With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:19 am

Hunter » Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:07 pm wrote:RI is just not fun anymore, I hope that changes, I will keep checking to see, otherwise there are more relaxing places to hang out and spend my time.


You all take care. Fix the place.



You have decided to leave RI how many times in the last couple of days? 3 ....4?

Didn't you ask to have all your posts deleted?

What's up with that?

Do you know how many people that have been here like forever...... made it through thick and thin without threatening that once? That's not how things get worked out here.
trump administration’s zero-tolerance policy has overwhelmed Ursula children sleep in cages
lights never go off
The Navy plans to build a tent-jail for 47,000 immigrants in California.


TENDER AGE SHELTERS = INTERNMENT CAMPS

PURE EVIL
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 27291
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby Project Willow » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:28 am

There are plenty of options here. This thread can be moved to ask admin or the fire pit. You can rehash at great length the grudges you're nurturing and endlessly pick on one another, or you could let it all go, or something in between. I know which end of that scale I'd advise.

Ask yourselves, is yet another post about another poster added to this thread really something that contributes to the quality of the experience on this board?

It's all up to you.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:33 am

I'll stop the bickering so to let this thread stay in GD otherwise it will render the poll in Ask Admin mute if it is moved..
Last edited by seemslikeadream on Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
trump administration’s zero-tolerance policy has overwhelmed Ursula children sleep in cages
lights never go off
The Navy plans to build a tent-jail for 47,000 immigrants in California.


TENDER AGE SHELTERS = INTERNMENT CAMPS

PURE EVIL
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 27291
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby barracuda » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:34 am

Just lock it. Deterioration is setting in.
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12887
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby Ben D » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:35 am

justdrew » Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:36 pm wrote:........ Mods decision must stand. CW can go chat elsewhere. If that bothers you too much, please follow. DO NOT engage in endless bullshit drama. lock this thread is my advice.

Just recently when C2W was banned for a week, some RI members appealed to the mods to have it lifted and discretion came into play to lift it before the week was up. Was that fair? Sure, the mods have discretionary powers.

Now when CW was banned for a week, and then changed to a permanent ban, it seems reasonable for RI members to follow the same path and appeal to the mod's discretion to lift it.
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby Hunter » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:38 am

seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:19 am wrote:
Hunter » Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:07 pm wrote:RI is just not fun anymore, I hope that changes, I will keep checking to see, otherwise there are more relaxing places to hang out and spend my time.


You all take care. Fix the place.



You have decided to leave RI how many times in the last couple of days? 3 ....4?

Didn't you ask to have all your posts deleted?

What's up with that?

Do you know how many people that have been here like forever...... made it through thick and thin without threatening that once? That's not how things get worked out here.
No, much more than that, probably 10 or 15 times and will probably threaten 10 or 15 more.

Glad you care though.
Hunter
 
Posts: 1455
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:10 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby brainpanhandler » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:39 am

Ben D » Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:35 pm wrote:
justdrew » Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:36 pm wrote:........ Mods decision must stand. CW can go chat elsewhere. If that bothers you too much, please follow. DO NOT engage in endless bullshit drama. lock this thread is my advice.

Just recently when C2W was banned for a week, some RI members appealed to the mods to have it lifted and discretion came into play to lift it before the week was up. Was that fair? Sure, the mods have discretionary powers.

Now when CW was banned for a week, and then changed to a permanent ban, it seems reasonable for RI members to follow the same path and appeal to the mod's discretion to lift it.


Well sure, except.... oh fuck it. Lock.
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby barracuda » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:42 am

This thread is no longer even about Canadian_watcher, if it ever was. It is about something else, the tension between types of posting styles, differing philosophical outlooks, the effects of Stockholm Syndrome, and group dynamics. Lock. We all know how this story ends.

Image
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12887
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby 82_28 » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:50 am

No. Nothing adds to the "experience" of this board any longer. And it's a shame. I LOVE you all. I really do. I wish I could inject some love to make this place what it was, but we have stultifying rules banning expression. It seems some think that CW was being sarcastic and others serious. So here is a rift in agreement.

Must we always agree?

Sure.

But should we always agree that someone handled themselves in an unacceptable way as per RI standards?

Nope.

Look at CW as a force of nature, a battery, a plugging in of a cord. She was who she was and is. And still is. But no longer digitally exists among us. Who the fuck fucking cares what she said? Did she control an army or paramilitary outfit? I reckon, no.

Do the math.

