Sanctum Zone

Keyword
A+ A A-
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
Forgot your password? Forgot your username? Create an account

Poll: Should we ban Blue Tackler?

Yes Bar 12 66.7%
No Bar 4 22.2%
Just stop him posting Bar 2 11.1%
Total number of voters: 18 ( novum, Blue_Tackler, Evie, pheony, dantesrevival ) See more
Only registered users can participate to this poll

TOPIC: Blue Tackler's Membership Status

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:25 #181

  • 3point5
  • 3point5's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Junior Boarder
  • Rank2
  • Posts: 154
  • Thank you received: 261
  • Karma: 0
SilvaRizla wrote:
3point5 wrote:
If usual practice is a 1 week ban, followed by a 2 week ban, followed by a 4 week ban etc... then I really don't see why BT should be any different. If he's been trolling, 1 week ban. If he does it again, 2 week ban. Again? 4 week ban. He only needs to commit 6 offences and that's already over a year of bans. What makes BT special that he gets different treatment?

batou wrote:
I'm all too happy to ban people that are generally regarded as asshole's by the majority of users.

I think that's a slippery slope to go down. Just because people regard someone as an asshole I don't think that should warrant a ban.

Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.

@Dubs: Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.

Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.

Is it sinking in yet?

Then he should be put on his 2 week ban as this is his second offense.

If anyone thinks simply banning a user will stop them joining a forum if they want to, they're very sadly msitaken.
Warning!!! User may offer a differing opinion. If in doubt, accuse of shilling.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:27 #182

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
3point5 wrote:
SilvaRizla wrote:
3point5 wrote:
If usual practice is a 1 week ban, followed by a 2 week ban, followed by a 4 week ban etc... then I really don't see why BT should be any different. If he's been trolling, 1 week ban. If he does it again, 2 week ban. Again? 4 week ban. He only needs to commit 6 offences and that's already over a year of bans. What makes BT special that he gets different treatment?

batou wrote:
I'm all too happy to ban people that are generally regarded as asshole's by the majority of users.

I think that's a slippery slope to go down. Just because people regard someone as an asshole I don't think that should warrant a ban.

Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.

@Dubs: Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.

Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.
Blue Tackler is Cousin Frothy. Cousin Frothy is a previously identified troll whom we (wrongly) gave another chance.

Is it sinking in yet?

Then he should be put on his 2 week ban as this is his second offense.

If anyone thinks simply banning a user will stop them joining a forum if they want to, they're very sadly msitaken.

For what its worth, I'd changed my mind and wanted to go with a lengthy suspension.

Doesn't really matter, the majority voted to ban, and a ban he received.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:30 #183

  • dubmeup
  • dubmeup's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 3239
  • Thank you received: 2296
  • Karma: 0
And i'd wager that a lot of tgose ban votes came in before oi reminded folk of his process and tge thread developed...
The whole premise of the poll was wrong imo.
"laws are unenforceable if the majority break them."-humanspirit,
"avoid the concept of an ambassador for truth altogether"-gilly.
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: 3point5

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:30 #184

  • 3point5
  • 3point5's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Junior Boarder
  • Rank2
  • Posts: 154
  • Thank you received: 261
  • Karma: 0
SilvaRizla wrote:
For what its worth, I'd changed my mind and wanted to go with a lengthy suspension.

Doesn't really matter, the majority voted to ban, and a ban he received.

I look forward to meeting BlueTackler/Cousin Frothy under their new guise.
dubmeup wrote:
And i'd wager that a lot of tgose ban votes came in before oi reminded folk of his process and tge thread developed...
The whole premise of the poll was wrong imo.

There's also confirmation bias at play I'd argue. People that dislike BT are more likely to come in and vote than someone that doesn't really care. Whilst 'Yes' got the majority of the votes out of those that voted, we're still only talking 11 votes out of a forum of thousands.
Warning!!! User may offer a differing opinion. If in doubt, accuse of shilling.
Last Edit: 16 Apr 2014 17:32 by 3point5.
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: thoreau, dubmeup, Hemingway

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:31 #185

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
dubmeup wrote:
And i'd wager that a lot of tgose ban votes came in before oi reminded folk of his process and tge thread developed...
The whole premise of the poll was wrong imo.

I'd take that bet, because as is written in the thread, at that point it was only 4 in favour of the ban.
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gilly, dubmeup, 3point5

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:35 #186

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
3point5 wrote:
SilvaRizla wrote:
For what its worth, I'd changed my mind and wanted to go with a lengthy suspension.

