YesNoOk
avatar

Warnings v2 (Read 2948507 times)

Started by Valodim, February 07, 2010, 09:40:57 pm
View printable version
« previous next »
Page 49 of 183← First < 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 183 > Last →   Go Down

OZ

Re: Warnings v2
#961  April 04, 2012, 12:54:19 am
  • ******
  • ಠ_ಠ
i feel like three months may be a tad excessive

similar reactions have often net less
ಠ_ಠ

Iced

Re: Warnings v2
#962  April 04, 2012, 12:59:19 am
  • ******
  • 日本は素晴らしい国です。
hey he said "three is the perfect measure"!
( I have already changed it )
Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 01:13:35 am by Iced

Rajaa Retired

Re: Warnings v2
#963  April 04, 2012, 08:31:36 am
  • avatar
  • ******
    • Thailand
Last Edit: April 04, 2012, 08:35:15 am by Seincat

Rajaa Retired

Re: Warnings v2
#964  April 06, 2012, 06:03:58 pm
  • avatar
  • ******
    • Thailand

Mog

Re: Warnings v2
#965  April 06, 2012, 08:53:39 pm
  • avatar
  • *****
That thread is a feedback to warnings thread.  I don't think it's right that you banned him after I asked him a question about his previous banning.  If people can't discuss their "horrible behavior" to try to figure out just exactly what other people thought was so horrible about it and they can't respond to a staff question IN a thread that is supposed to be about feedback without some other staff member telling them to shut up, then ban them, then may as well lock the thread.  Seriously, I asked the guy a question, I had to leave for a bit and I come back to see how he responded and he's banned?

 :S

Thedge

Re: Warnings v2
#966  April 06, 2012, 09:01:33 pm
  • *****
  • Lazy spriter
  • Demon in heaven gotta carry a knife
    • Bolivia
    • network.mugenguild.com/thedge/
You can get an idea of what he's been doing from his answers on that thread.
I see your point, and we should take note of that on the future, but, he was unsaveable, he keeps repeating himself for a while now with that "illstop-pum! on stupid subjects" behaviour.
That’s when I thought, “good grief”
Just ain’t my belief
Until I saw the holes
Inside his hand

OZ

Re: Warnings v2
#967  April 06, 2012, 09:05:34 pm
  • ******
  • ಠ_ಠ
edit: ninja'd

but he wasn't still posting in that thread to discuss why he was banned
that was never his objective

his last three posts didn't even mention your question
all he was posting was that he would stop posting while continuing to throw in jabs


if he had legitimately wanted to discuss why he had been banned before, and that's what he had been posting about, he wouldn't be banned now
ಠ_ಠ

Rajaa Retired

Re: Warnings v2
#968  April 06, 2012, 09:07:03 pm
  • avatar
  • ******
    • Thailand
MissBHaven said, April 06, 2012, 08:53:39 pm
That thread is a feedback to warnings thread.  I don't think it's right that you banned him after I asked him a question about his previous banning.  If people can't discuss their "horrible behavior" to try to figure out just exactly what other people thought was so horrible about it and they can't respond to a staff question IN a thread that is supposed to be about feedback without some other staff member telling them to shut up, then ban them, then may as well lock the thread.  Seriously, I asked the guy a question, I had to leave for a bit and I come back to see how he responded and he's banned?

 :S
I thought you were doing your usual "airhead" gimmick in that thread and didn't really want to know about his bans.

This goes beyond the scope of you asking him a question and you wanting an answer. You should have already known about his previous bans as a moderator of this forum, as they happened when you were online and active.

OZ

Re: Warnings v2
#969  April 06, 2012, 09:09:19 pm
  • ******
  • ಠ_ಠ
ಠ_ಠ

Mog

Re: Warnings v2
#970  April 06, 2012, 09:27:43 pm
  • avatar
  • *****
Seincat said, April 06, 2012, 09:07:03 pm
MissBHaven said, April 06, 2012, 08:53:39 pm
That thread is a feedback to warnings thread.  I don't think it's right that you banned him after I asked him a question about his previous banning.  If people can't discuss their "horrible behavior" to try to figure out just exactly what other people thought was so horrible about it and they can't respond to a staff question IN a thread that is supposed to be about feedback without some other staff member telling them to shut up, then ban them, then may as well lock the thread.  Seriously, I asked the guy a question, I had to leave for a bit and I come back to see how he responded and he's banned?

