7, where a politician starts arguing with another which ends up being a fistfight that possibly escalates into a 3-6 person brawl...

[Backtothemac]

NO offense to Pooky, but why wasn't he banned too? And why wasn't the person who attacked me 7 times banned?

Was it me that attacked you ?

[Neserk]

Was it me that attacked you ?

nope. At least not that remember! ;)

[Chip NoVaMac]

Voltron's comment - "You are an ass" - is a direct personal insult. That's an instantly bannable offense. I think that's why he got banned.

Seems like a fine line.

One from what little I was following that thread at the time (quantum physics is not my thing), a number of people were getting testy with each other.

If a debate gets heated and I am called a crack smoking liberal, is that sarcasm? Or is it a personal insult? It is in my nature to count it as sarcasm, and friendly like set them straight. More like I am a flaming liberal :D

Nerserk will probably agree. It takes two (or more) to fight. And when words are involved, it is better to ignore some that will lead to a downward path of no return.

I have learned that there are some posters that I will never agree with, or even be able to have a civil debate. So I ignore them (for the most part). Sometimes it is like a moth to a flame.

[Chip NoVaMac]

nope. At least not that remember! ;)

You and I did cross paths once on my choice of words. After you called me on, I thought better of it. I apologized, and edited the comment from the offending post. It was my attempt at humor, and it fell flatter than a soufflé at a artillery range (now see there, I insulted cooks and the military :D ).

The point being is that we are a community. If someone says something that upsets us personally, say something. Either in the thread, or in a private email.

I think the world would be better off with a few more Type B's personally.

[LethalWolfe]

NO offense to Pooky, but why wasn't he banned too? And why wasn't the person who attacked me 7 times banned?

Again, agreeing w/Neserk here (wow, 2x in one day ;)). Just seeing the exchange that KC posted Pooky's post was inflamitory<sp?>, condesending, and blatantly provacotive.

If someone says something that irriates you so much that you are unable to create a constructive post then just ignore the person or what they said.

Did Pooky commit the "cardinal sin" of a direct personal insult? No. But he did spend a entire paragraph lighting HunterFlexTron up. Personally, I find SlyHuntFlex's "you're an ass" comment severely less flamming than Pooky's tirade.

I think people, in general, need to take a deep breath and count to 10 before they post sometimes. The Golden Rule people the Golden Rule. There is no need for the snide comments, left-handed compliments, and cloaked insults that seem to have become "par for the course" for this section of MR.


Lethal

[King Cobra]

If a debate gets heated and I am called a crack smoking liberal, is that sarcasm? Or is it a personal insult? It is in my nature to count it as sarcasm, and friendly like set them straight. More like I am a flaming liberal
It's still a personal insult. Anything that goes under "You are [derogatory remark]" and isn't an obvious attempt to create comic relief is a flat out personal insult. In this forum, sarcasm is considered trolling. Either way, that person stands a chance to get banned. The moderators at MacRumors won't always be able to tell if such a comment is meant in a comic relief, so if the comment stands any chance of being regarded as a personal insult, it's best to not say the comment altogether.

[Neserk]

You and I did cross paths once on my choice of words. After you called me on, I thought better of it. I apologized, and edited the comment from the offending post. It was my attempt at humor, and it fell flatter than a soufflé at a artillery range (now see there, I insulted cooks and the military :D ).



Was that the finkicky woman comment? LOL...


The point being is that we are a community. If someone says something that upsets us personally, say something. Either in the thread, or in a private email.

I think the world would be better off with a few more Type B's personally.


Yep!

[Chip NoVaMac]

It's still a personal insult. Anything that goes under "You are [derogatory remark]" and isn't an obvious attempt to create comic relief is a flat out personal insult. In this forum, sarcasm is considered trolling. Either way, that person stands a chance to get banned. The moderators at MacRumors won't always be able to tell if such a comment is meant in a comic relief, so if the comment stands any chance of being regarded as a personal insult, it's best to not say the comment altogether.