Doesn't really matter, the majority voted to ban, and a ban he received.

I look forward to meeting BlueTackler/Cousin Frothy under their new guise.
dubmeup wrote:
And i'd wager that a lot of tgose ban votes came in before oi reminded folk of his process and tge thread developed...
The whole premise of the poll was wrong imo.

There's also confirmation bias at play I'd argue. People that dislike BT are more likely to come in and vote than someone that doesn't really care. Whilst 'Yes' got the majority of the votes out of those that voted, we're still only talking 11 votes out of a forum of thousands.

Everybody had chance to have their say in the poll, even dubmeup, who for some strange reason decided not to vote. Yet he obviously feels so strongly on the subject :coffee:
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: marina

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:42 #187

  • SilvaRizla
  • SilvaRizla's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Expert Boarder
  • Rank4
  • Erm, hiya :)
  • Posts: 1015
  • Thank you received: 867
  • Karma: 0
I'm pulling out of this thread, what's done is done. No doubt he's already re-registered anyway.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:43 #188

  • dubmeup
  • dubmeup's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 3239
  • Thank you received: 2296
  • Karma: 0
@silva.
If you look at page one you'll see why i haven't voted. I was giving folk a chance to show breaches that others don't regularly commit.

No-one has...right up to now.
There was no time limit set on the poll. Therefore i've been denied my chance to vote. You got him banned in a trumped up kangaroo court.
Not the sz way. Though the sz has changed a lot of late. For the worse imo.
"laws are unenforceable if the majority break them."-humanspirit,
"avoid the concept of an ambassador for truth altogether"-gilly.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:46 #189

  • angelchemuel
  • angelchemuel's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 2901
  • Thank you received: 1356
  • Karma: 11
Please guys...10 pages and we're still at it???

As I understand it, Oi has explained the 'due process' to be followed which I am also assuming was agreed on by the majority here.

Can we not move on, please?

It's done, it's dusted, it's sorted.

All that is happening now is arguing amongst ourselves.

We all have our bad days, our off days, and yes, such is the nature of forums, we come on thinking we can just vent, have a pop at somebody who becomes 'the last straw on the camels back' if you will. Hell, I've been guilty of it myself.

I am not defending BT in any way shape or form at all.......he was given more than enough chances to understand what RESPECT means. We all forget that sometimes, and learn by it....others don't and appropriate action has to be taken.

Now for goodness sake.... :grouphug: ........Illegitimi non carborundum

:jane:
"love it better"
the more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: chandrakavi, marina, SilvaRizla, Babs, Wise Haven

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 17:55 #190

  • wake_up_bomb
  • wake_up_bomb's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 5063
  • Thank you received: 4418
  • Karma: 56
dubmeup wrote:
@wub.
I happen to agree with a fair amount of what blue said about posting on conspiracy forums and the focus on icke.
Perhaps i too should be banned for.that?
If there was a vote regarding whether or not you were to be banned or allowed to go on posting, would over 75% of people vote against you? No, they wouldn't, because you're not trolling the place.

Remember, the majority of people voted in favour of giving him a second chance. He emphatically failed to take this opportunity. Hence virtually all the people who have voted in favour of him have now changed their opinion. I wasn't one of them. I knew no good would come of giving him a second chance, and nothing has. Like Feather, I knew this would happen, and now it has happened.

I respect your opinion, and your right to hold a different opinion. If you don't think he was here solely to cause trouble that's fine, but you have to accept that most people do. I always did, I would have kicked him out last time, but I'm happy to go along with most people's wishes.

And Jane is absolutely right, so I won't say any more on the subject.
The true measure of a man is not his intelligence or how high he rises in this freak establishment. The true measure of a man is this: how quickly he can respond to the needs of others and how much of himself he can give - Philip K. Dick.
Last Edit: 16 Apr 2014 17:56 by wake_up_bomb.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:01 #191

  • batou
  • batou's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Forum Facilitator
  • Rankmod
  • Premier Subscriber
  • Posts: 4480
  • Thank you received: 3847
  • Karma: 91
If we can all say our final words I'll lock this
my limbless friend will die alone
a torso of flesh upon the throne

Violence is not the answer, it is the question. the answer is yes.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:04 #192

  • 3point5
  • 3point5's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Junior Boarder
  • Rank2
  • Posts: 154
  • Thank you received: 261
  • Karma: 0
angelchemuel wrote:
Please guys...10 pages and we're still at it???

