CosmicFuzz wrote:You shot yourself in the foot there. BAN |
Justice for Deckard1
•
Page 8
-
monkman76 18,987 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 13 years ago -
Mola_Ram 26,196 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 9 years agoCosmicFuzz wrote:
Yeah, this. If someone is banned in the first instance (regardless of whether you personally agree with the decision or not), then it should stick. Someone coming back under a different name shouldn't be any different, otherwise banning wouldn't be at all effective as a moderation tool.
Acidizer wrote:
Banning someone on sight isn't power hungry. If someone is banned, and they come back, they will get banned again on sight. Because they are banned.
Mola_Ram wrote:
Banning someone on sight isn't power hungry? (if true)
I dunno, I can think of maybe 5 people who have been banned here in the last 6 months (not counting socks or spammers). It's hardly an epidemic of power-hungry modding.
On another note, I think forum rules should be written down somewhere for people to see. They used to be, but aren't anymore for some reason.
Edited by Mola_Ram at 10:41:39 09-09-2015 -
Psiloc 6,368 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 14 years agoDrStrangelove wrote:
I recall a few misguided users creating threads to say hello* and literally the first reply was Deckard saying "Fuck off, cunt". If that's not ban worthy I don't know what is.
@Psiloc
You think so? I thought it was mostly teasing, while Dirtbox is a bit more plain-spoken.
Dirtbox is almost militant with his pro-PC stuff but I've never seen him get so personal myself.
* Bad idea, true, but the site recommends they do just that when they sign up which is stupid -
DFawkes 32,791 posts
Seen 54 minutes ago
Registered 16 years agoI know I'm just a big precious flower with sand in my vagina for making such a request, but can we please, please stop calling people paedophiles as a "joke"? It wasn't really funny at first, and now it's just ridiculous how often people are resorting to accusing other human beings of such a deeply horrible crime. -
smoothpete 37,743 posts
Seen 6 hours ago
Registered 17 years ago@craigy We all know he's an offensive bellend but he's the only person I can think of in my 14 years of posting on EG that has ever been permanently banned to this extent. Every other permabanned person has been back within 5 minutes and it's all been fine. I'm puzzled what the difference is here. -
CosmicFuzz 32,632 posts
Seen 15 minutes ago
Registered 15 years agomonkman76 wrote:
FUCK!
CosmicFuzz wrote:
You shot yourself in the foot there. BAN
Next person to post under this line is getting banned:
_________________________________________________________
Listen to us chat about Until Dawn and look back over the Metal Gear Solid series.
/red dot on chest
/runs -
smoothpete 37,743 posts
Seen 6 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoMola_Ram wrote:
They are, on the left on the main forum page
On another note, I think forum rules should be written down somewhere for people to see. They used to be, but aren't anymore for some reason. -
Mola_Ram 26,196 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 9 years agosmoothpete wrote:
*blinks*
Mola_Ram wrote:
They are, on the left on the main forum page
On another note, I think forum rules should be written down somewhere for people to see. They used to be, but aren't anymore for some reason.
Huh. Weird that I did not see that. Thanks!
Is it on the mobile site too?
Edited by Mola_Ram at 10:47:07 09-09-2015 -
Salaman 24,162 posts
Seen 2 weeks ago
Registered 17 years agoCosmicFuzz wrote:
Case in pint: F_S
Acidizer wrote:
Banning someone on sight isn't power hungry. If someone is banned, and they come back, they will get banned again on sight. Because they are banned.
Mola_Ram wrote:
Banning someone on sight isn't power hungry? (if true)
I dunno, I can think of maybe 5 people who have been banned here in the last 6 months (not counting socks or spammers). It's hardly an epidemic of power-hungry modding.
oh wait ....
edit: I'm leaving that typo!
Edited by Salaman at 10:48:16 09-09-2015 -
Psiloc wrote:
Dirtbox was pretty quick to tell people that they were a worthless piece of shit and should kill themselves or something. At least that's how I recall it. He's become very friendly recently.
DrStrangelove wrote:
I recall a few misguided users creating threads to say hello* and literally the first reply was Deckard saying "Fuck off, cunt". If that's not ban worthy I don't know what is.
@Psiloc
You think so? I thought it was mostly teasing, while Dirtbox is a bit more plain-spoken.
Dirtbox is almost militant with his pro-PC stuff but I've never seen him get so personal myself.
* Bad idea, true, but the site recommends they do just that when they sign up which is stupid -
smoothpete 37,743 posts
Seen 6 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoThe machine has arrived to remove the sand from everyones vaginas
http://geekologie.com/2008/08/19/trencher-1.jpg -
Psiloc wrote:
I remember Deckard telling me I wasn't special and nobody gave a fuck about my opinion after I hijacked somebody else's "Hello" thread, once I'd decided to stop lurking after years and years.
