I'm a former IC ZZL/P Mod = AMA

[NOVAHEEL13]

How many posters have actually complained? Handful? Isn't that what snoop invited? And isn't there just as much effort by those arguing why the bans were fair and vice versa? I mean that is the nature of the thread.

clearly you don't know what an AMA is

 

[gtyellowjacket]

I wonder if any of the posters spending near 30 pages arguing why their bans were wrong... realize that in the world of unpaid message board moderating, I'd almost guarantee an unspoken part of the decision to give somebody a lifetime ban is knowing that you will never have to argue with this particular poster again who is psychologically incapable of backing down and admitting he is wrong... and will continue arguing for the rest of his life rather than risk having to do so.

I was asked a couple times to become a moderator. This thread reminds me why I refused. The length that some people will go to prove they are right and the rest of the world is wrong... makes me want to kill puppies.

I guess but in the world of unpaid discussion boards, is there some expectation of applying the rules evenly?

Lols. Thinking about it now, of course not. Folks run off people they don't like all the time be it other team's fans or people of a different political persuasion or any reason at all. You're right and I'm not really sure why I had that in my head.

 

[SnoopRob]

I wonder if any of the posters spending near 30 pages arguing why their bans were wrong... realize that in the world of unpaid message board moderating, I'd almost guarantee an unspoken part of the decision to give somebody a lifetime ban is knowing that you will never have to argue with this particular poster again who is psychologically incapable of backing down and admitting he is wrong... and will continue arguing for the rest of his life rather than risk having to do so.

As if being banned would stop people from arguing that their ban was unjust.



We had folks PM us for months and months after a permaban was put into place to try to argue their innocence or that the ban was unfair. After a couple of exchanges and with nothing new to add, we'd just ignore them and let them tire themselves out arguing.

But there is a bit of truth to what you're saying, but not quite in the way you're seeing it. Folks like the ones on here who post in this manner typically don't only begin this once a ban is put in, but their normal posting style was already like this before any bans were entered. And the fact that they often ping around the board posting like this, which largely isn't conducive to great discussion, does often end up playing a role in that banning them doesn't take much away from the greater board.

As I said previously, as mods we often viewed the board as a kind of online bar and if a particularly poster could best be described as the obnoxious drunk who annoys everyone at the bar, then that certainly factored into the decision-making as to when to be done with that poster.

 

[Rock]

As if being banned would stop people from arguing that their ban was unjust.



We had folks PM us for months and months after a permaban was put into place to try to argue their innocence or that the ban was unfair. After a couple of exchanges and with nothing new to add, we'd just ignore them and let them tire themselves out arguing.

But there is a bit of truth to what you're saying, but not quite in the way you're seeing it. Folks like the ones on here who post in this manner typically don't only begin this once a ban is put in, but their normal posting style was already like this before any bans were entered. And the fact that they often ping around the board posting like this, which largely isn't conducive to great discussion, does often end up playing a role in that banning them doesn't take much away from the greater board.

As I said previously, as mods we often viewed the board as a kind of online bar and if a particularly poster could best be described as the obnoxious drunk who annoys everyone at the bar, then that certainly factored into the decision-making as to when to be done with that poster.

That latter point is exactly how I always viewed it and a huge problem that KUs 247 site currently has because the current moderators think that "free speech" is all that matters. Amusingly, this belief of theirs only causes more problems for them and just leads to the board getting fewer readers and worse and worse quality.

 

[hedge]

clearly you don't know what an AMA is

What is it?

 

[UNCatTech]

I don't know. Its more than he claimed which brings into question his other claims. That's why I think it's relevant and I brought it up.

Sorry, I meant is it a high enough percentage to be relevant.

It is clearly relevant to many here.

I can understand. This is an opportunity to better understand, I'd take it too if I had questions.

 

[UNCatTech]

Even with regard to sexuality. Would the average person describe a Catholic Priest as "abnormal" because they have taken a vow of celibacy? I guaran-damn-tee you that if you ever hear a person use the word "abnormal" in reference to a Catholic priest it will be an attack on them and not a description of them. You know it, and I know it.

Exactly, we don't typically use abnormal in these contexts except to be mean for no reason.

Sure, I agree.

But does ZenMode seem like someone who has changed substantially for the better?

I don't know enough about him and I don't have the reference of his other user name for comparison.

As I said, I don't know him, but he seems to be hedging his bets on the homosexuality discussion with this adherence to the binary normal vs abnormal.

 

[NOVAHEEL13]

What is it?