I didn't realize Brekin had been axed. Again, stupidity. Not the mods, but we only live once and can only get angry a few times.

Image
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 10894
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby brainpanhandler » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:51 am

Project Willow » Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:28 pm wrote:
Ask yourselves, is yet another post about another poster added to this thread really something that contributes to the quality of the experience on this board?



Interpersonal conflict is inevitable.

Endless petty bickering is not or shouldn't be.

But I'm afraid I don't see any end in sight in the near future.

I'll have something to say about shutting down conversations prematurely, locking and firepitting if we end up having that conversation.

If we get trigger happy about firepitting and locking what sort of precedent does that set? How does that support free expression? What sort of avenues for deliberately getting threads locked does that sort of mentality provide?

I think it is remarkable there are only two pages of threads in the firepit.
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby OP ED » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:52 am

Hunter » Sun Jul 21, 2013 1:21 pm wrote:
Wombaticus Rex » Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:16 pm wrote:No. I still think I made the right decision. I would make it again today.

I'm just willing to listen to the community -- I mean, we have to, right? We're not doing this on behalf of ourselves.

Edit: I would also like to clarify that I am using "I" rather than "we" because I do not, and cannot, speak for the other members of the moderating team. I am not a consensus.

And that is the other side of the coin, you guys made the decision, a lot of people arent happy with it, so what do we do about that. We may just have to accept it OR we can make a simple poll about it.

One way or another a decision should be made soon, having this in limbo does not help anyone in moving forward.


Has Jeff even agreed to honor the results of a poll wrt this matter, because if he has not then this discussion is a big waste of time.



while OP ED voted against the ban, OP ED would not expect Jeff to honor the results of any discussions. OP ED would not do so if OP ED had made a decision and had its name on the place.
Giustizia mosse il mio alto fattore:
fecemi la divina podestate,
la somma sapienza e 'l primo amore.

:: ::
S.H.C.R.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby compared2what? » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:54 am

Ben D » Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:30 pm wrote:
barracuda » Mon Jul 22, 2013 11:21 am wrote:.
seemslikeadream wrote:would you clarify that comment? Would that be socks as in sock puppets?

Yeah.
Jerky wrote:Do you have proof of this assertion that sock-puppets are rigging the vote?

Do you have any that they aren't?

Seems to me that since you are making the claim, the onus is on you to put up...


I guess I thought that the reason he followed that up with this...

Or are you just behaving poorly because the vote isn't going the way you'd like?


False dicotomy. I am saying the poll is illegitimate, meaningless, and subverts the forum. I don't care if Canadian_watcher comes back or not, frankly, because I know she'll just act up again, and probably end up banned.


...was that he grasped that while being annoyingly flip might have its benefits, clarity isn't necessarily one of them if you don't explain that you're not literally saying that the voting is overrun by socks but rather that polling an issue without doing all the usual fairness-and-merit-type safeguard stuff doesn't mean much and isn't inherently fair. Or even likely to be.

So I was under the impression that he wasn't making the claim.

I could be wrong about that.

But I'm sure that he can't spell "dichotomy." And I don't agree with everything he's saying.

However, fwiw, I'd say he couldn't be more right that there's not actually anything intrinsically legitimate about people organizing a vote and then voting, when it's really that bare-bones..


The reason that the popular vote is regarded as a hallmark of legitimacy in an established democracy is that when that's what it's a part of, it comes fully equipped with legitimizing democratic features, such as notifying people of the vote; taking some steps to ensure that everyone has more or less the same equal access to both the polls and the necessary information as everyone else; establishing some kind of debate-ish or campaign-like means for people to challenge the merits of each option on the same terms as one another, etc..

But that's not what it is in it's natural and unadorned state. Someone has to make it legitimately democratic first.

...

Not that democracy and legitimacy don't both have their disadvantages. I'm just elaborating on what I took to be his point.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby barracuda » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:57 am

I misspelled dickotomy?
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12887
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby Project Willow » Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:58 am

Moving this to ask admin. We can have a lovely discussion about board moderation there.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: With regret, Canadian Watcher has been banned.

Postby brainpanhandler » Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:02 am

82_28 » Sun Jul 21, 2013 11:50 pm wrote: Who the fuck fucking cares what she said?


The moderators. Jeff. Me. presumably you. Everyone that voted in the sham poll.

Everyone that ever read anything she wrote here.
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
brainpanhandler
 
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:38 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Ask Admin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest