The Chamber of Horrors obviously saw fit to ban a longstanding member of this forum and yet no reasons given, apart from some mutterings about smerfing (hidden away in the depths of the flounders). Don’t you think some of us might like to know why?
I’m not going to waste your time arguing about it, just want to know why and in detail if you please. For example, if he was smerfing, which accounts was he using? Or would the disclosure of such details make you look a tad foolish? Taking a not particularly wild guess I’d say that strange ‘Canadian’ Leo may well be a fictional creation. I’d also like to suggest the same in regard to Vannyel but I fear he is only too real.
Oh, the f@#$%ing irony of it, mod lang is banned and Vannyel is still here. “But mod lang broke the rules and Vannyel didn’t…”. Bollocks.
[quote=“yeti”]The Chamber of Horrors obviously saw fit to ban a longstanding member of this forum and yet no reasons given, apart from some mutterings about smerfing (hidden away in the depths of the flounders). Don’t you think some of us might like to know why?
I’m not going to waste your time arguing about it, just want to know why and in detail if you please. For example, if he was smerfing, which accounts was he using? Or would the disclosure of such details make you look a tad foolish? Taking a not particularly wild guess I’d say that strange ‘Canadian’ Leo may well be a fictional creation. I’d also like to suggest the same in regard to Vannyel but I fear he is only too real.
Oh, the f@#$%ing irony of it, mod lang is banned and Vannyel is still here. “But mod lang broke the rules and Vannyel didn’t…”. Bollocks.[/quote]
Decisions to ban people from Forumosa are not taken lightly. They are discussed and reviewed by 11 people and done only after a majority agree that it is necessary.
You want to know why someone else was banned? That is a private matter, but not for the sake of the Chamber, but for the person in question. I am glad that is respected.
Don’t forget, that person is notified of the problem, the infraction is identified to him or her, it is debated for several DAYS, during which time that person is invited to communicate to the group.
Also remember, at least 7 long-standing Forumosans, whose judgement and interests in the entire community is recognized, have chosen to expel someone. As far as you are concerned, this should be enough reason.
[quote=“Goose Egg”]
You want to know why someone else was banned? That is a private matter, but not for the sake of the Chamber, but for the person in question. I am glad that is respected.[/quote]
Is there some reason the reasons are kept a state secret? I do not really give a rat’s ass but that kind of stance; the Star Chamber has decided, for reasons not made public, it is none of your business, smack yourself for daring to ask and so on—undermine the idea that Formosa is a open community and rather give the impression it is a closed club.
Having said that, I actually am an advocate of quickly and harshly dealing with idiots on chat boards. But simply say why; e.g. dipshit was banned for (pick one)
posting too much b.s.
being a general idiot (i.e. a troll)
cut and pasting huge pieces of articles
making cyber-threats
hacking the site
[quote=“brianlkennedy”]Is there some reason the reasons are kept a state secret? I do not really give a rat’s ass but that kind of stance; the Star Chamber has decided, for reasons not made public, it is none of your business, smack yourself for daring to ask and so on—undermine the idea that Formosa is a open community and rather give the impression it is a closed club.[/quote]I understand this Brian, but once you start posting the reasons there are going to be a thousand comments, opinions and debates on the decision, which the Chamber of Horrors (nice one) hasn’t the time or inclination to go into, and I respect that fact even if I don’t like some of the people on that panel.
It’s a logical follow-on thing: if “Oneballbear” disappears suddenly from the board, and you don’t see anything in the China Post saying that he’s been hit by the 236 bus while carelessly crossing Roosevelt Road after a few too many beers on a Saturday night, you can assume he was banned because he broke the rules. The Star Chamber doesn’t ban people for any other reason (tempting though it might be in some cases).
There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies as against despots. What is it? Distrust.
[quote=“hatch”][quote=“Durins Bane”]"Have faith in the moderators and
do good
".
Durins Bane
Feb. 1st, 2005[/quote]
Word. :bravo:[/quote]
Even Christ performed a few miracles that helped instill some faith in him.
If the Moderators (and Administration) want the members to put their faith in them, they ought to illustrate some competence. That this site is as good as it is demonstrates bucketloads of competence… but, nobody should be complacent. Faith is easily lost…
I have a moment waiting for my better half to get ready. I am not arguing with the decision not to state why but I do have two neutral comments:
Since about 80% of the folks here (and I would guess 99% of the ones who get banned) use fake cybernames, what is the “privacy concern”?
From a “criminal justice” standpoint, if a “cyber criminal” is going to be disciplined then the reasons ought to be publically stated so that others can learn from the errors of the blacklisted/banned. I see what folks are saying about stating reasons leading to further arguments but I would recommend something like this “sample verdict”:
Dipshitmanna (his cyberhandle) was banned for excessive use of the phrase “the stinking fucking locals” to refer to our esteemed local hosts. This decision is final.
sincerely,
The Most Mercy-full Mods
Okay the Mrs. is ready, gotta post and run,
take care,
Brian
[quote=“brianlkennedy”]I have a moment waiting for my better half to get ready. I am not arguing with the decision not to state why but I do have two neutral comments:
Since about 80% of the folks here (and I would guess 99% of the ones who get banned) use fake cybernames, what is the “privacy concern”?
From a “criminal justice” standpoint, if a “cyber criminal” is going to be disciplined then the reasons ought to be publically stated so that others can learn from the errors of the blacklisted/banned. I see what folks are saying about stating reasons leading to further arguments but I would recommend something like this “sample verdict”:
Dipshitmanna (his cyberhandle) was banned for excessive use of the phrase “the stinking f***ing locals” to refer to our esteemed local hosts. This decision is final.
sincerely,
The Most Mercy-full Mods
Okay the Mrs. is ready, gotta post and run,
take care,
Brian[/quote]
