Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes, he was awesome!

9 (6%)

Yes, for reasons I will post in the thread.

4 (2.7%)

No, and I hate fun and I like to step on cats.

30 (20%)

No, for a NON HATEFUL, LEGITIMATE REASON i will post in the thread.

54 (36%)

I take a neutral stance on this.

38 (25.3%)

Who is GWG?

15 (10%)

Total Members Voted: 150

[Again_Dejavu]

He already got a week long earlier, and a 3-day, and apparently 7 warnings.

That's almost impressive

[Flying Dice]

This thread pretty much sums up why. He wasn't always bad, but he did tend to turn into a condescending know-it-all prick when he thought he was right, and he's had far more chances than most people get. :|

[Darvi]

Even more impressive is how long he was here without a single ban and how they suddenly piled up over the course of a few months. I wonder what changed.

But I've got better things to do than talk about a guy who isn't even able to reply ,like studying for my exam tomorrow, so I'll stop.

[Graknorke]

If he got banned I would have to assume that there were good reasons. I don't actually spend time on FGRP, but I haven't seen Toady hand down many bans to non-bots so it would have to be something pretty serious.

[Harry Baldman]

Even more impressive is how long he was here without a single ban and how they suddenly piled up over the course of a few months. I wonder what changed.

He must have gotten in with some of those bad neighbor kids. You know they're no good! Or he may have discovered rock music.

Anyhow, yeah. I don't quite see how GWG would become any less bitter if he was unbanned, and he was apparently becoming increasingly disruptive. Geometrically increasingly disruptive. He'd reach a singularity eventually. And then we would all surely die.

[LordSlowpoke]

He must have gotten in with some of those bad neighbor kids. You know they're no good!

he got into one little fight and his mom got scared

[10ebbor10]

Mob rule is bad, so as a matter of principle I can do nothing else than oppose this. Decisions like these should be based on merit, rather than popularity. If you had started of with a collection of all the good things he has done, the reason he's important to the community, perhaps a heartfelt apology and a puppy-eyes picture, then I could have supported this, now I most certainly won't.

This thread pretty much sums up why. He wasn't always bad, but he did tend to turn into a condescending know-it-all prick when he thought he was right, and he's had far more chances than most people get. :|

The trick of being a condescending know-it-all prick is to know that you know-it-all, and grant the pathetic plebs their ignorance, that little light in their existence.

Even more impressive is how long he was here without a single ban and how they suddenly piled up over the course of a few months. I wonder what changed.

Nothing, probably. Once you get muted once, people will be less tolerant of occasional excesses, which can pile up quickly.

[Playergamer]

Argumentum ad populum. Even if GWG was popular, would the forums truly be better if he was unbanned?

[IamanElfCollaborator]

No, I say he shouldn't be unbanned. He had a lot of legitimate points when he argued, the trouble is that he was being an asshole about them, even when it was clearly going to piss people off (as can be seen everywhere where Toady's cleaned up his arguments). I for one had had to end up locking my OOC thread a lot due to his shenanigans, so I'm slightly biased here. Still, my position is that he should remain banned for the foreseeable future.

That being said, if he improves himself enough, I wouldn't be averse to seeing a reformed GWG back; not that that's likely and not that it'll happen anytime soon. Not saying this because he was popular; I wasn't even aware of that before reading this thread, but because second chances and so on and forth- though, as Flying Dice said, he's been given a lot of chances, perhaps too many.

[escaped lurker]

To be honest, I do think that him being banned is a loss for these forums.
While he is as prone to arguments - and somewhat lacking in niceties in that regard - as others already pointed out, he did contribute his share of stuff, at least in the parts that I tend to haunt.

Well, but with seven warnings and several mutes, I would think it clear that he already was given more consideration than most would normally get. Can't really argue against this final blow, nor do I intend to. Still regrettable that it has taken this course.

With - at least when I last looked - over 20 votes and none of them supporting his return, I guess that the majority see it the same way. Yeah, guess thats that.

Argumentum ad populum. Even if GWG was popular, would the forums truly be better if he was unbanned?

Define "better":
If it is about quality content, then I would vouch for a yes.
If it is about peace and harmony on the boards, we~hell... Nope.

But really, I guess it is a moot point, especially considering the direction the wind in this thread blows already.

[BlitzDungeoneer]

I'm taking a neutral stance on this.
From what I've seen in the one forum game of mine that he participated in, he was fairly pleasant, but..
seriously, a 50 page argument on the definition of the phrase Civil War? No. Just... no.

[IamanElfCollaborator]

Before I get a lot of flak for flaming; he contributed his share- and for that I agree with everyone who's said the same, argued a lot and was an ass (no other words for it) about it, for that reason he was banned, therefore I agree with the ban.

[Tiruin]

Bring GWG back

   

• Yes, he was awesome!
• Yes, for reasons I will post in the thread.
• No, and I hate fun and I like to step on cats.
• No, for a NON HATEFUL, LEGITIMATE REASON i will post in the thread.
• I take a neutral stance on this.
• Who is GWG?

...I sincerely believe the poll is biased, Imperial Guardsman. [...We're talking about a serious topic and you have cat/fun hating? Nitpicking anyway ._. Excuse that. It's out of place {for me}.]

I stand against on the matter however it was to be addressed that there was the attitude. Referencing Digital Hellhound, he did not apologize in cases wherein he was wrong, but there were also cases wherein ...it was actions out of emotion--something not truly thought about. There were times where he had been spoken to in a clear, concise and calm manner, but the process of conversation didn't follow well. It is hard for me to explain it but it was in the details.

The reason for bringing him back (sans this...poll) does not justify the act however--while I'm more neutral on his case (and hold no grievances or bias against GWG), I'm against bringing him back under these grounds  [or those mentioned] as I'm judging not the person-but the attitude that led to this occurrence.

Though I have to note--there was a significant change in his attitude towards the years of 2013-2014...prior to that, he was pretty much ok. On the note of this whole thread's purpose--do not rely on popularity as a cause for revoking a ban request: rely rather on rationality and merit.

But really, I guess it is a moot point, especially considering the direction the wind in this thread blows already.

GWG is pretty much an OK guy. Just that in some cases, a bad part of his personality shows and...it seems it isn't that well controlled. It showed itself in an otherwise harmful way, and did not contribute for the better (though the rest can't be said it was for the worse--there is no wrong in arguments as a general rule, but in how you argue [and of course the topic]).

[Itnetlolor]

At a more outside perspective (not nearly as much interaction with them as others have), I trust in the Toad's word. If he gave off enough warnings/mutings, and none of them have been (properly) heeded, then a banning was to be expected. Sorry you had to go, but thanks for what you've contributed over time.

EDIT:
Despite my word, I still stand neutral on this (can't decide yes or no, either way).

[nenjin]

No.

Because I don't believe in petitioning Toady to unban random forumites who earned their ban.