NationStates Jolt Archive

For those who don't know, Sinuhue got herself forumbanned for five days. Yes, I cried a little. You puts out such good threads. Now where am I going to post?

Forumbanned? Why??

I don't really think I should put my opinions on that out on the forum, lest I join her in being banned.

Yes, her threads are the best ones, by and large, on NS, and she is easily one of my favourite people. Hopefully she won't disappear after this *ends possible opinion outlet.*

maybe a link to the thread it happened in?

*sniffles*

it couldnt have happened to a nicer person?

yes, i can see how banning her was a good idea

who wants good threads with serious discussion when we can have the usual "gays are evil" threads.

good decision by the mods


:rolleyes:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=424103&page=3

Read that.

She's quite entertaining and thought-provoking; my guess is someone took offence to that.

[After having read the post for which she was banned, it was in poor taste, but I've read much worse in these forums.]

Forumbanned? Why??

She made a joke that was fairly crude. Cog warned her for trolling and banned her. In defense of Cog, it was a really crude joke, but you certainly wasn't trying to upset anyone, so I'm a little shocked by the ban.

More importantly, I'm absolutely devestated by the fact that we lose her contribution to the forum for the next week. Yes, that's right, it's all about me.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=424103&page=3

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=424103&page=3

Read that.

Didn't see that you'd already linked it. Thx.

That seems a little heavy-handed of Cog, but I can foresee someone taking Sinuhue's comments and running with them.

Sinuhue got herself forumbanned for five days.
No! Sinuhue??? That's a bit of a surprise to me! :(

:(

No! Sinuhue??? That's a bit of a surprise to me! :(

I'm as shocked as you, to be fair she was provoked but I do think Cog may have been right (since we would always expect the best from Sin).
5 days huh? That's not so long...


um
...


...
eh
...

...So what do you think of this 'Music Television'?

Really, I think that the inequity in distributing the punishments is actually quite unfair. Why should, two parties, after commiting precisely the same offense, be disciplined, by the same person, differently? I can see the warning, but the ban for one and not the other? That seems.... odd.

If you read simply what she posted and didnt get a feel for the whole thread, then yeah-it was bad. Some of us were quite aware she wasnt serious. But I guess someone coming in late could take it differently.

Really, I think that the inequity in distributing the punishments is actually quite unfair. Why should, two parties, after commiting precisely the same offense, be disciplined, by the same person, differently? I can see the warning, but the ban for one and not the other? That seems.... odd.

Sinuhue has previous infractions.

Really, I think that the inequity in distributing the punishments is actually quite unfair. Why should, two parties, after commiting precisely the same offense, be disciplined, by the same person, differently? I can see the warning, but the ban for one and not the other? That seems.... odd.

Yes, exactly.

Hey... I got an official warning, too, ya know... :(
:D

Sinuhue has previous infractions.

Untrue. She has never received a warning before. You really should be more careful about making statements like this.

Sinuhue has previous infractions.

HerPower, right?

Well, according to Cogs posts, Rogue Newbies was also cruising for a banning due to their previous posts. That sounds like infractions to me. Sinuhue has a reputation for being a good poster, as well as the HerPower business. Why should only external negatives be looked at? Either take the case in isolation or take "all" external circumatances. Good and bad.

Also, Rogue Newbies... that's my point.... you got warned. But not banned. Why not? You done exactly the same thing.

I just read her forum and why she got banned then I found this forum I decided to pay my respects. I read a lot of forums and I have to say Sinuhue is about the best I've seen in a while. Her opinions spark the mind and I saw no reason why she should have gotten banned. Her remark was made in a joking manner and i wish the best for her and hope she is back in the forums soon!!!! My best to rogue newbies too sorry bout the warning but at least you weren't banned so take it easy for awhile bud.! no offense meant by that dont want you getting banned too you're a good forum type person too!!! :D

Sinuhue has previous infractions.
and shes also one of the best posters here

surely that should have been taken into consideration

Untrue. She has never received a warning before. You really should be more careful about making statements like this.
We don't know that. There's not a list of warings somewhere you can look up. It is possible she may have had prior minor offenses. My guess is that she had. That's the only reason I can think of for the differences in punishments.

Untrue. She has never received a warning before. You really should be more careful about making statements like this.

She was the puppet master behind HerPower. You really should be more careful about making statements like this.

and shes also one of the best posters here

surely that should have been taken into consideration

Unfortunately, it is not. If someone breaks the rules, they get punished, no matter who they are.