So

It was a joke dumbass... :P

from a mainline thread is out of bounds then too?

[Neserk]

So



from a mainline thread is out of bounds then too?

Depends on who posted it ;)

[CandelLife]

You may not feel I am objective about this, but I can tell you that Sly/Flex/Voltron/whatever he's using now and I have disagreed about just about everything under the sun. He will argue his point till the end of time, but I have seen him see my side from time to time, albeit it next to never... :rolleyes: Point being: Everyone has a right to their opinion, and if we all agreed, no one would have a different view....that'd be a might boring I'd say. (Other than someone pointing out your question marks being appropriate or not) :cool:

It seems many here have broken the rules countless times....why does it seem the head is turned the otherway....because you usually agree with these people?

I think it's wrong...and I admin in two other forums that he frequents, as well as another that we both go to, and have for four years now....he makes things interesting. We don't agree 99.9% of the time, but that's ok. The good thing is, to get someone like that to understand your side after you thought he never would is an amazing thing. It is possible. Haven't any of you been able to do this?

Amazing.

[blackfox]

FWIW, I already discussed this via PM with Rower, as Slyflextron PM me the other night complaining of this very issue (getting a PM from him was a little strange...) and I forwarded it to Rower, along with my comments...

I find his banning as Voltron a little unfair, but he had already been banned once, and rules are rules...so I support the decision(s) of the moderator(s) because of this.

I think this little incident should be a reminder to us all, that we should not gang up on someone who has different (an at times exasperating) viewpoints, or who is presenting his opinion even if not knowledgeable about the subject.

I have been guilty of this, as some of the rest of us...whether it was deserved (a la he was trolling) is somewhat irrelevant...I am sure that Voltron felt justified in his response to pooky...we all get a little hot-headed at times.

As the new rules suggest, I would advocate in the future of trying to deal with disagreements such as above, in-thread between us, before notifying a moderator...therefore potentially defusing a situation or misunderstanding before bothering the mods, who must apply the letter of the law.

OK...?

[King Cobra]

Did Pooky commit the "cardinal sin" of a direct personal insult? No. But he did spend a entire paragraph lighting HunterFlexTron up. Personally, I find SlyHuntFlex's "you're an ass" comment severely less flamming than Pooky's tirade.

Well, let's disect what pooky said to see if that's so. I'll try to play it right down the middle - no political pun intended.


--> (pooky) Do you even believe half the stuff you post?

That does seem mostly like an insult, but I don't think it's an instantly bannable offense. The question that is posted can be interpreted to one as an honest question, or, to Voltron, it could have been a wake up call of some sort. Though that wasn't a respectful way to state the question, granted.

Still, it is not as direct or as obvious as Voltron's "You are an ass," because that is a "hands down" direct personal insult.

--> Because sometimes it seems that you post indefensible opinions simply to aggravate others

"sometimes it seems" implies that pooky is making an observation based on opinion. His opinion is that "you [Voltron] post indefensible opinions simply to aggravate others." That isn't a direct personal insult, because it is a statement that can be backed up (potentially in other situations) with facts without referring to derogatory insults. Though one might see that as a direct personal insult since pooky never backs that up in his post, so he says that for the sake of making a claim without supporting it.

--> It doesn't earn you much respect here

That's not a personal insult, since it can be backed up with facts and statistics. Also, pooky explained the "It" already (albeit, in one line).

--> and people are less likely to take you seriously

--> on the odd occasion you do say something intelligent.

That is very well a direct personal insult. Pooky's comment suggests that the other person, Voltron, is not intelligent most of the time; hence, pooky claims that the moments in which Voltron says something intelligent are worth to mention as an occasion, specificaly, an "odd occasion."

--> I know you're not stupid

Even though pooky says that, his previous statement is still a direct insult.

--> so why not contribute when you actually have some knowledge and experience to contribute, rather than spouting off on stuff you obviously know nothing about?

