Print

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

[Akroma]

exactly, they don't count


unban by popular demand ?

hurrhurr

if popular demand did anything, then why is VN gone ?


suuuure, there were people who complained about it, but a lot more people who wanted it to stay.


this time, the ones who want IWM back are not even many, I only see you and Tack and Armok.



accept it man, he's dead. won't come back. not yours. can't have.

you can bitch and moan about how he was a good guy as long as you want.
you know what people always say at court when their friend murered someone?

"I would have never thought he'd do sucha  thing"


people can be nice guys, and STILL deserve a ban.



discuss as long as you want, but this ban was justified. if maybe not on that single remark, then still on the sum of complaints he received, and the sum of warnings he ignored.


he got warned and temp-banned and gave a shit about it.
likewise, toady has full right to give shit about him.


for weeks and months toady took the time to warn him and ask him nicely to discontinue his behaviour, IWM didn't care


now if IWM nicely asks toady to discontinue his ban, then why the hell should toady care ?



call injustice and mercy all you want, he has been banned, and rightfully so, and nothing you say about him being oh so nice and oh so popular will change that he acted like an ass

[Little]

Akroma just won THE GAME.

Thread closed now?

[codezero]

-1 to locking!

Anyway, without the bad guys, how does anyone know the limits?

[Cheeetar]

-1 to locking!

+1 to locking!

[Akroma]

if the bad guys are not punished, then just how is one supposed to recognize the limits ?

if anything, IWM's noble sacrifice helps to improve the forum

[codezero]

Exactly.

[cowofdoom78963]

Rules
Law
Dictatorship
Blah

Akroma if poplular demand did nothing then why were those people unbanned? Sure they got banned again afterwords, but its proof enough that a point got across from the members to the staff.

Except the difference here is that the admin hasent stopped us. Yet.

Tack dont lock this topic, if Toady wants to lock it let him lock it. But if you want IWM back then you keep it open.

If this topic lacks support then it will sink, its as simple as that. There is no need to lock it.

[Vester]

I think Akroma's already said everything that needs to be said. The forum has rules, and if you break them, you can kiss your butt goodbye.

He was a fairly decent kid, but there are rules against bigotry, which he repeatedly ignored. So, I'll miss him, but really, all I'm gonna say is, too bad he's gone.

[Tack]

Geez. Why does a simple debate of conflicting viewpoints need to end up so petty?

Also, Akroma, as I am the maker of the topic, and the person with the point of view opposite to yours, the entire petty viewpoint that this topic has degraded into states that I simply shouldn't lock it, at least until everyone suddenly has an epiphany realizing that my point of view was the righteous one after all.

Sarcasm finished. Now.

The simple reason why I believe he didn't deserve permaban is because the "inciting" incident that led to the permaban was simply a misunderstanding in the first place. he wasn't a troll, and he didn't go out of his way to make other's lives more miserable. Sure, I wasn't here during his gigantic "caliphate uprising" thing, but if nobody noticed that, he also apologised for it, too. In a strange and annoying way.

Simply put, and I say this mostly to Akroma, If a person can be banned for a "grey area", then what stops a person being banned for a minor infraction? What stops a person from being banned for saying something against the admin? Sure, I'm guessing from the general air of chill, and lack of reaction to this topic, that Toady isn't the kind of person to ban someone for simply speaking out against him. But, with any benevolent ruler, per-se, there's a certain amount of give. VN was a "hellhole of Yaoi and Racism". There was literally no way he could keep it open in a respectable forum. IWM was a "slightly annoying kid".

Seeing the minor differences between them there? Note: Sarcasm.

Honestly I don't think he did enough to earn a permaban. The only other permaban I've heard of was given because somebody spread copious amounts of gay-porn through the forum. All that IWM did was have a passionate, one-sided viewpoint, and annoying attitude, something that a great many people on this forum also have. Sure, he's stepped the line, and he might have done it a few times before I "arrived" here, but I didn't see that, So I can't honestly weigh up the differences, and therefore I just make an opinion based on what I Saw of IWM. Which wasn't that bad. I honestly think a fair few people miss him, and possibly a slightly smaller number wish he was back, they just don't have the intolerant recklessness I do, to make such a stand for him. Maybe I'm being overly loyal for a person I hardly knew, but, knowing the community here, I think that being temp-banned from this place would be hell for me, let alone Perma-Banned.

And Cod. I'm glad you have the same viewpoint as me, but stop being so immature. I made this thread simply so that reasonable arguments can be shown, and discussed. Not so that we could all have a bitch session.

 And that goes for a lot more people here. To shame, all of you, that fucking Tack is admonishing you for immaturity.

Also, in the system of law, there is also some strange thing called "repeals". This is when, through majority consent, a person is deemed to be not as bad as seemed, and their punishment lessened or removed.
I'm not asking for instant forgiveness. But permanent is simply too long. I mean, in Australia the "life sentence" is 25 years. Because "permanent" is Just Too Long. All I'm asking is that his punishment is say, a month, or half a year. Not forever. Not over a misunderstanding.