I read over the thread in question and a forum ban seems a bit unjust to me... surely a warning would have been more suitable?

In the context of the thread her violation certainly didn't appear malicious nor did it seem to be a personal attack.

Oh well

We don't know that. There's not a list of warings somewhere you can look up. It is possible she may have had prior minor offenses. My guess is that she had. That's the only reason I can think of for the differences in punishments.

I spoke to her. With the exception of the HerPower stuff, she has never had any infractions. Considering her considerable record on the forums for being a good and decent poster, it seems like we should be holding her up as an example rather than pushing her out.

I was talking to her about building materials... :( :headbang: :(

I think the big red WARNING note would have been sufficient to scare people who didn't know Sinhue was just bantering in (crass) fun.

Now who am I going to get to (dis)agree with me?

HEY Canuck! (Either one - or a Eurowenie ;) doesn't matter who...) Abuse my opinions please! ;) ;) ;)

I spoke to her. With the exception of the HerPower stuff, she has never had any infractions. Considering her considerable record on the forums for being a good and decent poster, it seems like we should be holding her up as an example rather than pushing her out.

Its exactley because she is an example for the rest of the board that I think she's been banned.

I'd like to see people post their dissatisfaction with the decision here. Maybe we can get an explanation from Cog. I have never seen Cog be unreasonable so perhaps there is something behind this.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9020744#post9020744

Its exactley because she is an example for the rest of the board that I think she's been banned.

You think? That seems a little too police state-y to me. "If it can happen to someone like Sinuhue, it can happen to anyone." I don't think the moderators would seek to make an example out of someone.

You think? That seems a little too police state-y to me. "If it can happen to someone like Sinuhue, it can happen to anyone." I don't think the moderators would seem to make an example out of someone.
Actually if you have a warning or two, and push it, you get forumbanned if you're a good poster. A lot just get deated.

She made a joke that was fairly crude. Cog warned her for trolling and banned her. In defense of Cog, it was a really crude joke, but you certainly wasn't trying to upset anyone, so I'm a little shocked by the ban.
I got forumbanned for a WEEK for doing less than she did. The only thing I'm shocked about is that her "sentence" was only 5 days.

She was the puppet master behind HerPower. You really should be more careful about making statements like this.

Actually, I apologize. She told me she hadn't been warned before. She was mistaken and, thus, so am I. I apologize for making such a strong statement. *looks embarrassed*

5 days! Oh dear! The forums will surely melt!

Honestly, I think both parties should have been given the 5 day forumban as a sort of equality factor, but that's just me. Cog was right here, whether you guys like it or not. An inflammatory comment is an inflammatory comment whether some guy at a pub makes it or if it's the king of Sweden.

That said, the overall anti-american sentiment of this forum made me raise an eyebrow when I saw that someone got tempbanned for calling Americans hicks instead of that person getting a medal or a free UN proposal or whatever you guys hand out on the forums.

I think it's odd that their statements got a warning and a 5 day ban. Anyone on the thread when Mutated Sea Bass told someone to kill themselves...twice....even sugesting a suitable weapon and the best position for best results? That only earned mutie a 3 day ban.

a sad 5 days for all :(

I hate doing this because I feel like a puppet but Sinuhue sent something to me that I think explains that she does not feel like the ban was undeserved.

I realise that I am not innocent in this case, and I do not want to be represented, or to represent myself as such. My puppet HerPower was deleted, and I received a major warning. I received a warning for my actions towards VoteEarly. There have been a few other friendly reminders to cool it down. I understand why I was forumbanned when Rogue Nations was not. The only thing that I would ask, is not that the ban be lifted, but that if it is at all possible, I get some sort of warning if my posts really are going to far. I honestly did not have the intent to flame, or troll, or offend anyone, and since it's clear I wasn't able to make that explicit, I would have been happy to remove the post and apologise. So please, I don't want anyone thinking I want to be a martyr, or that I feel the forumban COMPLETELY undeserved...but I would like to remind everyone that a LOT of remarks, taken out of context can seem very damning. Again, I apologise if I actually offended anyone, I accept the ban, and thanks for thinking of me!

Sinuhue

Well, hopefully she comes back and stays back after the ban... :(

I hate doing this because I feel like a puppet but Sinuhue sent something to me that I think explains that she does not feel like the ban was undeserved.


Tell Sin I like her humble and appologetic. Its making me drool

Bah... the comment was directed at me, I'm not offended by it; should not the target's opinion be all that matters? She wasn't talking to other people when she said it, so why should whether they're offended mean jack?

