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

[Remalle]

He was a douche more often than not.  He had more than enough chances to shape up.  There's no reason to bring him back.

[Leafsnail]

I think Toady's decision was appropriate.  There's only so many times you can warn someone if they are clearly not responding to it.

[RedWarrior0]

I vote no, and also that the matter of unbans should be confined strictly to PM (via proxy) or e-mail. Appeal to popularity is not a good enough reason to unban. Keeping the discussion in private channels prevents popularity arguments.

[Fniff]

I didn't like the man himself, but it's funny how the thing that got him banned was the most petty thing imaginable: refusing to back down from an argument on definitions.

[ShadowHammer]

I wish it hadn't come to this, because I liked GWG, but since it did come to this, I completely support Toady's decision; seven warnings and a few mutes is too much to let pass. My vote is no.

[Dutchling]

Public discussions of bans (other than talking about the fact that it happened) are generally a bad idea.
I'm not even sure why I'm posting in this thread

[RedKing]

Against. One of the reasons that permabans are effective is because they're permanent and irreversible. Take that away, and you open up a whole Pandora's box. Some people will push the envelope to see what they can get away with and then petition to be allowed back. And if some are allowed back and others aren't, it starts up accusations of favoritism and such. I've seen more than one IRC channel and forum go down that road.

The justice of the Toad is fair but stern.

[Gunner-Chan]

He had his chance, he had more warnings than he deserved and I quite simply fail to see why anyone would want someone who has this stupid need of some kind to always be right around and active in a community.

I kinda feel like maybe after it was obvious the muting didn't actually teach him shit he shouldn't of been given that second chance.

[scrdest]

Against. While it saddens me to see him banned, the wall was visible from the moon and the writing on it was in flaming, neon, twenty foot tall letters.

I wouldn't mind seeing him return after a while, especially if he made an alt and managed to be so different regarding the argumentativeness nobody would notice he's the same person for a while. This is not some fundamental-matter-of-reality thing, it's just about having a modicum of restraint.

[Sheb]

I never felt he was really that obnoxious, and it saddens me to see our foremost poster go. But I this is Toady's place, and if he thinks GWG has to go, the he has to go.

[sal880612m]

No. If someone did something either offensive enough or often enough to get banned they deserve it. Though from what I have heard the muting seems somewhat light-hearted as a warning. I don't know if it just isn't possible or if it just hasn't come up but 3 days or a week just doesn't say this is a serious matter you need to change your behaviour clear enough for me. I don't know the actual numbers but what I have seen so far goes like that. I assume there is more to it in terms of communication (ie, you did this don't in the future) but I do think the length of the mute should be more significant just to nail home how seriously Toady takes doing such things.

[Graknorke]

No. If someone did something either offensive enough or often enough to get banned they deserve it. Though from what I have heard the muting seems somewhat light-hearted as a warning. I don't know if it just isn't possible or if it just hasn't come up but 3 days or a week just doesn't say this is a serious matter you need to change your behaviour clear enough for me. I don't know the actual numbers but what I have seen so far goes like that. I assume there is more to it in terms of communication (ie, you did this don't in the future) but I do think the length of the mute should be more significant just to nail home how seriously Toady takes doing such things.

It is. He's muted forever.

[TCM]

I wouldn't mind seeing him return after a while, especially if he made an alt and managed to be so different regarding the argumentativeness nobody would notice he's the same person for a while. This is not some fundamental-matter-of-reality thing, it's just about having a modicum of restraint.

Be careful, making alternate accounts as well as ban-dodging is strictly against the forum rules, so you might get into some hot water for supporting it. Just watching out for you bro, since I'm fairly certain that Toady is going to scan thread sooner or later.

I picked neutral, not because I am truly neutral, but it seems most closely aligned with my own feelings towards the situation. GWG pissed me off occasionally. GWG was my boy. Those two statements are not contradictions, as I feel the same way about a few of my friends and acquaintances. I am not glad he is gone, nor am I furiously trying to alleviate his ban. I simply feel sad that someone who, for better or worse, has ingrained himself as a member of the community and Bay12 culture, has been lost.

What I believe above all else is that Toady's judgement on this situation, and any more like it, should be left up to himself (and ThreeToe) for final judgement. Toady may be somewhat tyrannical, but I don't think that's always a bad thing. I myself have nearly gotten banned for violating some forum conduct. I learned, and Toady let me stay. For that I am thankful. His brother and he run this forum for free, supporting it off of voluntary donation, allowing us to do all sorts of batshit nonsense stuff as long as we adhere to the rules put in place. To that, I must agree.

[IronTomato]

I am against this.

I don't care how good of a person you are, if you break the rules as many times as he did, and still don't behave, you get banned. That's what the ban exists for.

[sal880612m]

No. If someone did something either offensive enough or often enough to get banned they deserve it. Though from what I have heard the muting seems somewhat light-hearted as a warning. I don't know if it just isn't possible or if it just hasn't come up but 3 days or a week just doesn't say this is a serious matter you need to change your behaviour clear enough for me. I don't know the actual numbers but what I have seen so far goes like that. I assume there is more to it in terms of communication (ie, you did this don't in the future) but I do think the length of the mute should be more significant just to nail home how seriously Toady takes doing such things.

It is. He's muted forever.

Yeah but at this point it is too late for him to modify his behavior. So it only functions as a warning to others not to him. If I  hadn't stumbled across this I would think a three day mute was a slap on the wrist unless whatever communication I received in conjunction with it was incredibly clear. I have lost track of the number of times I have written out a post and not posted it but thought I did and my memory of posts I have made isn't always so great either. If it was still there I would go look for what caused the issue but seeing as Toady would likely have removed it I wouldn't be able to do so. I don't think this was the case with GWG but if I could see it as a slap on the wrist it stands to reason someone else could as well.