As I understand it, Oi has explained the 'due process' to be followed which I am also assuming was agreed on by the majority here.

But that's exactly it. Oi explained the due process which is a fair process. Somehow that doesn't seem to have been applied to BT though :down:

Such is the nature of forums though. There'll always be debates as to rules and how they are enforced. I don't think it's a bad thing for discussions like this to happen to be honest, I think it's healthy for the mind to have your peers scrutinise your reasonings :)
Warning!!! User may offer a differing opinion. If in doubt, accuse of shilling.
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: SilvaRizla

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:04 #193

  • Gilly
  • Gilly's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Rank6
  • Psychic Assassin
  • Posts: 11225
  • Thank you received: 6506
  • Karma: 99
What is all this gubbins about BT having been treated differently from others, and the premise of this vote being wrong? :conf:

BT was treated the same as others (except that he's the only one who anyone has opened a thread to garner votes for his second chance).

The comparison of Ent for eg, with his ever increasing duration of time-outs is not the same situation as BT, purely because no member here has (yet) opted to start a vote on whether or not to ban him.
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: SilvaRizla

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:06 #194

  • Gilly
  • Gilly's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Rank6
  • Psychic Assassin
  • Posts: 11225
  • Thank you received: 6506
  • Karma: 99
3point5 wrote:
angelchemuel wrote:
Please guys...10 pages and we're still at it???

As I understand it, Oi has explained the 'due process' to be followed which I am also assuming was agreed on by the majority here.

But that's exactly it. Oi explained the due process which is a fair process. Somehow that doesn't seem to have been applied to BT though :down:

Such is the nature of forums though. There'll always be debates as to rules and how they are enforced. I don't think it's a bad thing for discussions like this to happen to be honest, I think it's healthy for the mind to have your peers scrutinise your reasonings :)

You're wrong.

This 'due process' as you keep calling it, is where facilitaion was undertaken on the individual's own initiative, because some action was deemed necessary, but no members had chosen to set up a thread like this one.
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
Last Edit: 16 Apr 2014 18:07 by Gilly.
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: SilvaRizla

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:10 #195

  • dubmeup
  • dubmeup's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 3239
  • Thank you received: 2296
  • Karma: 0
So. Blue is on a week suspension in accordance with sz 'protocol' then?

Or has he in fact been banned by an undemocratic kangaroo court?
"laws are unenforceable if the majority break them."-humanspirit,
"avoid the concept of an ambassador for truth altogether"-gilly.
Last Edit: 16 Apr 2014 18:12 by dubmeup.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:11 #196

  • 3point5
  • 3point5's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Junior Boarder
  • Rank2
  • Posts: 154
  • Thank you received: 261
  • Karma: 0
Gilly wrote:
What is all this gubbins about BT having been treated differently from others, and the premise of this vote being wrong? :conf:

BT was treated the same as others (except that he's the only one who anyone has opened a thread to garner votes for his second chance).

I was under the impression BT was now just banned for good? Surely going by what Oi posted a few pages back he should just be on a 2 week suspension, or 4 week suspension etc...?
Gilly wrote:
You're wrong.

This 'due process' as you keep calling it, is where facilitaion was undertaken on the individual's own initiative, because some action was deemed necessary, but no members had chosen to set up a thread like this one.

That's the first time I've used the term due process. In fact, I stepped out of the middle 8 pages of this thread and only chimed up about an hour or so ago. Angelchemuel was the first I've seen call it a due process and I thought the term was fitting.
Warning!!! User may offer a differing opinion. If in doubt, accuse of shilling.
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: angelchemuel, dubmeup

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:12 #197

  • Gilly
  • Gilly's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Rank6
  • Psychic Assassin
  • Posts: 11225
  • Thank you received: 6506
  • Karma: 99
dubmeup wrote:
So. Blue is on a week suspension in accordance with sz 'protocol' then?

Are you reading the replies?

Where's this new 'protocol', 'due process' crap coming from?
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:17 #198

  • dubmeup
  • dubmeup's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Gold Boarder
  • Rank5
  • Posts: 3239
  • Thank you received: 2296
  • Karma: 0
Ffs gilly i am amazed you can't see what has happened here.
The protocol for transgressions of a non rule breach nature is as oi laid out....