Then again, nothing offends me, but still. It wasn't that bad.

Sinuhue is a righteous bitch.

hehe

(in this case, "righteous" = "groovy")

I think that I would quite possibly make the worst moderator of... well, of anything... ever. It would take way too much for me to even consider giving someone a warning, and even then I'd probably warn them unofficially.

You think? That seems a little too police state-y to me. "If it can happen to someone like Sinuhue, it can happen to anyone." I don't think the moderators would seek to make an example out of someone.

I agree with you. I doubt they did this just because she's someone people pay attention to.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=424103&page=3

Read that.

I think she did nothing wrong. Personally I have encountered far more offending nationstaters then Sinuhue. I hope she will return.

You go girl, for telling it like it is!

I'm gunna miss her hot canadian ass

Hey... I got an official warning, too, ya know... :(
:D
You should also have been forumbanned for five days. Your "joke" was just as bad as Sinuhue's.

I'm gunna miss her hot canadian ass

I believe the prefered terminology is hot Injun ass.

I believe the prefered terminology is hot Injun ass.

it's funny you say that because that was my first choice, but considering the nature of her ban, I decided I was too much of a pussy to risk it. *scared*

But yeah, what a nice hot and tight injun ass it is. *misses it*

it's funny you say that because that was my first choice, but considering the nature of her ban, I decided I was too much of a pussy to risk it. *scared*

But yeah, what a nice hot and tight injun ass it is. *misses it*

They are her own words. I forget the exact quote, but it was something along the lines of her having a "red hot Injun ass".

Bah... the comment was directed at me, I'm not offended by it; should not the target's opinion be all that matters? She wasn't talking to other people when she said it, so why should whether they're offended mean jack?

Then again, nothing offends me, but still. It wasn't that bad.
Quite. I'm a mild-mannered sort, but I think the forum ban is REALLY FUCKING STUPID. Does no one have a sense of irony any more? I expect a lot better from Cog, who is a mod I've always admired.

Now I remember why I dont read this forum much anymore, they ban anyone interesting.

AH ! You people, you didnt think to mention it was only a 5 day ban in liek the WHOLE first page did you... nearly scared me out of my little wits.

Tut tut. naughty.

It's going to be a boooring five days. Some of us appreciate her sarcasm, too bad not everyone can tell it apart from a serious post.

Bah... the comment was directed at me, I'm not offended by it; should not the target's opinion be all that matters?
No. That particular misunderstanding has been at the root of many warnings and bans.

We moderate based on what the reader will see, not what the author may have intended or the target may have interpreted. If you want to have a private, uncensored exchange, there are ample instant messenging clients available. If you post on public forums, then what you post must be fit for the public as defined by the site owner. That's what we enforce. That's what you need to abide by.

For the record, Cogitation reversed himself after discussing it with other mods.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9022012&postcount=5

For the record, Cogitation reversed himself after discussing it with other mods.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9022012&postcount=5
Yay! She'll be back!

For the record, Cogitation reversed himself after discussing it with other mods.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9022012&postcount=5

Woohoo!

No. That particular misunderstanding has been at the root of many warnings and bans.

We moderate based on what the reader will see, not what the author may have intended or the target may have interpreted. If you want to have a private, uncensored exchange, there are ample instant messenging clients available. If you post on public forums, then what you post must be fit for the public as defined by the site owner. That's what we enforce. That's what you need to abide by.

For the record, Cogitation reversed himself after discussing it with other mods.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9022012&postcount=5

Thanks, Fris. I think a lot of people, including myself, don't realize that we have to be sensitive to the offense that others might take. Duely noted.

Yay, I used duely in a sentence.

Sinuhue, welcome back.

Thanks, Fris. I think a lot of people, including myself, don't realize that we have to be sensitive to the offense that others might take. Duely noted.

Yay, I used duely in a sentence.

Oh dear, does this mean that you and I can't even post in the same threads anymore?

I actually enjoy them.

Well, sometimes. =)

Yay! She'll be back!

What's funny is that she would have been back even with the 5 day ban, but some people have the attention span of a gnat.

You go girl, for telling it like it is!

****** Please... Telling it like it is? Well, at least I have more ammo to back up my statement that this forum is blindly anti-American.

Sinuhue, welcome back.
\
now show us your hoo hoo

****** Please... Telling it like it is? Well, at least I have more ammo to back up my statement that this forum is blindly anti-American.

