Have You Ever Been Banned/Suspended?

[beddo]

What about these?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.202851-Question-of-the-Day-June-18-2010#6765370

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.175608-Editors-Note-The-Spy-Who-Fragged-Me

You've got to be kidding me.

Please tell me that you read the rest of this thread before posting. I mean, we gave reasons for both of those examples of mod wrath not just on this thread, but on this [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.203222-Have-You-Ever-Been-Banned-Suspended?page=4#6783889] very [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.203222-Have-You-Ever-Been-Banned-Suspended?page=4#6781523] page [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.203222-Have-You-Ever-Been-Banned-Suspended?page=4#6781343] and yet you still seem to give those examples as if they're still examples of irrational moderator action. If you had looked four posts above yours, you would've seen one of our resident users explain Tharwen's suspension, two posts above that and a moderator explained it, so much for the moderators not justifying their actions.

I'm sorry, but in trying to make the moderators seem irrational, you've just made yourself look very lazy.

I don't think the commentator is directly saying that the 'moderators' are irrational. I had not seen this before and it does seem a bit farcical. Clearly the post was not intended to be rude, it was sharing a miss-reading. Not to mention that the author has designed his own signature and can't expect to be immune from commentary in the same way someone with an 'unusual' name would be.

However, his 'Don't get your knickers in a twist comment' was out of line and inappropriate. At that point I would have expected a minor suspension.

His following comment did try to justify his actions and pointed out that using the term 'mate' is quite aggressive even if it's followed with a wink emote. It's a shame that this was the comment resulted in a ban. That response seemed more of a 'don't talk back' punishment than 'what you're saying is unreasonable'.

I would expect a moderator to take a step back at that point and consider things from the user's point of view rather than just acting and banning the user to 'end' the discussion where mistakes appear to have been made on both sides.

Ultimately, even without any commentary from the community, that thread speaks volumes.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

Snip

I've already [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.203222-Have-You-Ever-Been-Banned-Suspended?page=4#6781390] explained [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.203222-Have-You-Ever-Been-Banned-Suspended?page=4#6781343] this, but corroded was probably not actually banned for that post. Ignoring moderator decisions and opinions, if that was the post he was banned for it would be going against most of the HTML code the Tech Team made for ban posts: a post you're banned for wouldn't contain a link to the post you were banned for, it would simply say that you were banned for that post and said link would link directly to the post, instead of to the top of the thread -- and the url provided has a post number on the end, implying that it should link directly to the post he was banned for instead of to the top of the thread. Because it's linking to the top of the thread yet there is a post number, this looks more like the post he was actually banned for was deleted from the thread.

What I suspect actually happened was that corroded was put on probation for the post in question, and in response to his probation made another post in that thread. It was that post which actually caused the moderators to ban him and they simply decided to delete that post afterwards. That would explain why the link doesn't go directly to that post and why it provides a link instead of saying 'user was banned for this post' underneath. It simply says that he was banned for that post because when you're banned, any posts which you have recieved a probation/ suspension for that's still on the system changes to say that you were banned for it (I provided an example of this in one of my posts linked above).

EDIT:

EDIT: I, of course, didn't address my opinion in the most courteous manner however, that's free speech for ya.

I'm quoting this from a previous post, but free speech is irrelevant on this site. The Escapist is privately owned and are free to have a code of conduct (this is presented on this site as terms and conditions for any contests and guidelines for the forums) on this site even if it infringes on free speech as a result. When you signed up here, you agreed to this code of conduct, that means that they're allowed to ban you for breaking these terms and conditions and any rules of conduct they have even if they end up infringing on your free speech because of it.

It's like saying that getting fired from your job for being racist towards someone is an infringement on your free speech (assuming that the company's code of conduct says not to be racist towards other workers/ pick on other workers in general). It sure as Hell is, but that is irrelevant due to the fact that you need to comply to the privately owned company's code of conduct, and the company are allowed to have this code of conduct.

Perhaps I forgot to refresh the page. Whoops.
You don't have to be rude, sir.

I would believe that were it not for the fact that my post explaining corroded's ban and Varchld's post explaining Tharwen's suspension were both made more than half a day before that post of yours I responded to and manaman's post was made about ten hours before your post. Unless you're trying to tell me that you kept a webpage of a single thread open without refreshing it for at least about 14 hours, I'm not buying it.

 

[beddo]

EDIT: I, of course, didn't address my opinion in the most courteous manner however, that's free speech for ya.

I'm quoting this from a previous post, but free speech is irrelevant on this site. The Escapist is privately owned and are free to have a code of conduct (this is presented on this site as terms and conditions for any contests and guidelines for the forums) on this site even if it infringes on free speech as a result. When you signed up here, you agreed to this code of conduct, that means that they're allowed to ban you for breaking these terms and conditions and any rules of conduct they have even if they end up infringing on your free speech because of it.

It's like saying that getting fired from your job for being racist towards someone is an infringement on your free speech (assuming that the company's code of conduct says not to be racist towards other workers/ pick on other workers in general). It sure as Hell is, but that is irrelevant due to the fact that you need to comply to the privately owned company's code of conduct, and the company are allowed to have this code of conduct.

I understand that this site doesn't have to abide by unlimited freedom of speech. My last comment was just saying that I wasn't courteous about portraying my opinion but that's part of human behaviour.

In any case, as I argued before, my comment was completely acceptable because it was my belief about the behaviour of those that choose, beyond any tenuously arguable compulsion, to engage in sexual conduct for monetary gain. That's no more a 'group' than people who play Mario, my opinion couldn't be seen to be discriminatory or offensive towards them because they are not a 'group', they have no status that could be discriminated against.

However, as I learned through liaising with the moderators their decisions were emotive because they knew some adult performers. In which case the moderator should have acknowledged a conflict of interest and asked someone far removed to look at it objectively. However, this was not even addressed through my numerous follow up complaints about my suspension.

 

[Mr Montmorency]

i called a certain animal oriented show on the escapist terrible whilst explaining my view and got suspended for my troubles. i think they are just unhappy they have pumped a good deal of money into it and the shows turned out shit.

All I found was "this is an awful terrible series".

I was hoping for some dirt.