And nobody "request" locks from me. Sure, if it continues going downhill from here, I guess I'll have no choice but to get rid of it before it descends into fourth-grade hell. But if you honestly want it to die, stop posting. Don't post just to say "lol lock it tots!". You're showing the same pettiness that I am.
So, against everyone's better judgement, I'm going to keep this thread open a bit longer, just in case anyone wants to say a viewpoint conflicting to mine. I'm not so petty that I'm going to "make sure" I have the last word.

[qwertyuiopas]

I believe that rules are important, however, exceptions must sometimes be made.

The rule is "Permanent bans are permanent"
The exception: "Sometimes people change, and some bans are based on misunderstandings, and should be removed." But does it apply in this case? Only Toady can decide.

[Akroma]

Rules
Law
Dictatorship
Blah

Akroma if poplular demand did nothing then why were those people unbanned? Sure they got banned again afterwords, but its proof enough that a point got across from the members to the staff.

Except the difference here is that the admin hasent stopped us. Yet.

Tack dont lock this topic, if Toady wants to lock it let him lock it. But if you want IWM back then you keep it open.

If this topic lacks support then it will sink, its as simple as that. There is no need to lock it.

popular demand did nothing

it was constant harrassement that drove a single mod to act against the rules and unban someone

it was not popular demand, it were only some few very very loud and annoying voices

such as yours and tacks for example

the point did not get across, it was forced across, and everyone involved, from the mod to the harassers got banned


I assure you, popular demand did nothing, nor was there even popular demand



look around, and you will see that IWM-supporters are nothing but a very local minority







tack: miunderstanding or not, when I tell jokes that start with "what's the difference between a nigger and a ", and even if I mean it jockingly, tell that to the black person behind me that I didn't notice before

this is just a block of text, there is no sarcasm tag. if someone who doesn't know you reads this, he is certain to not reaaaaly undestand that you meant it the funny way.


toady received  easily 3 dozen complains about IWM spread over several months, even after IWM already got a temp ban once.
it's a matter of fact that he did NOT learn a thing from that temp ban



you might be right that a permaban is hard punishment when it happens on the first offense. but this is NOT the first offense.

he was warned dozens of times, ignored it. he got temp banned and ignored it.

so either he is simply not CAPABLE of sticking to the rules, or he is UNWILLING to stick to them.
in either case, someone who simply will not abide by the rules, even when repeatedly told about them, is not welcome here


you can not say "he didn't know about the rules" nor can you say "ohh but he is suuuuch a nice guy"


strike one

strike two

batter out




he is unwilling to learn, and has proven that quite nicely.

so even if the single bigoted remark in question was a misunderstanding, the 30 others previous to that were not.

he was told not to do that, he did anyway.


if someone gts out of jail and immediatly steals/murders/whatevers again, you don#t say "oh he is such a nice guy, he totaly didn#t mean it that way" either


sorry if the metaphor is a bit out of proportion, but translated to forum-level, it does apply. IWM is a recidivist.
his view of what is funny and what is against the rules are 4chan-ish, and that will not change, especially not if he sees that toady gives in just because some of his friends bugged him until he gave in.


I am sorry, but this forum will have to abdicate from IWM's presence from now until version 1.0



rules must be absolute. if they are full of holes, exceptions and inconsequences, they are worthless

[LegoLord]

I would also say that if the banning of someone in that case bothers you, and you don't actually know them in person, you should probably get out a bit more.  Really, it's not your ole' chum what you know so well.  It's some other person on the internet.  Who, on top of that, may act differently - potentially very differently - in person.  Saying he's your friend, however nice a person he may be, is kind of like trying to say the president is your friend just because you shook hands with him once.  And he never actually got your name.  Or anything on you, for that matter.

[Armok]

Rules? Laws?

He didn't murder anyone, you CAN'T murder somone over a forum. Nor can you steal or rape. It's WORDS, being permanently cut of from your freinds and a place that you love is WAY, WAY out of proportion even for the very worst thing that is is physically POSSIBLE to do through forum posts. There are bad things that shuld have punishments, but NOTHING deserves a complete blockage.
The forum is made out of bytes, there are no resources to steal or means to permanently cripple someone, it's a post sacristy economy, all the reasons that justifies law in the real world are invalid on the net.

[Akroma]

first I said real world scaled DOWN to a forum level, in other words, what is theft in the real world becomes a rascist joke on forum level


second, I am certain that IWM is not that fixated on this forum as you are armok

else he would have long since come back

[LegoLord]

all the reasons that justifies law in the real world are invalid on the net.

No.  Wrong.  Every site on the internet is someone's property.  What goes on it is only what they allow.  The laws are defined by what they want done with their site.

That, and the laws of the country the site's owner is based in.  And the US has laws against various forms of harassment.