First, it was a joke and, second, hardly. The US happens to be a hot topic much like abortion and about a dozen other things. Whenever you have a hot topic there will be some people on either side who blindly believe there side is the only way to see it. Much like someone who's decided the forum is blindly anti-American. You obviously don't see the straight down the party line people that reside here that think American can do no wrong and everyone who says otherwise is a terrorist sympathizer. Many people on this forum aren't worth talking to and I suggest you ignore them and not judge the forum on a select, but vocal, few. Most people on this forum fall into that grey area that reasonable people tend to find where they can see both sides but tend to lean toward one. The exist aplenty on this board and you'll have no problem finding them if you care to have a reasonable discussion.

Oh dear, does this mean that you and I can't even post in the same threads anymore?

I actually enjoy them.

Well, sometimes. =)

Well, they have a point. Look at the reaction in the post below yours to see why posts like the one Cog was reacting to can create a problem. Now should we avoid everything that might create a problem? Probably not. However, we can try to curb behaviors that encourage people to get angry and to write unreasonable posts that degrade the discussion. To that end, I will refrain right now from telling you what I think of you. (Ok, seriously, that was my last one. For everyone who isn't Dem, I am totally kidding. For Dem, you already know, sweetheart.)

I am glad Sinuhue is back and Cog reconsidered. The incident does teach the lesson that rabble rousing can be risky, even if meant in fun (or sarcasm).

Please be careful in the future Sinuhue!

\
now show us your hoo hoo

~Stabs Sumamba Buwhan to death and sells the body on the illegal international slave market~

Nothing to see here. Please move along.

First, it was a joke and, second, hardly.

Recite for me the exact reason why our 'beloved' forum member was banned in the first place.

Poster in question made a 'joke' and was banned because the line between 'joke' and 'troll' are so thinly veiled on an internet message board, it's difficult for a moderator tell which. As such, Cog had to set a precident. Unfortunately, Cog backed down under the pressure of people who feel that the rules should be bent for someone who they like. Yes, I said it. If this were a less popular poster, he/she would still be banned right now. I feel no guilt for saying that.

Now I'm not going to be hypocritical and say that I was only joking when I said that this forum is anti-American. We could go around in circles forever that way. I prefer to stick to my guns and not be soft. I still believe that this forum is generally anti-USA, and I'll keep thinking that way until I see otherwise. Anytime the word America is brought up, there are significantly more people who come on and have something rotten to say compared to the people who have something generally nice to say. Granted, there are some people who come on here and say something completely baseless (We saved your asses in WWII :sniper: :sniper: ) and then they get roasted. Those individuals deserve to get roasted because they're dim witted morons who don't understand history. Then you get your people who said that the War of 1812 was a decisive Canadian victory because the White House was burnt down. The second an American who knows their history and that nothing about the War of 1812 was decisive, they get flamed.

You say that the vocal minority are the ones who form my opinion. You're entirely correct. When you go down through a thread, which are you more likely to be emotionally moved (in any direction) by? A long well thought out post that has sources and a coherent flow or a one liner that makes a sweeping generalization. I know which one made me mash the 'reply' button more quickly, and from all outward appearances, it looks like it did the same thing for you. ;) Now, logically, the big post that has a lot of info is going to make me think more, and I'm not going to want to reply so much, unless it's a topic I really know my stuff about (like nuclear power or some other physics topic). It's easier to be dumb and write a really quick dart when you are convinced that the other party is also dumb. It's harder to keep up with someone who actually knows what they're talking about unless you indeed know what you're talking about as well.

Overall, I'll agree with you. This forum is somewhat enlightening, some threads are actually quite informative when you post based on logic and not emotion.

I am glad Sinuhue is back and Cog reconsidered. The incident does teach the lesson that rabble rousing can be risky, even if meant in fun (or sarcasm).

Please be careful in the future Sinuhue!Yes, indeed.

A compounding problem is that text form doesn't carry tone-of-voice or body language unless you take the time and effort to describe it in your text. Since these carry a lot of meaning, you have to be careful in any medium where these are stripped out. When I read the involved posts, Rogue Newbie and Sinuhue both looked quite serious (at least, to me).

As for the disparity in punishments, Sinuhue has a longer list of prior offenses than Rogue Newbie.

Another note: While friendly jests are allowed to SOME mild extent, playflaming and playtrolling are discouraged.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Look! I'm jumping from point to point!

Yes, they made an exception for Sinuhue. Not because of her popularity, but because of a misinterpretation of a sardonic remark in a post. If you read it carefully, it was in response to a person who made an equally (syntactically, et al) distasteful remark about Canadians.