That's pretty much an insult, since pooky used the words "know nothing about" to determine via his opinion Voltron's accuracy on a topic. But some might take that as not an insult, since pooky doesn't mention that everything Voltron says represents how obvious it is that he knows nothing about.

--> Or are you so arrogant as to assume you know it all

This is a borderline call, since arrogance doesn't necessarily determine one's ability to want to assume that he/she knows everything about a topic.

--> even more so than the numerous professionals who have attempted to politely correct your misconceptions?

Not an insult.


--
In conclusion, pooky's flamebit wasn't as clearly a personal insult to Voltron as Voltron's "You are an ass" to pooky was, but readers might determine that both are personal insults.

[King Cobra]

So

It was a joke dumbass... :P

from a mainline thread is out of bounds then too?
Doesn't seem like it.

[Neserk]

I read Pooky's comments more or less the way you did, King. I don't know him so I can't say what his motivations were. I do know if someone posted something like that to me, I'd be pissed off too. I'd also believe that at least I was being direct and not beating around the bush in my insults ;)

[Chip NoVaMac]

The thing is that you can't look at just one post. What is done is done, but my fleeting look at the "physics war" postings; there were lots being said up till the last two posts in question.

[Neserk]

The thing is that you can't look at just one post. What is done is done, but my fleeting look at the "physics war" postings; there were lots being said up till the last two posts in question.

Voltron was attacked repeatedly, as I recall.

It was mostly over my head, although I did try to inject some humor into it. Some people just take themselves way too seriously! :D

[Chip NoVaMac]

I am also guilty here.

Maybe it is time for a rule about talking about a member that has been banned (either permanently or temporarily). It really is not fair to that member since they can not defend themselves. And privacy should be respected. All the moderators should say is that an individual has been banned if the question comes up.

[Neserk]

I'd agree with you. Except he is actually being defended ;)

[Griffon]

That idea works in most cases I would think. However, what is to keep the moderators from having two sets of rules as they actually enforce them? Ignoring the transgresses of those they are friends with, or agree with, while requiring higher standards from those they don't? Refusing to discuss such bannings might not be such a good idea.

[Neserk]

That idea works in most cases I would think. However, what is to keep the moderators from having two sets of rules as they actually enforce them? Ignoring the transgresses of those they are friends with, or agree with, while requiring higher standards from those they don't? Refusing to discuss such bannings might not be such a good idea.

I agree.

[LethalWolfe]

That idea works in most cases I would think. However, what is to keep the moderators from having two sets of rules as they actually enforce them? Ignoring the transgresses of those they are friends with, or agree with, while requiring higher standards from those they don't? Refusing to discuss such bannings might not be such a good idea.

I was going to bring something like this up but you beat me to it.

I think HunterVolEx gets/got the "instigator" label so often because he has a dissenting opinion on this board and isn't afraid to voice it.


Lethal

[blackfox]

See sly...(I know you're reading)...we all love you...even if we disagree with you...can I get a group hug?

I believe this has been a good lesson for the lot of us...

[Neserk]

*Group Hug*

Wow, 2 in 2 days :eek:

[Ugg]

I was going to bring something like this up but you beat me to it.

I think HunterVolEx gets/got the "instigator" label so often because he has a dissenting opinion on this board and isn't afraid to voice it.


Lethal

No, it's not about dissent. Dissent is welcome and active, BTTM is a fine example of that and you will find plenty of dissent here amongst those of us who often agree. Neserk and Kriziotz are examples of those who have very clear ideas on certain subjects which don't often mesh with the other lefties. What's at issue is the ability to voice one's dissent in a reasonable manner and back it up with cold hard facts, or, state that it is backed up by an opinion piece.

I think most of us here when we see something that isn't quite right have the guts enough to say, "I found this but......" He didn't. He wanted to back his thoughts up with biased opinion and wouldn't consider other viewpoints. This is a discussion forum not a forum for propaganda.

