rugbybuck said:
I went back and read the thread. Who else could it be?
gregorylee said:
Because the thread I was dinged on was the "wussie" thread, where I posted a pic of someone beating a dead horse. He started that thread, who else could it be??
Ah, yes deductive reasoning and educated guessing. Well, you were both correct ... I was just curious how you arrived at that conclusion.
USCemper said:
bucknutty or 3yards:
I'd like to understand this particular banning, if I may.
Goofy dings BB over a difference of opinion and calls him an idiot. BB retaliates with an anonymous ding with the "putrid" remark. Is BB being banned because his remark was more vicious and offensive than the idiot remark, or is he being banned because he used vulgarity while PMing a poster anomimously?
And, is this a lifetime ban? Just curious.
I think BNutty has answered this already. I do believe BNutty was just going to give out a stern warning saying that crossing the line like this won't be tolerated. When BNutty got a reply just as vulgar it was time to pull the trigger. I agree with BNutty's action. Who needs that stuff? Certainly not BNutty who is a third party to this whole scenario. FWIW, I don't think it is possible to send a PM anonimously ... only reputation comments. Lifetime ban or not? I think that's being sorted out now.
BuckNutty said:
BB was banned because of things he said to me in PM and in my opinion he crossed the line. As far as I'm concerned he shouldn't be allowed to post here any more. Others disagree so I lifted the ban and from now on I'll let the powers that be handle things.
* I'm not referring to Clarity.
I'm wondering who disagrees with that banning. I think it's best I don't know. For those of you who don't know, BNutty is one of the friendliest and easy going persons you'll likely ever meet on a message board. There is almost nothing you couldn't say to him while trading friendly barbs and talking "smack". I for one, believe that is one of the biggest reasons Clarity made BNutty an administrator ... because he would never abuse that power, and in fact doesn't see himself in a position of authority, just a regular member.
Tibor75 said:
Damn, if they are gone, we won't be able to see who the crybabies are.
I'm sure you'll keep us informed of who the crybabies are Tibs.
Clarity said:
Disabling rep is probably a temporary measure. Clearly it's more than some folks can handle.
I don't have the answers, ability or time to make immediate improvements to it, so I decided to take it down at least for the time being as it's causing too many problems and headaches.
As far as BB's banning, he was banned, unbanned, and rebanned. Obviously we can't make up our minds. I'll touch base with the other mods and admins, I'll also trade a couple emails with Believer, and we'll figure out how to proceed from there. If people have feelings on this issue one way or another, they're welcome to PM me on it. I've always said I wanted bannings to be a last resort. Even in the case of LHM we tried a temp ban before going to a permanent. This is not to say his banning today wasn't justified, it is to say that things have to go pretty far for someone to drop a banning. Particularly a guy like Nutty who doesn't like taking a step like that.
We're 22 days until the season, let's not all lose our heads 3 weeks out. Let's also all be a little better about keeping ourselves in check. The political board definitely seems to cause some headaches here and there, but is the answer to delete it and ban discussions in that line? I don't think so. On the flip side, I can't wait for the election to come and go. There's a lot of unnecessary hostility there, and a lot of intolerance of other people's beliefs and positions.
Well, that last paragraph about says it all. I'd rate the reputation feature from Marginal Success to Abysmal Failure. Have you noticed that the majority of complaints with the Reputation Feature centers around the Political Discussion Board? It seems that's where most of the abuse of the Reputation Feature is found as well. In the past 3 weeks the hostility and anger has risen noticably. What started out as resonable debate and discussion is devolving into hardline attacks and bitter feelings. The rep feature that was originally used to reward memebers for excellent posts regardless of political affilition, is now being used (in many cases, not all) as a tool or an instrument of retaliation. For all the talk I've heard (on the Political Board) that the rep points should not be used against differing opinions or political leanings, that is exactly what is happening in a large number of instances. Even positive points are given to posts that have no intention other than flamming anothers viewpoint.
USCemper said:
Clarity:
Personally, I think that the rep points and the "ding" threat is what is keeping the political debate pretty much in check.
People think first before submitting an idea because they know they MIGHT be evaluated for their opinions and the way they are presented. When people have to think about their actions and opinions, normally good things will happen. We have only had two threads, since I've been a member, where some vulgarity and profanity were used to accuse or describe a poster's "mental capacities". Considering the total number of posts, I wouldn't consider that a major problem.
You always say that it is the responsibility of the community to police itself. In this case, I respectfully request that you let us.
I would submit that the vulgarity and profanity need not apply only to a member's "mental capacities" to be a problem. Even your posts of late have had some anger and profanity as content. I say that NOT to "call you out" USCemper, but to illustrate the direction the Political board is taking. In fact, I consider you one of the most calming influences on that board. BrutuStrength and Buckiprof have also been outstanding in putting political passions aside to keep that board civil and cordial. But as you say, the community must do the policing, not a select handful of members. IMO, the reputation feature is a poor way to handle community policing. That should happen in the thread for all to see. Let the folks who are interested in reasonable debate and discussion make it publicly clear to those who are not, that a certain standard of civility will be expected and in fact demanded of them, regardless of political position or opinion. That way flames, profanity, and political rhetoric aren't left unchallenged in the public eye, lest others think that behavior is acceptable.
Finally, BuckeyeBeliever. I don't know why we can't say his name, but I'm shocked at his behavior. As many of you know, he's has some serious medical conditions, and I would like to think that some medication he might be taking is affecting his behavior. I have no idea, but that's all I can think of that might explain today, short of someone stealing his password and posting under his moniker. Maybe the change in temperment of the Political Board (as of late) simply got to him and he went tilt. But he crossed the line several times today and the BuckeyeBeliever I know from months past would not think that type of behavior was permissable or something to be tolerated.
