Kakapo banned

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:07 PM, Funktion said:

i loved theocide and lion, they were hilarious. i still remember theocides enormous post on how he achieved the perfect routine for making his hair shiny and glorious.

theo was a bit much, but never really got on my nerves.

lion was half-boring, half-amazing. never knew which side of the coin you'd get

Well I'm not sure I really cared for ezkerraldean's sense of humour because he just seemed to brag about cool rocks or mention something to do with the USSR all the time. But as far as I recall he was banned for insubordination by posting a picture of an obscure Nazi leader which is not a good reason.

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:10 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

Well I'm not sure I really cared for ezkerraldean's sense of humour because he just seemed to brag about cool rocks or mention something to do with the USSR all the time. But as far as I recall he was banned for insubordination by posting a picture of an obscure Nazi leader which is not a good reason.

yeah, i remember having to look the guy up on wikipedia in order to understand why i was supposed to be offended !

i didn't find ezekelderran to be particularly funny or know him very well, and i certainly don't care either way if he's banned or not, but he definitely didn't ask for it. unless you deleted that post, which is very likely. as far as i recall he posted an image of some 1920s era anti-semite and you banned him for it.

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:10 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

Well I'm not sure I really cared for ezkerraldean's sense of humour because he just seemed to brag about cool rocks or mention something to do with the USSR all the time. But as far as I recall he was banned for insubordination by posting a picture of an obscure Nazi leader which is not a good reason.

aha yeah. i recall some talk of a bunch of deleted posts but no one saw any of them.

And as for the public execution thing; it seems to make sense not to do that but then a thread like this always appears, and sometimes people get so vitriolic by the time papa arrives that another ban happens

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:09 PM, hahathhat said:

theo [...] never really got on my nerves.

lion was [...] half-amazing.

yep.

Long gone are the days of

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:05 PM, azatoth said:

Why isn't there any suspensions given in this forum? Straight up banning is a little bit harsh. Let the offenders be suspended for a set amount of time and have them think over the stuff that caused it. Rack up enough suspensions then it's a ban.

 

Some of these latest bannings have gone to people who have contributed to this site with funny, clever and insightful posts, more so than causing havoc and problems. Soon, or maybe it already is, it will be like walking in a minefield with posting here when you can't even know what will cause a ban. Especially when it's all done in secrecy and out of the blue. I don't like where this NewWATMM™ is going.

 

It's obvious the community is frowning upon these actions when there is always a lengthy discussion on the bannings. And the forum is nothing without the eclectic mix of people here and it will be a really boring place when it's full kiddie-friendly, toe the party line sycophants and mindless fanboys around here. I understand that this is your place Joyrex, but you are strangling all the fun out of this place with this new uptight and PG policy, and what made this forum so successful in the first place are the people who contributed to it during it's initial phase and surprisingly enough a number of them have been banned over the years as it's been able to sustain itself without the members that made it initially a place where people came to have fun banter and maybe talk about the IDMz on the side.

We do suspend repeat offenders first in most cases - again, the general forum populace is not privy to this, so unless it happens to you or someone goes around telling everyone it happened, nobody knows and assumes the opposite.

People who made the forum successful, banned? Like who?

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:09 PM, KY said:

all discussion of kakapo aside (i remember arguing with him about something trivial, so therefore, i hate him with a passion lol), but maybe you should be less lenient with handing out warnings, joyrex? at least that way, we'd know whether or not we're toeing the line.

Perhaps you're right - but then I am sure I'll get branded "teh warninator" or threads will be started about my excessive warning. I don't see myself winning either way, to be honest. Maybe I'm not meant to.

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:10 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

Well I'm not sure I really cared for ezkerraldean's sense of humour because he just seemed to brag about cool rocks or mention something to do with the USSR all the time. But as far as I recall he was banned for insubordination by posting a picture of an obscure Nazi leader which is not a good reason.

Ah, yes - I recall that now. I think his warn level was such it justified it, or he was ramping things up to the point enough was enough. I thought he asked to be banned, but I'm probably not remembering that correctly. Too many names to keep track of around here.

At least we have fresh young talent like myself to fill in the gaps where previously monolithic harbingers of freedom and justice once stoode

I recall, years ago, myself and Iain C recieved month-long suspensions. I think they work, as someone else here has said, to alleviate tension and give the party time to consider their fuckery.

Personally, I'd like to see Joyrex ask us before adding new rules; a poll? At least that way we could see what's coming. The sudden deletion of porn-type threads really shocked me. I know, I know. There are more appropriate places and this is supposed to be a music forum, but we created that in general banter and it was clearly very popular.

Although, actually, I completely understand that it may have been including dangerous links and images and that no-one should have to police a porn-type thread.

I'd just like to see things coming. Further, perhaps when a user is clearly losing friends and annoying everyone, maybe up to 70% warn and having already suffered a suspension, perhaps we should be polled as to whether we still want to see their inane banter or whether we too think they should go. Put them on suspension whilst we vote.

It's not a democracy. Do what you want, JR. It's your site and your time, but I think we should be given a little more say about what you let happen here. A lot of us have donated our individual skills, talents and personalities to some pretty decent things on here... as well as money.