The only truly revelatory item that he posted was his recent bit on Joe Wilson and the Niger uranium. The majority of the rest of it was bunk, from time, to sunspots being the cause for global warming, to sterilizing the poor. He was here to inflame, not educate or convince others of the validity of his viewpoint.

[pooky]

I read Pooky's comments more or less the way you did, King. I don't know him so I can't say what his motivations were. I do know if someone posted something like that to me, I'd be pissed off too. I'd also believe that at least I was being direct and not beating around the bush in my insults ;)

Pooky was extremely irritated, because numerous attempts (mostly by other posters, but a little bit by me) to politely explain things seemed to fail miserably, and this was not the first time with him. FWIW, the original post wasn't really intended to get him to mouth off and get himself banned, but was intended more as an honest question. The problem was it was (admittedly) worded fairly sarcastically, as I have a tendency to be sarcastic when I'm irritated. Though it certainly doesn't make up for my rudeness, I did apologize afterwards. Hopefully that earns me some credit, because I've seen a lot of heated opinions fly with nary an apology to follow.

As to why I was so irritated? Well, if a doctor were told modern medicine is complete rubbish, or an athlete told his sport was a complete waste of time, he might get testy. I'm not a physicist, but I am a scientist, so I get a bit defensive. Time-out taken, counted to 10, sorry again.

Of course, if I post something out of line, there's always the report button. If I break the rules and the mods choose to call me on it, I respect that.

[Neserk]

I actually got flamed quite a bit on the Marijuana thread. I was told I had no clue what I was talking about even though not one person could provide a study that showed that Marijuana was perfectly safe. They couldn't uphold the standards that you claim are necessary. There is a pack-dog mentality that goes on here sometimes. I'm afraid Voltron is a victim of it.

[Backtothemac]

No, it's not about dissent. Dissent is welcome and active, BTTM is a fine example of that and you will find plenty of dissent here amongst those of us who often agree. Neserk and Kriziotz are examples of those who have very clear ideas on certain subjects which don't often mesh with the other lefties. What's at issue is the ability to voice one's dissent in a reasonable manner and back it up with cold hard facts, or, state that it is backed up by an opinion piece.

I think most of us here when we see something that isn't quite right have the guts enough to say, "I found this but......" He didn't. He wanted to back his thoughts up with biased opinion and wouldn't consider other viewpoints. This is a discussion forum not a forum for propaganda.

The only truly revelatory item that he posted was his recent bit on Joe Wilson and the Niger uranium. The majority of the rest of it was bunk, from time, to sunspots being the cause for global warming, to sterilizing the poor. He was here to inflame, not educate or convince others of the validity of his viewpoint.


First let me say thank you for the compliment. Second, let me say that I have argued with some of you to the point that I took time off so to speak. Well, did take time off, and thought about never coming back. I have gotten so mad, that I have actually said, man, I would stomp his ass if I could get my hands on him right now.

BUT, I have also made many friends, and even the little spat recently with mactastic that I have had, if someone went after the guy, well, I would whip their ass with words ;)

I love dissent. Dissent is what make a democracy work. I don't like the "Bush is stupid" or "Cheney is the devil" dissent. I like the "Bush let me down because he used faluty intel to justify the war" dissent. I like the man, I learned something on macrumors today dissent. This forum has had its ups and downs, but lately, there seems to be a more relavant consumption of FACTS instead of name calling 2nd grade crap.

So, with that. I look forward to the healthy debates that will come......

[zimv20]

I'm afraid Voltron is a victim of it.
he was no victim. i agree 100% w/ what Ugg said.

[Sayhey]

Sorry to be the dissenting opinion, but I don't miss him in the least. At least not for the two minutes it takes for him to try to circumvent the forum rules with a new screen name (is Griffon banned because he has the same IP address?)