Note that this poster's original sentence wasn't to be forum banned. Note that noone whined about how the anti-Canadian one "got off" but the anti-American one didn't (I would've -- had I not read the reasoning about the prior warnings first -- and I'm an American, not that that matters in a global community).

From there, you're points kinds of split and intermesh like you were kind of... high... when you posted. What was your point, besides the fact that this forum is anti-American, Sinuhue got off too easily, you have a penchant for sniper smilies (never a good thing), and that a well typed post is responded to less often than short quips?

Granted, there are some people who come on here and say something completely baseless (We saved your asses in WWII :sniper: :sniper: ) and then they get roasted. Those individuals deserve to get roasted because they're dim witted morons who don't understand history. Then you get your people who said that the War of 1812 was a decisive Canadian victory because the White House was burnt down. The second an American who knows their history and that nothing about the War of 1812 was decisive, they get flamed. .

I refute that kind of nonsense about history all the time Manawsistan and I rarely get flamed. I don't always think the person on the other end is reading what I write, but hey, one does what one can.

There are a lot of opinions on this board. Some are flat anti American, some are bigoted, some are well intentioned but wrong and some are also pro American (and wrong too..chuckle). Thats free speech for you. There are plenty of defenders of America on the boards. Some of them aren't superpatriots or ignorant either. But some are and they don't help us very much. But thats free speech as well.

Woohoo!

I second this.

So what did we learn from all this kids?

DON'T EVER FEED THE TROLLS

But, she didn't feed a troll. She just made a joke that was taken the wrong way.

But, she didn't feed a troll. She just made a joke that was taken the wrong way.
Trolling comment about Canadians > response

the definition of feeding trolls

Trolling comment about Canadians > response

the definition of feeding trolls

Ah. Didn't read the other posts!

Ah, censorship. It's a wonderful thing. :rolleyes:

Recite for me the exact reason why our 'beloved' forum member was banned in the first place.

Poster in question made a 'joke' and was banned because the line between 'joke' and 'troll' are so thinly veiled on an internet message board, it's difficult for a moderator tell which. As such, Cog had to set a precident. Unfortunately, Cog backed down under the pressure of people who feel that the rules should be bent for someone who they like. Yes, I said it. If this were a less popular poster, he/she would still be banned right now. I feel no guilt for saying that.

Now I'm not going to be hypocritical and say that I was only joking when I said that this forum is anti-American. We could go around in circles forever that way. I prefer to stick to my guns and not be soft. I still believe that this forum is generally anti-USA, and I'll keep thinking that way until I see otherwise. Anytime the word America is brought up, there are significantly more people who come on and have something rotten to say compared to the people who have something generally nice to say. Granted, there are some people who come on here and say something completely baseless (We saved your asses in WWII :sniper: :sniper: ) and then they get roasted. Those individuals deserve to get roasted because they're dim witted morons who don't understand history. Then you get your people who said that the War of 1812 was a decisive Canadian victory because the White House was burnt down. The second an American who knows their history and that nothing about the War of 1812 was decisive, they get flamed.

You say that the vocal minority are the ones who form my opinion. You're entirely correct. When you go down through a thread, which are you more likely to be emotionally moved (in any direction) by? A long well thought out post that has sources and a coherent flow or a one liner that makes a sweeping generalization. I know which one made me mash the 'reply' button more quickly, and from all outward appearances, it looks like it did the same thing for you. ;) Now, logically, the big post that has a lot of info is going to make me think more, and I'm not going to want to reply so much, unless it's a topic I really know my stuff about (like nuclear power or some other physics topic). It's easier to be dumb and write a really quick dart when you are convinced that the other party is also dumb. It's harder to keep up with someone who actually knows what they're talking about unless you indeed know what you're talking about as well.

Overall, I'll agree with you. This forum is somewhat enlightening, some threads are actually quite informative when you post based on logic and not emotion.

My problem is with people who stifle debate by saying things like 'this board is blindly anti-American'. You are free to hold your opinion. I'm free to consider someone who based their opinion of a board on a few posters a waste of my breath. It's kind of like europeans who judge all Americans by a vocal minority. Oh, wait, that wouldn't be what you're complaining about, would it?

*Ring, Ring*
"Hello"
"Pot?"
"Yes, who's this?"
"Oh, it's the kettle. You're black!"

Yes, indeed.

A compounding problem is that text form doesn't carry tone-of-voice or body language unless you take the time and effort to describe it in your text. Since these carry a lot of meaning, you have to be careful in any medium where these are stripped out. When I read the involved posts, Rogue Newbie and Sinuhue both looked quite serious (at least, to me).

