pope Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 catbirdseat said: This person was interested in how people get "kicked out" (banned). They seemed to think it was a pretty arbitrary process. Is it? I said I thought those who got banned generally deserved it. Your mystery man/woman is asking a question that is common to many of us. Just WHAT ARE THE STANDARDS FOR BANNING? When we study the behavior of those who are banned and those who are not, the logic applied in these considerations is imperceptible. Take for example an all-too-typical offering from one of our finest: glassgowkiss said: pope you just don't know when to shut the fuck up. why don't you get your pansy ass down here to b-ham and i will give you something to cry about looser. you are just another sheep shagger. Insults, threats, vulgarity, poor sentence structure.....and this wasn't even posted in "SPRAY". I'm very curious to know, have standards been established for guiding the banning decisions, or is it as political as it seems? An associated question is also appropriate. When we register to use the features of this site and to contribute to the discussions, each of us agrees to conditions for participation. Is it possible to point to violations of this code which would seem to justify some of the recent bannings? Quote
Cpt.Caveman Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 It's about the bolts on this one.... Clearly. If you are in support of rap bolting you will never be banned and if you are a so called PNW well known climber you will get a featured forum as Peter Puget has. Bummer. Quote
scott_harpell Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 i wanna be famous so i can have my NEW VODKA FORUM! Quote
catbirdseat Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 I'd say that poor sentence structure is an unforgivable sin. Winston Churchill, after receiving a Minute issued by a priggish civil servant, objecting to the ending of a sentence with a preposition and the use of a dangling participle in official documents, Churchill red pencilled in the margin: "This is the sort of pedantry up with which I will not put." Quote
pope Posted December 3, 2003 Author Posted December 3, 2003 Turd Burglar said: I'd say that poor sentence structure is an unforgivable sin. Grounds for banning? That would cut the cc.com traffic by a healthy fraction. Quote
catbirdseat Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 I'd say that poor sentence structure is an unforgivable sin. There pope, is that better? The little nurd guy was supposed to be there so you'd know it was a facetious statement. Quote
cracked Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 catbirdseat said: I'd say that poor sentence structure is an unforgivable sin. There pope, is that better? The little nurd guy was supposed to be there so you'd know it was a facetious statement. Don't make fun of the kid in the short bus, catbird. It's not his fault he's like that. Quote
AlpineK Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Pope this is for you Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you." Quote
cracked Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 AlpineK said: Pope this is for you Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you." Quote
Cpt.Caveman Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Fuck off. Dawyner- I dont see eye to eye but respect him as the man he is and his beliefs. IF I agree or not with them is another matter. To ban him is just shitheadclimbers.com Quote
marylou Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 It seems to me that D's banning had more to do with the repeated beating of the dead horse than about the subject matter itself. I don't even think it was because his arguments were faulty, inconsistent, and full of bombast. I think it was all about the poor dead horse. The thing is dead, please, please stop beating on it. Quote
Cpt.Caveman Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 marylou said: It seems to me that D's banning had more to do with the repeated beating of the dead horse than about the subject matter itself. I don't even think it was because his arguments were faulty, inconsistent, and full of bombast. I think it was all about the poor dead horse. The thing is dead, please, please stop beating on it. Yes he was not out of line. Bring him back NOW Quote
Cpt.Caveman Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Take me down to the Paradise City Where the Grass is green and the girls are pretty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote
RobBob Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Take me up to the North Pole city, where the elves have pointed hats and ti... shoes.... Quote
Beck Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 is this some kind of religious climber's chat room? is there a HIDDEN AGENDA to the seemingly random manipulation of CC.com by the man behind the curtain? biblical revelations explaining this shit? WOAH, stop the cart! Quote
allthumbs Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 "oh lord, won'tcha buy me, a mercedes benz"? Quote
nonanon Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Ezekial??? That was Quentin Tarantino you bonehead! Dwanyer was banned because he showed us for the hypocrites we are. We love bolts, but we hate ourselves for needing them. Quote
allthumbs Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 nonanon said: Ezekial??? That was Quentin Tarantino you bonehead! "I don't think there's anything to be afraid of. Failure brings great rewards.” Quote
jon Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 The reason for banning purely has to do with the mood the moderator. Like for instance if I'm in a good mood I will just send the person to PM politely asking them to knock it off. On the other hand if I am in a mood like I am today, which seems to be a reoccuring theme, I really don't give a shit what you think and will ban people just so I feel better. I don't know what it is about banning people, maybe the sudden rush of endorphines from my pituitary gland, that makes it so fun. Quote
Formaldehead Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 jon said: The reason for banning purely has to do with the mood the moderator. Like for instance if I'm in a good mood I will just send the person to PM politely asking them to knock it off. On the other hand if I am in a mood like I am today, which seems to be a reoccuring theme, I really don't give a shit what you think and will ban people just so I feel better. I don't know what it is about banning people, maybe the sudden rush of endorphines from my pituitary gland, that makes it so fun. "Moods are for cattle and love play" Why'd Necro get banned? Did it make you hard, when you hit the button and cut him off from the rest of the world?? Quote
klenke Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 It should be noted that none of us except Jon and Timmy "own" this site. It is at their whim to ban, unban, cuss out, slobber over, spit at, or otherwise through a medium that is of their making. But, moderators, on the other hand... Possible solution: rotating moderators. Or make it an elected position maybe once a year. If we as users feel that any one (or more) moderator is getting too big for his britches or her panties, then we can simply vote the lame Locke out of his/her office. But Jon and Timmy shall lord supreme. Gods to us ordinary cc.com mortals. Quote
minx Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 lets add banning to the list of topics that have been beaten to death and quit wasting time with it. it is an arbitrary decision. yeah sometimes i'd like to know why but since jon and tim haven't set any standards for it it's a waste of time to argue about it. Quote
Formaldehead Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 minx said: lets add banning to the list of topics that have been beaten to death and quit wasting time with it. Do you feel the same way about the Holocaust? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.