I don't think we need a democracy here JR just needs to calm down the bannings. Suspensions make much more sense for things like this. (not boxing day tho. good riddance. )

I'm actually still waiting for another Project 168 and if it ever happens again I'm sure I'd hear about it here first. I'd want to check up on the contributions of WATMM members.

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:24 PM, Gary C said:

I recall, years ago, myself and Iain C recieved month-long suspensions. I think they work, as someone else here has said, to alleviate tension and give the party time to consider their fuckery.

 

Personally, I'd like to see Joyrex ask us before adding new rules; a poll? At least that way we could see what's coming. The sudden deletion of porn-type threads really shocked me. I know, I know. There are more appropriate places and this is supposed to be a music forum, but we created that in general banter and it was clearly very popular.

Although, actually, I completely understand that it may have been including dangerous links and images and that no-one should have to police a porn-type thread.

 

I'd just like to see things coming. Further, perhaps when a user is clearly losing friends and annoying everyone, maybe up to 70% warn and having already suffered a suspension, perhaps we should be polled as to whether we still want to see their inane banter or whether we too think they should go. Put them on suspension whilst we vote.

 

It's not a democracy. Do what you want, JR. It's your site and your time, but I think we should be given a little more say about what you let happen here. A lot of us have donated our individual skills, talents and personalities to some pretty decent things on here... as well as money.

That's a perfectly reasonable request, and one I like! Would it be all right with everyone if myself and the Moderators discussed an issue internally and come to a consensus of whether a person should be banned or not? We could suspend their account (as you suggest) pending the outcome, make them aware of it beforehand, and then depending on the ruling, take the appropriate action? I wouldn't have a problem with that for most circumstances.

As for the rules, with the exception of the most recent change, they don't really change that often, truth be told. We could have a thread about proposed rule changes, and even get and allow input from the community on what should change and what could be added.

I want to make it clear that I do want to be as fair as possible, and really hate being the heavy - sometimes I feel I'm provoked and pushed into that role more often than me deciding it's time to lay down the law.

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:28 PM, Gary C said:

I'm actually still waiting for another Project 168 and if it ever happens again I'm sure I'd hear about it here first. I'd want to check up on the contributions of WATMM members.

I'm really trying to find the time to do WATMM Volume 2 - I really want another CD to smile at on my shelf! (and perhaps a vinyl edition this time, if the money's there to do it)

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:21 PM, Offisides said:

At least we have fresh young talent like myself to fill in the gaps where previously monolithic harbingers of freedom and justice once stoode

  Quote

Posts: 11

Joined: 31-March 11

i would love it if there was a poll to decide on if members should be banned or not, but i wouldn't feel comfortable unless there was a poll first to see if everyone agrees that polling is the correct way to do things. like a "Do you agree that polling works? Yes or No." thread.

  On 5/4/2011 at 6:31 PM, Joyrex said:

That's a perfectly reasonable request, and one I like! Would it be all right with everyone if myself and the Moderators discussed an issue internally and come to a consensus of whether a person should be banned or not? We could suspend their account (as you suggest) pending the outcome, make them aware of it beforehand, and then depending on the ruling, take the appropriate action? I wouldn't have a problem with that for most circumstances.

Perhaps there should even be a sub division of WATMM where these things could be discussed. Of course, for privacy, maybe you should hide this room whilst you come to your decision. LOL.

There should also be a pol deciding if football (soccer) is more idm than porn. Because we had porn (or not even porn but erotic) topics removed, because they didn't belong. Ok, so football has a sub-freakin-forum. How in multiverse is that possible?

One of the best. I'll miss his posts.

The football subforum is here to stay.

  On 5/4/2011 at 7:07 PM, gaarg said:

There should also be a pol deciding if football (soccer) is more idm than porn. Because we had porn (or not even porn but erotic) topics removed, because they didn't belong. Ok, so football has a sub-freakin-forum. How in multiverse is that possible?

Joyrex went crazy during the World Cup and is having to deal with the hangover.

Banners gonna ban.

Outright banning does seem a bit harsh if the guy had not been previously "warned". A suspension does seem like a suitable kick up the ass, I think you should try that next time. A security issue probably does warrant a banning though tbf.

Although what do I know, im only

  Quote

Joined: 02-February 10

Posts: 1284

LOL

  On 5/4/2011 at 4:20 PM, Joyrex said:

I'm tired of being nice - fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

bestiality threesomes? in my watmm?

perhaps bans for serious offenses should start off at 1 month ban from watmm, and upon return from 1 month ban continue as follows:

• 2nd offense - 2 month ban
  
• 3rd offense - 3 month ban
  
• 4th offense - 6 month ban
  
• 5th offense - 12 month ban
  

obviously if someone comes back from a year long ban and starts fucking about, by all means have at them. however if someone tries to turn a new leaf after any of these serious offenses maybe it could work out something like this: if the person is on their nth offense, look at the span between this offense and their return. If this amount of time is greater than the penalty for an n-1 offense, penalize them as if it were an n-1 offense (or if it has been n-1 + n-2, etc, give them the lesser penalty). not trying to create some loopholes to allow people to game the system, but perhaps if we had a little more of a framework for the length/duration of bans the community would not be so up in arms about outright permabanning?