I love debates when people are speaking from deeply held beliefs, but there has to be some respect for how to argue and the boundaries of debate. I'm sorry, but I don't have time or the inclination to argue with folks who think genocide or forced sterilization are acceptable propositions. Now if others here want to argue with someone who advocates such nonsense, it is fine by me as I can turn on my ignore feature, but don't tell me I should feel sorry for the poor, misguided soul.

Either Sly was a troll of the worst sort (remember the number of posts on his first day - almost all looking for a flame war) or he didn't have the elementary level of respect of others necessary to have any real debate. He was given every chance to change (and I don't mean his political positions) and he refused. Sorry, Neserk and blackfox, I like you both, but this is one group hug I'll stay out of.

[Rower_CPU]

If you see something specific that you feel is a double-standard, point it out and we'll investigate - if you get in people's face and are a repeated problem you're going to get more attention if you decide to come back than someone who hasn't made work for us mods.

You will have absolutely no leniency if you've already proven yourself a nuisance and decide to repeatedly re-register.

This isn't about not going with the flow or having a dissenting opinion, this is about not being able to discuss things in a manner consistent with the site rules. If this was a Conservative "witch hunt", as some people seem to want to call it, there are plenty of right-of-center posters (B2TM, macfan, LethalWolfe, etc.) who would've been singled out and banned.

Neserk-
That situation was handled the best way we could under the circumstances and you were told what you could do if you wanted to follow up. Continuing to bring it up in this fashion comes off as a grudge and doesn't constructively help the situation.

[Backtothemac]

Guys, I agree with Rower, if it was a Witch hunt, I would have been the 1st to go. I have been around since the very first Mac's and politics thread. Find that puppy, man it was awesome!

Do a search and then read for a long time. Some of the best debate that I have ever seen. Very intelligent.

So, if people break the rules, they get delt with. Yea, I have probably broken a few, but the fact that I am still here shows that you really have to be a pain to get in trouble. And, they have given him a time out, which is toooooo cool of them to do.

[blackfox]

I believe everyone has had their say, and I would like to nominate this thread closed and locked.

Let's move on. We had a day. There is still the wild world of politics to deal with...

[LethalWolfe]

No, it's not about dissent. Dissent is welcome and active, BTTM is a fine example of that and you will find plenty of dissent here amongst those of us who often agree. Neserk and Kriziotz are examples of those who have very clear ideas on certain subjects which don't often mesh with the other lefties. What's at issue is the ability to voice one's dissent in a reasonable manner and back it up with cold hard facts, or, state that it is backed up by an opinion piece.

There is plenty here that is back-uped by nothing more than opinion, preference or assumption. I'm not saying that Voltron was a saint that was easy to get along what I'm saying is that if he landed on the other side of the political isle I'd bet $20 he wouldn't have gotten kicked in the first place (although he does need to give up the ghost and stop making new names).

I think most of us here when we see something that isn't quite right have the guts enough to say, "I found this but......" He didn't. He wanted to back his thoughts up with biased opinion and wouldn't consider other viewpoints. This is a discussion forum not a forum for propaganda.

So ignore it. There are people here who I've ignored more than once because they argrued their preference no matter what evidence was brought before them. No big deal, just don't respond to their posts.

The only truly revelatory item that he posted was his recent bit on Joe Wilson and the Niger uranium. The majority of the rest of it was bunk, from time, to sunspots being the cause for global warming, to sterilizing the poor. He was here to inflame, not educate or convince others of the validity of his viewpoint.

Yes, it is nice when there are civil, educational discussions going on but those are the exception, not the norm IMO.


Lethal

[zimv20]

iow, "time in"

[LethalWolfe]

iow, "time in"


Not it! ;)


Lethal

[Rower_CPU]

I believe everyone has had their say, and I would like to nominate this thread closed and locked.

Let's move on. We had a day. There is still the wild world of politics to deal with...

Agreed - let's get back to politics.

Further comments should be directed to the guidelines discussion thread or privately for moderation matters.

PS. For those who still believe that posters with liberal inclinations are safe from the ax, I suggest you look up PalmHarborTchr, as a recent example.