Banning Ink maybe a little extreme?

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rainbow Man

Veteran
...For this anyway?

I don't think it was at all deserved. The guy wasn't insulting or even hostile or anything. If the exchange had taken place with anyone but a site staffer nothing would have come of it whatsoever I'm sure.

The "if you don't laugh at this you're not human" statement is obviously meant as tongue in cheek/hyperbole I don't understand why anyone would misinterpret it as otherwise.

I can't helpp but feeling Geo was deliberately goading Ink by being needlessly short and vaguely rude and then used his power to ban him. Bad day at the office?

It sets a really bad prescident for the site. Argue with a site staffer can get you rather arbitrarily banned kind of prescident. This doesn't exactly foster a spirit of free and open debate. Particulary in a "geenral" type forum whrre rules ought to be a bit laxer.

He didn't even have bad rep so he was obviously not a troublemaker typre of person.

Sooooo..waht's up with all that really?

Pewace.
 
Agreed.

Reading that was... tough. Seriously, Chal did not seem the least offended (why should he have been?). Ink said a few comments clearly tongue in cheek and it was over.. till Geo popped in and started pushing him. Even then Ink never insulted or anything.

That was honestly rather bullshit...
 
He came across to me like he was hammering himself to a cross, but im not too familiar with his writing style. Regardless the only reason he was banned, at least to me, was because of who he was exchanging words with as Rainbow said. If it was a regular user then at the worst im sure a slap on the wrist and a deletion of the posts would of resulted. I respect Geo but that sends a bad message in my opinion as well. Get into a disagreement having a discussion in the general discussion section with the site staff and get booted. :???:

Personally i think the both of you should shake hands and apologise.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Was it really an outright banning ? Maybe something less severe like a temporary suspension would suffice ?
 
Rainbow Man;985792I can't helpp but feeling Geo was deliberately goading Ink by being needlessly short and vaguely rude and then used his power to ban him.[/QUOTE said:
Personally, I don't think Geo had that intention, whether consciously or not.

Until we know the private correspondences that must have existed that must have led to this ban, I think maybe we shouldn't judge anything on the face of it. And IMHO, if no such private correspondence existed between Ink and B3D/Geo, then I don't agree with the ban based on Ink's posting history (altho' I admit I haven't read every single one of Inks posts! Just 2 pages.).

Just MHO.
Click to expand...
 
digitalwanderer said:
I THINK IT WAS JUST AND PROPER, WHATEVER GEO DOES IS!

:yep2:
Click to expand...
I really don't know what to make of this, considering I'm sure that I could find a perfectly identical but sarcastic post of yours with Geo's name replaced by Bush's! ;) Just kidding, hehe.
 
Tim Murray said:
It's not a permanent ban, guys. It's only for a week.
Click to expand...
I still don't get it. "Only" for a wweek or no what was it he did that was a bannable offense - according to site rules?

That he talked back to Geo who never acted as anything else than a regular user rather than staff - and without being unpleasant I might add?

I must say I never noticed 'hammering oneself onto a cross' as being mentioned anywhere on the site as being against the rules. Even if it was why would that be so or even get you banned?

A shrug and just leaving the thread would have sufficed if you think someoen's being silly. Maybe locking it if it's getting out o fhand. Which I never thought it was I might add.

To go from replying to each other to banned for a week without any warning or anything..I can't say I like it. Seriously I feel this was a very poor decision. I didn't think the ceiling was so low at this place.


*Puzzled*
 
No, I was just in a "300" mood. :oops:

I don't see the issue, and I always giggle when people start talking about "their rights" on a privately owned/operated board. The bottom line is you have as many "rights and freedoms" here as the management allows, same as about every other damned forum out there.

Anyone tells you otherwise is wrong, that's just how it is. You either can play by their rules or play somewhere else.

It took me a few years to learn that lesson, so I don't see why I laugh at it so much in others...probably seeing a reflection of an earlier me. :oops:
 
I could add "Geo can ban anyone he likes, anytime he likes, just for giggles" to the rules in less than 30 seconds, but somehow I don't think that's what they're after. :cry:

And besides, the rest of the staff would get jealous. And anyway, now that I know who Rainbow Man is, his carefully hidden agenda just bores me. Ah well.
 
:???:

rainbowmanpy1.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top