Ask Me Anything. It's not a ask a question then argue/ignore/move goal posts and repeat ad nauseam because you don't like the answer. One or two back and forth posts with follows for clarity. Sure. 30 pages of festivus-level greivance airing about biased internet mods simply because the answer didn't meet some arbitrary level of satisfaction. No

either Snoop is bored, recently finished a project and now has time on his hands to respond to their tantrums OR this is the greatest stealth thread of all time,

 

[SmilingJack]

Can we change the title to the festivus contemplating my navel thead?

 

[HeelInTheOzarks]

Been on vacation for a week…come back and see this shitshow of a thread. Actually read the whole thing and my God, the victimhood/grievance mentality is off the charts. How are there people this soft and mentally weak? Getting banned from an internet message board is not like getting unfairly fired from a job, erroneously charged with a crime, etc. But apparently people took this stuff incredibly seriously. Wow.

 

[Centerpiece]

I wonder if any of the posters spending near 30 pages arguing why their bans were wrong... realize that in the world of unpaid message board moderating, I'd almost guarantee an unspoken part of the decision to give somebody a lifetime ban is knowing that you will never have to argue with this particular poster again who is psychologically incapable of backing down and admitting he is wrong... and will continue arguing for the rest of his life rather than risk having to do so.

I was asked a couple times to become a moderator. This thread reminds me why I refused. The length that some people will go to prove they are right and the rest of the world is wrong... makes me want to kill puppies.

Please, not the puppies. Please.

 

[ColdBlueSteel]

Been on vacation for a week…come back and see this shitshow of a thread. Actually read the whole thing and my God, the victimhood/grievance mentality is off the charts. How are there people this soft and mentally weak? Getting banned from an internet message board is not like getting unfairly fired from a job, erroneously charged with a crime, etc. But apparently people took this stuff incredibly seriously. Wow.

It’s abnormal behavior for sure

 

[Centerpiece]

So most bans were for breaking board rules and/or being an obnoxious drunk in the bar and not leaving when asked nicely or simply refused to play nicely in the same sandbox with other attendees at the pub? Correct?

 

[farce©]

So most bans were for breaking board rules and/or being an obnoxious drunk in the bar and not leaving when asked nicely or simply refused to play nicely in the same sandbox with other attendees at the pub? Correct?

Or just consistently being fucking annoying.

 

[EhringhausSouth]

As if being banned would stop people from arguing that their ban was unjust.



We had folks PM us for months and months after a permaban was put into place to try to argue their innocence or that the ban was unfair. After a couple of exchanges and with nothing new to add, we'd just ignore them and let them tire themselves out arguing.

But there is a bit of truth to what you're saying, but not quite in the way you're seeing it. Folks like the ones on here who post in this manner typically don't only begin this once a ban is put in, but their normal posting style was already like this before any bans were entered. And the fact that they often ping around the board posting like this, which largely isn't conducive to great discussion, does often end up playing a role in that banning them doesn't take much away from the greater board.

As I said previously, as mods we often viewed the board as a kind of online bar and if a particularly poster could best be described as the obnoxious drunk who annoys everyone at the bar, then that certainly factored into the decision-making as to when to be done with that poster.

Wait, people got permabans and kept messaging after the mods stopped responding, for months? LOL

 

[SnoopRob]

So most bans were for breaking board rules and/or being an obnoxious drunk in the bar and not leaving when asked nicely or simply refused to play nicely in the same sandbox with other attendees at the pub? Correct?

I don't know that anyone was actually banned solely for being the obnoxious drunk. There had to be some rules broken before someone would be banned.

But being if someone acts a fool long enough, they'll eventually go over the line and break some rules. And that is when the lack of any further grace typically came out.

 

[NOVAHEEL13]

I don't know that anyone was actually banned solely for being the obnoxious drunk. There had to be some rules broken before someone would be banned.

But being if someone acts a fool long enough, they'll eventually go over the line and break some rules. And that is when the lack of any further grace typically came out.

nasa gave me a 7 day ban for obnoxious drunk posting but, as I said 24 pages ago, I probably deserved it

 

[bumeister]

I got banned once (during the Katrina thread, in fact) because they thought I was wtz. Which in hindsight is pretty fucking insulting.

 

[heel79]

I only got banned once. But I asked fur it. Literally. Needed a break And got one for 24 hours.

 

[hedge]

Ask Me Anything. It's not a ask a question then argue/ignore/move goal posts and repeat ad nauseam because you don't like the answer. One or two back and forth posts with follows for clarity. Sure. 30 pages of festivus-level greivance airing about biased internet mods simply because the answer didn't meet some arbitrary level of satisfaction. No

Upvote for festivus-level greivance airing...