I recall a few misguided users creating threads to say hello* and literally the first reply was Deckard saying "Fuck off, cunt". If that's not ban worthy I don't know what is.
It didn't make me feel any more or less special FYI. -
Goban 10,121 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 16 years agoI find the renaming thing really confusing. Don't post in here as much as I used to so its difficult for my poor age addled brain to join the dots. -
Acidizer wrote:
Vizzini wasn't banned though, iirc he said he'd leave because he had no further interest in this forum or something. Didn't last long though, he probably missed his arguments with Dirtbox
I see here people seem to call everyone by their old name anyway... can get a little confusing. This Vizz guy for instance. -
Mola_Ram 26,196 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 9 years ago@Acidizer so, what's your definition of "genuinely unacceptable" behaviour? Do you accept that others might have different views about where that line is?
Edited by Mola_Ram at 10:52:30 09-09-2015 -
Armoured_Bear 31,234 posts
Seen 3 hours ago
Registered 10 years agoDFawkes wrote:
It's supported by the mods so don't expect it to stop anytime soon.
I know I'm just a big precious flower with sand in my vagina for making such a request, but can we please, please stop calling people paedophiles as a "joke"? It wasn't really funny at first, and now it's just ridiculous how often people are resorting to accusing other human beings of such a deeply horrible crime. -
Armoured_Bear 31,234 posts
Seen 3 hours ago
Registered 10 years agoGoban wrote:
I'd love a matrix of old/new IDs, I can't keep up either.
I find the renaming thing really confusing. Don't post in here as much as I used to so its difficult for my poor age addled brain to join the dots. -
glaeken 12,070 posts
Seen 8 months ago
Registered 17 years ago@Goban Indeed. We need an AKA guide thread locked at the top of the forum. -
Armoured_Bear 31,234 posts
Seen 3 hours ago
Registered 10 years agoMola_Ram wrote:
I think the line is when you're being abusive to someone in a personal manner, such as obtaining photos of someone and photoshopping them, calling their wife fat and ugly (smuggo got done for that), that kind of thing.
@Acidizer so, what's your definition of "genuinely unacceptable" behaviour? Do you accept that others might have different views about where that line is?
Calling someone an arse or having repeated arguments isn't a big deal at all.
Mowgli was fine, he could be interesting to chat to but his temper would let him down and he'd explode and call everyone a c*nt.gif)
-
what happened to Brem??? i know he got temp banned but come back and then i havent seen him post in months -
Goban 10,121 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 16 years agoCould also be used by mods as a snitching thread. Imagine the fun that would cause. -
Armoured_Bear 31,234 posts
Seen 3 hours ago
Registered 10 years agoGoban wrote:
Haha
Could also be used by mods as a snitching thread. Imagine the fun that would cause. -
@Goban Goban! Whatever happened to your cinema? Are you still running it? -
Load_2.0 33,583 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 18 years agoI think there is a lot of generalisation and association going on here. Posting fuck off as a reply "Hi" threads annoys the hell out of me, what you could have is a 10 year olds who get greeted with a torrent of abuse. It just doesn't work as a joke. I can't recall Deckard making those sorts of posts, his shit was aimed at established posters who more often than not posted something which deserved a rebuke. -
Load_2.0 33,583 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 18 years agocraigy wrote:
:S
@Goban Goban! Whatever happened to your cinema? Are you still running it? -
Frogofdoom 17,974 posts
Seen 3 hours ago
Registered 9 years agoChange it so when someone gets permabanned they get to take someone with them. That way giving them a martyr like status and no need to return. -
CosmicFuzz 32,632 posts
Seen 15 minutes ago
Registered 15 years agoSalaman wrote:
Heh, F_S is an example of how the mods aren't power hungry enough
CosmicFuzz wrote:
Case in pint: F_S
Acidizer wrote:
Banning someone on sight isn't power hungry. If someone is banned, and they come back, they will get banned again on sight. Because they are banned.
Mola_Ram wrote:
Banning someone on sight isn't power hungry? (if true)
I dunno, I can think of maybe 5 people who have been banned here in the last 6 months (not counting socks or spammers). It's hardly an epidemic of power-hungry modding.
oh wait ....
edit: I'm leaving that typo!
-
@craigy
That went under about 5 years ago. Recession hit, numbers dropped, the bank pulled the plug and forced us into receivership.
Was great while it lasted.
.gif)
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
