Fairyelfdog wrote:
Sod's not that bad that he would cause that much trouble, as feather points out though, a whole heap left DIF because of the 'free speech so long as its not questioning moderation' was applied.
Like I said...1 brown noser making a phone call is all it takes. I'm not sure you've been paying attention to everything thats been going on and why we were in conspiracy forums etc?

Me, paying attention? I've been way too busy! It's like this with me, Andyh, I understand the overall picture of the conspiracy-stuff. I know what it's about and in what direction it is going but I am way too busy with my life to pay attention to details and latest news and such also there are other aspects I am more interested in than the pure extroverted side of things. In ways it's like I'm living under a rock, with a few holes in it, but still.

Yes, that hypocrisy of the DIF admin was maddeningly annoying. Cognitive-Disonance-style but I see people here are guilty of that too to a certain degree. Thats okay, I love you anyway but I will point it out to you until I'm blue in the face.

Fairyelfdog wrote:
No, I don't agree.
We allow free speech in areas of the site where its possible to safely get away with it
Chat for example...pm's and so on.

Its about being careful and using some common sense is all.

Eg we need people to speak up against the establishment but what we do not need are raving lunatics leaving racist abuse for all to see on the forum...or potentially even worse, pedo stuff for example...then there are degrees of 'down the toilet' even worse than that. There's a tab at the top says 'rules' lol :p

andyh wrote:
Hm. You gotta excuse me*. Durin the last 24 hours I've had one majour life-change, three hours sleep and a cat. I really should not be writing on forums. I'm going to give you the win for now and think about it.

*Actually you don't but it's a very conversational thing to say. Fills out space. With words.

Fairyelfdog wrote:
Unfortunately, we don't have the option of "ignore" here. It must be reiterated again: this is NOT the dif.

I would also go along with the points already raised, as I feel it is of major importance to 'us' and what we are about: bannings don't tend to happen on the whim of a mod or anyone in admin.

Here, they occur because members complain or vote if someone is causing aggro. It's generally a consensus thing, unlike other forums.

Where there is victimisation or bullying involved (although I don't recall what the reasons behind this banning were) I'd say that's pretty much an open and shut case. I like that about this place, which is why I choose to return. If someone doesn't like that element of how we roll, I can't imagine why they'd be that bothered or indeed want to return?



EDIT: It would also make me think twice about returning if things were allowed to descend into the state that other forums seem to be OK with, and tbh, it would make a bit of a mockery of everything everyone here has worked so hard to achieve so far.

Fairyelfdog wrote:
Bypass censoring by censoring ourselves? Erm..

Its getting to be like fight club in here
1. Rule number 1, there are no rules.
2. Rule number 2, obey rule number 1.

I dont know .......sod in any of his guises, but if he made a commitment to follow the guidelines that the rest of the community feel is morally just, and then decides to piss on our cornflakes twice, I have to question the wisdom of letting him back in. Where do you draw the line, which apparently he has crossed more than once. Is it once, twice or thrice. And is it fair on the mods to expect them to do their job correctly, and then continually petition them to change the decision that was asked of them at first. How does the community grow in a positive direction, if we keep installing u turns to redecide on previous decisions.

Just my 2 pfennigs worh.

griswald

Griswald wrote:
Its simple enough to just ban him again if he does it again I suppose.
No big deal.
Maybe he'll show promise this time round? /shrugs.

Seriously neutral, because in all seriousness I don't know who Sod is.

I'm personally ok with giving the daft Sod another chance (even though he called me a cunt lol.) I'm not one to hold a grudge

But thats just me. Others here won't be so forgiving I fear, as daft Sod committed the cardinal sin: racism.

diamondgeezer wrote:
Not so much that it's a cardinal sin, DG, it's just that it is part of what we all agreed to when we joined. Once or twice is fine, but three times? What is the point of having guidelines (and subsequent 'bannings') at all if this is how it is here?

Any chance of a list of rules which MUST be adhered to
and
A list of rules which MAY be adhered to?
Otherwise it gets confusing as to why they exist at all.

Fair point Abs.

(by 'cardinal sin' btw, I mean that for some here, it really is that...they may be prepared to forgive many things, but they won't forgive that one. This has been made quite clear to admin by certain members).

feather wrote:
Good idea.

I'd say racism comes under the MUST category personally. For obvious reasons.

Can we also be clear that Sod wasn't given a 2nd chance.
He created another persona and took a second chance.
No apologies for his previous behaviour, no "hey I was just pushing your buttons for a laugh to see what you'd take, sorry for being a dick" just defiance of his ban.

diamondgeezer wrote:
I HATE racism. I hate all isms, tbh., but racism is the ultimate crass - and so stupid too: what's it meant to achive... because it doesn't!

I remember standing in a bus stop in London once, behind this kid of about 12 or so, a little mixed-race boy; when these fekkin yobs in their 20s came along and started calling him names - you know the ones; and standing there pointing and laughing at him. I got into a real frenzied slanging match with those busturds, and then so did others passing by.

And what had they achieved, except to make a little boy feel terrified and really bad about himself? He was trembling and trying not to cry, for appearance sake, and all I could really do was try to tell him, "I hope you don't think we all think that way".

All isms are shite, but racism should be an OUTTA HERE first time out of the trap!

diamondgeezer wrote:
Good stuff DG

feather wrote:
Hey Feather one thing this place has done is make me look at my own opinions beliefs etc and as long as it's making me selfreflect then that's great!

As for the rules? i don't seem them as rules, but more what we are willing to tolerate or not tolerate!

I suggest instead of a list of rules, let's have a list of tolerences.

lets make it clear what we will & wont tolerate

Roses by any other name bro.

When sod first joined, he behaved like a complete dick. Then capped it off with several racist comments.....

I and others reported those comments. Agreement was found that he should be banned.

Sod then socked up, spammed and got banned again.

Then on the day that Rodney King died, sod returned as sodneyking.........

Many of us have chatted to sod in chat and found it an ok experience. I've found several of his comments very funny. I've said both to sod and to the forum that I'd like him back IF he showed that he realised his own repsonsibility and showed respect to others.

As yet I don't think sod has contacted the admin team to discuss this at all, so this is a pretty pointless thread tbh.

In the absence of sod having contacted the admin, I vote NO, which is a shame because I think I'd quite like the real sod.