 :S
I thought you were doing your usual "airhead" gimmick in that thread and didn't really want to know about his bans.

This goes beyond the scope of you asking him a question and you wanting an answer. You should have already known about his previous bans as a moderator of this forum, as they happened when you were online and active.

As it happens I did want an answer.  I don't see everything the same way you guys do, I don't think anyone is "unsaveable" (except maybe vyx who actually managed to irritate me).  Most of you (imo) are overly aggressive in the way you deal with unpopular or potential trouble-causing members.  If you come across as being aggressive, mean, condescending, insulting, whatever else, then you can expect at least some kind of token resistance if not flat out defiance.   I don't want an answer from YOU about why he was banned, I wanted the answer from him. For him to put it into words... which he seemed to be doing.

What is the point of having a feedback thread if people get banned when they are asked to give feedback.

  :S

OZ

Re: Warnings v2
#971  April 06, 2012, 09:39:15 pm
  • ******
  • ಠ_ಠ
he wasn't banned for giving feedback

he was banned for his behavior and for his repeated failure to follow fairly clear-cut instructions from the staff

this started before your question and continued even after it
ಠ_ಠ
Last Edit: April 06, 2012, 09:43:42 pm by ಠ_ಠ

Jmorphman

Re: Warnings v2
#972  April 06, 2012, 09:41:38 pm
  • ******
  • If you’re gonna reach for a star...
  • reach for the lowest one you can.
    • USA
    • network.mugenguild.com/jmorphman
I know he was being a shithead, but permabanning him just seems premature.

MissBHaven said, April 06, 2012, 09:27:43 pm
I don't think anyone is "unsaveable" (except maybe vyx who actually managed to irritate me).  Most of you (imo) are overly aggressive in the way you deal with unpopular or potential trouble-causing members.  If you come across as being aggressive, mean, condescending, insulting, whatever else, then you can expect at least some kind of token resistance if not flat out defiance.
I agree with this.

Rajaa Retired

Re: Warnings v2
#973  April 06, 2012, 09:42:53 pm
  • avatar
  • ******
    • Thailand
MissBHaven said, April 06, 2012, 09:27:43 pm
Seincat said, April 06, 2012, 09:07:03 pm
MissBHaven said, April 06, 2012, 08:53:39 pm
That thread is a feedback to warnings thread.  I don't think it's right that you banned him after I asked him a question about his previous banning.  If people can't discuss their "horrible behavior" to try to figure out just exactly what other people thought was so horrible about it and they can't respond to a staff question IN a thread that is supposed to be about feedback without some other staff member telling them to shut up, then ban them, then may as well lock the thread.  Seriously, I asked the guy a question, I had to leave for a bit and I come back to see how he responded and he's banned?

 :S
I thought you were doing your usual "airhead" gimmick in that thread and didn't really want to know about his bans.

This goes beyond the scope of you asking him a question and you wanting an answer. You should have already known about his previous bans as a moderator of this forum, as they happened when you were online and active.

As it happens I did want an answer.  I don't see everything the same way you guys do, I don't think anyone is "unsaveable" (except maybe vyx who actually managed to irritate me).  Most of you (imo) are overly aggressive in the way you deal with unpopular or potential trouble-causing members.  If you come across as being aggressive, mean, condescending, insulting, whatever else, then you can expect at least some kind of token resistance if not flat out defiance.   I don't want an answer from YOU about why he was banned, I wanted the answer from him. For him to put it into words... which he seemed to be doing.

What is the point of having a feedback thread if people get banned when they are asked to give feedback.

  :S


I wasn't explaining to you why he was banned and I never did explain to you in any post in this thread or in the feedback thread. Like I said, I thought your post was part of your "airhead" gimmick and I didn't take it seriously. I tend to do that often with your posts.