As for the disparity in punishments, Sinuhue has a longer list of prior offenses than Rogue Newbie.

Another note: While friendly jests are allowed to SOME mild extent, playflaming and playtrolling are discouraged.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Thanks Cog...and I will be more careful to make my intent clearer in the future...as well as avoiding statements which, joking or not, will doubtless be found offensive.

Trolling comment about Canadians > response

the definition of feeding trolls
I admit it...in hindsight, I got caught with my hand full of cheezies (which everyone knows are a troll's favourite food....).

Have we learned NOTHING from Gremilins 1,2 and 3?

Well, I guess I have now :eek:

I admit it...in hindsight, I got caught with my hand full of cheezies (which everyone knows are a troll's favourite food....).

Have we learned NOTHING from Gremilins 1,2 and 3?

Well, I guess I have now :eek:

Now about that hoo hoo.

Look, I made an unpopular comment!
Yes, they made an exception for Sinuhue. Not because of her popularity, but because of a misinterpretation of a sardonic remark in a post. If you read it carefully, it was in response to a person who made an equally (syntactically, et al) distasteful remark about Canadians.

Note that this poster's original sentence wasn't to be forum banned. Note that noone whined about how the anti-Canadian one "got off" but the anti-American one didn't (I would've -- had I not read the reasoning about the prior warnings first -- and I'm an American, not that that matters in a global community).

From there, you're points kinds of split and intermesh like you were kind of... high... when you posted. What was your point, besides the fact that this forum is anti-American, Sinuhue got off too easily, you have a penchant for sniper smilies (never a good thing), and that a well typed post is responded to less often than short quips?

Well, my response was basically a point by point explanation of my one liner earlier. The whole thing about internet message boards (not just this one) is that if someone says something inflammatory, they can get off seemingly scott free by just saying that they were joking, as Jocabia did. Was he/she joking when he/she said that Sinuhue was right in saying that Americans were inbred hicks? How am I supposed to know that? I just know what was written down, and that's what I responded to. That's sort of what Cog was saying in the post above the one that you just responded to.

So now I'll make a very clear and defined change of subject.
I submit this to you. If half of General did not start lambasting Cog's policies over Sinuhue, would said poster still be banned right now? I would say yes. Honestly, if it were I who was banned, would you go and make a post on the Mods forum asking why I was treated so unfairly? I don't know you as a person, but I'm willing to bet quite a few internet dollars that you (or anyone else in General, for that matter) would not. This is because my post count is low, and I don't say things that people like to hear. Perhaps with time I'll get my own posse, but I'm not holding my breath, and frankly it's unimportant to me.

Oh, and the bit with the sniper smilies, I was using that as an example of a bad pro-American post. I actually despise using that smilie.



I refute that kind of nonsense about history all the time Manawsistan and I rarely get flamed. I don't always think the person on the other end is reading what I write, but hey, one does what one can.

There are a lot of opinions on this board. Some are flat anti American, some are bigoted, some are well intentioned but wrong and some are also pro American (and wrong too..chuckle). Thats free speech for you. There are plenty of defenders of America on the boards. Some of them aren't superpatriots or ignorant either. But some are and they don't help us very much. But thats free speech as well.

Some people read it, some people just go around looking for what they want to respond to and forget everything else. I've already said once that I'm as guilty of doing this as anyone else.


My problem is with people who stifle debate by saying things like 'this board is blindly anti-American'. You are free to hold your opinion. I'm free to consider someone who based their opinion of a board on a few posters a waste of my breath. It's kind of like europeans who judge all Americans by a vocal minority. Oh, wait, that wouldn't be what you're complaining about, would it?

*Ring, Ring*
"Hello"
"Pot?"
"Yes, who's this?"
"Oh, it's the kettle. You're black!"

I raise my eyebrow at your post. What debate did I stifle? I created a debate with my statement, did I not? You were just trying to make mindless fluffle posts (see this one above me that you made, that's a mindless fluffle post. postcount++, eh comrade?) and I saw something I didn't like. I may hate America just as much as the vocal minority, I just wouldn't lead on. What would you say if I were to say I were playing Devil's Advocate this whole time just to get a rise out of you (I sure did, didn't I)? Well, I guess it would be the same kind of response that I made when you said that you were just joking. You would discard it as rubbish and make a funny because you know that your fluffle buddies would find it hilarious. You read my post and you saw something you didn't like and you pulled out a cliche. I'm not going to even bother telling you what you just told me (Pot? Kettle; black), because we could go on like this for days. I, however, tire of your internet cliches and will respectfully bow out of this popularity contest.