This is a ban? thread. Which would have to be based on breaches of sz rules. No evidence of rule breaches has been provided...And it never had a time limit set. The ban just got arbitrarily imposed before everyone had all the info they needed to make a decision. I am talking about me there. It's trumped up cliquey bs based on folk not liking him.
It's a shitty way to do things.
"laws are unenforceable if the majority break them."-humanspirit,
"avoid the concept of an ambassador for truth altogether"-gilly.
Last Edit: 16 Apr 2014 18:23 by dubmeup.
The topic has been locked.

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:21 #199

  • marina
  • marina's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Azoner
  • Rank6
  • Gone Fishin'
  • Posts: 800
  • Thank you received: 889
  • Karma: 0
The suspension "protocol" doesn't apply here IMHO, since BT is a sock of CF, and the other protocol of "no socks" applies here, hence bye-bye BT/CF. He/she BT/CF has manipulated us from day 1, and even now still doing it.
"Like a lotus flower that grows out of the mud and blossoms above the muddy water surface,
we can rise above our defilements and sufferings of life" - Buddhist Value
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: SilvaRizla

Blue Tackler's Membership Status 16 Apr 2014 18:24 #200

  • Gilly
  • Gilly's Avatar
  • ZONED OUT
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Rank6
  • Psychic Assassin
  • Posts: 11225
  • Thank you received: 6506
  • Karma: 99
It's funny it's a kangeroo court now, when you've been happy enough for the same process to take place in the past. Your vote at this stage wouldn't have affected the outcome, and if others hadn't had long enough to decide, they've not spoken up about it.

He's breached the rules by trolling.

You might disagree that he's been trolling, but sufficient people believe his repeated insults to us all as a group, and an individual (Marina) constitute trolling.

*Edit* What's this suspension protocol everyone's on about??? Seriously? It might be something I've known about and forgotten, due to my ailment making me prone to extreme forgetfulness. :emb:
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]
Last Edit: 16 Apr 2014 18:28 by Gilly.
The topic has been locked.
The following user(s) said Thank You: chandrakavi, marina, SilvaRizla
Moderators: oioioi, psketti, batou
Time to create page: 0.186 seconds

Latest Members Blogs

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

What is going on when it comes to 9-11 I…

The EPA (environmental protection agency) and OSHA took air samples in the days following September 11th, they reported that they found no excessive levels of asbestos contrary to other findings....

Read more

9-11 Eleven Years Later

9-11 Eleven Years Later

With the anniversary of September 11th literally just around the corner, unanswered questions still remain for families who lost loved ones during the tragic event, as well as from families...

Read more

Strange Noises, Possible Link to Mass An…

Strange Noises, Possible Link to Mass Animal Deaths

In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review a series of lower court rulings that restrict the United States Navy's use of sonar in submarine detection training exercises off...

Read more

Annual Server Target

Whether its 50 cents or five dollars, your donations are appreciated and help keep this community site running so we can all continue to enjoy using it.
This target is to meet our server cost for one year, June 2020 - May 2021, in USD.
$ 340 - Target
( £ 250 GBP )
donation thermometer
donation thermometer
$ 192 - Raised
( £ 140 GBP )
donation thermometer
56%
Most Recent Donation:
$122 USD on 4th Jan 2021
Bitcoin Address: bc1q0kazqya0nurfxtunxv807vm0m8852nnrrk8mj8
 
Ethereum Address: 0xe69915c80dd75df19f438d556267e04f932f057d
 
More Info: Donation options for TZ

No one is obliged to donate, please only donate what you can afford. Even the smallest amount helps. Being an active member is a positive contribution. Thank You.

TradeZone Latest

default
99 CDs all in good condition
Music
09.11.2012 21:12

default
Cream, 2-seater leather sofa
Miscellaneous
18.08.2012 12:14

default
Enfield Striking movement
Miscellaneous
04.08.2012 0:16

Visitors

Today117
Yesterday421
Week538
Month22073
Total1096832
Your IP Address: 216.73.216.65 Your Browser and OS: Unknown - Unknown Tuesday, 28 July 2026 07:27

Who Is Online

Guests : 97 guests online Members : No members online
© 2012 – 2021 Sanctum Zone | All rights reserved. This website is a place for people to express and discuss their views on the news and world events. DISCLAIMER: Please Note: Views expressed and submitted by contributors are their own personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions and beliefs of the Sanctum Zone website and its founder(s) , administrators , moderators , and any other website maintenance technicians, personnel and volunteers. Articles and messages posted on this website and forum are solely the opinion of their authors.

Login or Register

LOG IN

Register

User Registration
or Cancel