Him explaining why he was banned would have accomplished nothing. I don't know what you're getting at.

But maybe you're right, I probably should have given him a 1000th chance to redeem himself after he went into a thread to do exactly what I was trying to tell him not to do through the privacy of personal messages, as not to derail threads. Or maybe I should have let him derail Titiln's review thread some more, you know, since he doesn't like Titiln and he HAS to post in a thread that says "Titiln Reviews Characters" and was started by Titiln himself.

Having him explain why was banned and what he's not sorry about would have definitely stopped him from doing that. Why didn't I think of that.

Thedge

Re: Warnings v2
#974  April 06, 2012, 09:46:08 pm
  • *****
  • Lazy spriter
  • Demon in heaven gotta carry a knife
    • Bolivia
    • network.mugenguild.com/thedge/
 :ninja: 'ed
As I said, we should have leaved him alone in that specific thread, we didn't and things turned out this way and he started his usual routine... that he was going to start sooner or later anywhere else.
I agree that the scenario where he was banned was not the best, but I totally agree with the banning, it's not the first or the second time he end up like that, it was really a sooner or later matter.
That’s when I thought, “good grief”
Just ain’t my belief
Until I saw the holes
Inside his hand

Mog

Re: Warnings v2
#975  April 06, 2012, 09:53:13 pm
  • avatar
  • *****
ಠ_ಠ said, April 06, 2012, 09:39:15 pm
he wasn't banned for giving feedback

he was banned for his behavior and for his repeated failure to follow fairly clear-cut instructions from the staff

this started before your question and continued even after it

In your opinion; what is the purpose of that feedback thread?


Rajaa, he apologized for the cheap shots at titiln and he admitted they were childish.  Do you have a reason to believe he lied about being sorry for that?  He was being an idiot in titiln's feedback thread, but that is an entirely different thread in a different section started for different reasons than the feedback thread.   You can't force people to like each other, but when one apologizes for bad behavior I dont think you should reward them with a ban.

 :S

OZ

Re: Warnings v2
#976  April 06, 2012, 10:03:57 pm
  • ******
  • ಠ_ಠ
MissBHaven said, April 06, 2012, 09:53:13 pm
He was being an idiot in titiln's feedback thread, but that is an entirely different thread in a different section started for different reasons than the feedback thread.

...from the feedback to warnings thread
Spoiler, click to toggle visibilty


no, his sorry was not genuine
his only purpose for posting at all was to take jabs at titiln

after his half-hearted apology/jab at the community he was asked to stop posting
to which he responded with two more identical apology/jabs

i'm not saying i would have banned him at that point, but i also don't feel rajaa was really out of line
ಠ_ಠ

Thedge

Re: Warnings v2
#977  April 06, 2012, 10:11:43 pm
  • *****
  • Lazy spriter
  • Demon in heaven gotta carry a knife
    • Bolivia
    • network.mugenguild.com/thedge/
Believing in his apologies at this point is like believing in vyx enterprises international.
That’s when I thought, “good grief”
Just ain’t my belief
Until I saw the holes
Inside his hand

Valodim

Re: Warnings v2
#978  April 06, 2012, 10:27:47 pm
  • ******
    • Germany
ಠ_ಠ said, April 06, 2012, 10:03:57 pm
Spoiler, click to toggle visibilty

That's a perfectly valid opinion in that thread about a recent staff thing, and by themselves I see no problem with those posts, although not many would agree with his opinion. stating it once would have been enough I guess, but that seemed to be his initial intention, as stated in his second post. he screwed up posting a third time on that page, mgbenz immediately called him out on it, and the thing was a lost cause from that point.

I was not here in the time when he was last banned so I have no opinion on the ban itself.

Iced

Re: Warnings v2
#979  April 06, 2012, 10:30:00 pm
  • ******
  • 日本は素晴らしい国です。
when no one was found agreeing with him he went to the titiln review thread and tried to do the same there.

Valodim

Re: Warnings v2
#980  April 06, 2012, 10:41:53 pm
  • ******
    • Germany
Page 49 of 183← First < 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 183 > Last →   Go Up
« previous next »