I admit it...in hindsight, I got caught with my hand full of cheezies (which everyone knows are a troll's favourite food....).

Have we learned NOTHING from Gremilins 1,2 and 3?

Well, I guess I have now :eek:
It happens to everyone... I've been pushed to the edge too up to where I responded angrily. Luckily I got off with a warning

Next time just click the little crossy thing in the top right of the window ;)

:fluffle: to cheer you up if you promise to be nice

Now about that hoo hoo.
Don't make me scalp you.

~Stabs Sumamba Buwhan to death and sells the body on the illegal international slave market~

Nothing to see here. Please move along.


*Snaps fingers and you wake up to realize that you were under hypnosis and had just murdered your own mother*

*points and laughs*

Look, I made an unpopular comment!


Well, my response was basically a point by point explanation of my one liner earlier. The whole thing about internet message boards (not just this one) is that if someone says something inflammatory, they can get off seemingly scott free by just saying that they were joking, as Jocabia did. Was he/she joking when he/she said that Sinuhue was right in saying that Americans were inbred hicks? How am I supposed to know that? I just know what was written down, and that's what I responded to. That's sort of what Cog was saying in the post above the one that you just responded to.

So now I'll make a very clear and defined change of subject.
I submit this to you. If half of General did not start lambasting Cog's policies over Sinuhue, would said poster still be banned right now? I would say yes. Honestly, if it were I who was banned, would you go and make a post on the Mods forum asking why I was treated so unfairly? I don't know you as a person, but I'm willing to bet quite a few internet dollars that you (or anyone else in General, for that matter) would not. This is because my post count is low, and I don't say things that people like to hear. Perhaps with time I'll get my own posse, but I'm not holding my breath, and frankly it's unimportant to me.
I'm going to give you my two cents on this one:).

Cog has a reputation for being pretty fair. As do most of the mods. They take things as far as possible in context, but they also must take things in FULL context...meaning that they consider previous infractions and poster history into account when making a ruling. One can ALWAYS appeal, and have the ruling reviewed. In this case, the ruling was reviewed, and the mods discussed it. Was it because I'm a 'popular' poster (wow...when did I get THAT label?), or was it because:

a) a review was requested AND
b) a review was made

OR was it done because for some reason the mods are 'afraid' of General posters and give in to their will for fear of some sort of nebulous internet retribution?

Conspiracy theories aside, I really don't think there is a case to be made for favouritism. I still deserve a warning for the comment, which I have been given. I am still on thin ice because of previous infractions, and much more likely to be DEATed if I push it, than say, YOU would be.

I have apologised for my comment, and will willingly do so again. I apologise. I do not really believe this about Americans, and was simply making fun of a stereotype that really, you could apply to ANY nationality if you really wanted to, and still be just as wrong.

Dont you guys have a life?

Dont you guys have a life?

Not for eight years. Woohoo.

I really intend to leave this thread, but since the namesake of this thread has posted on my diatribe, I might as well respond, eh?
I'm going to give you my two cents on this one:).
(cut for the sake of bandwidth)

Understood, but I'm just saying that there would be no request made if it were a less popular poster. And yes, I suppose I'll be the one to bestow that title if nobody else has. You had no less than two threads dedicated to your unfortunate demise. The original posts in this thread make it seem like the Queen was assassinated or something.


One always has the ability to appeal, on one condition. If you're banned, you have to get someone else on the forum to do the appeal for you. If you don't have at least one person to post your side of the case vicariously, you're gone and that's that. Follow me? Let's say I get a 10 day ban for this post. Now, if Manawskistan has a hidden fan club on this forum, at least one of them is going to go on the Mods board and say "WTF mate?" and then the mod crew is going to feel obligated to review the case because there is at least one person who challenges the ruling.

Now if I were fairly new and don't post that often in General and don't have people who are partial to my posts, nobody's going to call that ruling into question. Why should they? It's not like a lack of me for 10 days is going to have any affect on their lives. In fact, according to some of the individuals on this thread, they'd probably attack anyone who lobbied for my reinstatement. ;) However, a lack of Sinuhue for what appeared to be 5 days had a major effect on a lot of people's lives and they all went to the Mod Board and made a post right here on General.

There's no tin-foil hats going on here. That's not what I was trying to say. The mod crew couldn't care less (I presume) if some people stopped posting because one of their cronies got temporarily (that's the one thing I find totally funny about this situation) banned. I'm just saying that the representation that a person has will dictate how the mod crew may respond to anything adverse that happens to that person.

Edit: I knew as well as most people on here that you were indeed joking. Most of what my argument is involves a matter of principle rather than a facetious stab at American culture.

Look, I made an unpopular comment!


Well, my response was basically a point by point explanation of my one liner earlier. The whole thing about internet message boards (not just this one) is that if someone says something inflammatory, they can get off seemingly scott free by just saying that they were joking, as Jocabia did. Was he/she joking when he/she said that Sinuhue was right in saying that Americans were inbred hicks? How am I supposed to know that? I just know what was written down, and that's what I responded to. That's sort of what Cog was saying in the post above the one that you just responded to.

So now I'll make a very clear and defined change of subject.
I submit this to you. If half of General did not start lambasting Cog's policies over Sinuhue, would said poster still be banned right now? I would say yes. Honestly, if it were I who was banned, would you go and make a post on the Mods forum asking why I was treated so unfairly? I don't know you as a person, but I'm willing to bet quite a few internet dollars that you (or anyone else in General, for that matter) would not. This is because my post count is low, and I don't say things that people like to hear. Perhaps with time I'll get my own posse, but I'm not holding my breath, and frankly it's unimportant to me.

Oh, and the bit with the sniper smilies, I was using that as an example of a bad pro-American post. I actually despise using that smilie.




Some people read it, some people just go around looking for what they want to respond to and forget everything else. I've already said once that I'm as guilty of doing this as anyone else.



I raise my eyebrow at your post. What debate did I stifle? I created a debate with my statement, did I not? You were just trying to make mindless fluffle posts (see this one above me that you made, that's a mindless fluffle post. postcount++, eh comrade?) and I saw something I didn't like. I may hate America just as much as the vocal minority, I just wouldn't lead on. What would you say if I were to say I were playing Devil's Advocate this whole time just to get a rise out of you (I sure did, didn't I)? Well, I guess it would be the same kind of response that I made when you said that you were just joking. You would discard it as rubbish and make a funny because you know that your fluffle buddies would find it hilarious. You read my post and you saw something you didn't like and you pulled out a cliche. I'm not going to even bother telling you what you just told me (Pot? Kettle; black), because we could go on like this for days. I, however, tire of your internet cliches and will respectfully bow out of this popularity contest.

First, you should work on your reading. I never suggested that Sinuhue was right in what she said. I only suggested she was joking. What did I get off scott free for?

You didn't get a rise out of me. You used all the logical fallacies. A few people do this, so the whole board is like this. It can't be that the moderators reviewed her case and realized that what she did was NOT trolling (read the definition), it must be favouritism. She got away with it because it was anti-american sentiment (ignoring that she was handed a harsher punishment for the anti-american comment than her anti-canadian counterpart).

Once again, you try to stifle debate by saying it's a popularity contest. I bet you use other logical fallacies too, like I'm older so I know better, or I'm more educated so I can't possibly wrong.

It would be nice if you used evidence rather choosing to ignore evidenct, but that's probably asking too much.

Oh, by the way, in the bolded part, you admitted to trolling. Go complain to the mods that they played favorites and didn't punish you properly.

--snip--

Duely noted.

Yay, I used duely in a sentence.

...and spelled it wrong. D-U-L-Y.

Sorry. Teacher. Inveterate spell-checker. Can't help myself. Smeep. Gooby gooby gooby gabba gabba hey. Weird mood this morning.

...and spelled it wrong. D-U-L-Y.

Sorry. Teacher. Inveterate spell-checker. Can't help myself. Smeep. Gooby gooby gooby gabba gabba hey. Weird mood this morning.

Actually, I wasn't sure on the spelling. Checked it and chose to leave it misspelled because I'm a sucker for attention. Thank you for giving it to me.

I don't have time to read everything in this topic, only to respond to this one point.

I submit this to you. If half of General did not start lambasting Cog's policies over Sinuhue, would said poster still be banned right now? I would say yes.Actually, the correct answer is "No".

My consultation with other Moderators over this case occured independently of the protest in "Moderation". In fact, I hadn't even noticed the topic in "Moderation" about it until after we [the other Mods and I] decided to reverse my judgment. The reversal of my decision would have happened, anyway, even if the general public had remained silent.

If anyone has any questions or comments regarding NationStates policy or rules enforcement, then post in "Moderation". Thank you.

iLock.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator