Banned - Ouch!?

haha Paul from PF is hilarious when he banns people though. I've been banned a few times, once on a poetry forum. I criticized the admin's poetry and I was instantly banned. I don't really take it personally. I have some sympathy for Paul though, because even though he is exclusionary, I feel he is exclusionary for the better. If someone goes on there and writes absolute nonsense, he is pretty quick to ask some follow up questions. He then lets the thread continue until the person has finally philosophically backed him/herself up. If the person continues to not only spit nonsense, but harass others and insult them, he then makes his move and..."BALETED."

I'm not saying I endorse that kind of structure, but I do understand it. It is after all not a "Free-do it yourself-forum." He pays for it. So it is his personal property. He can run it in any way he pleases. If you don't like it...leave. I'm still part of PF as I find it to be one of the most engaging Philosophy forums out there...but I do see the problems involved when it comes to instant banning, even if it is unjustified.

Unreasonable wrote:

Post a link.

Why is it so great a forum?

PF is http://forums.philosophyforums.com/

Paul

I would dearly love to murder all the admins at that forum...

Your ban reason is the very reason I want to do it, more than ever...

Quote :

it is his personal property

Then why make a philosophy forum, then? He's a hypocritical, self-righteous piece of shit.

You've inspired a thread!

http://forum.philosophynow.org/viewtopic.php?t=1485&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=

____________

http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/

48 indexes!

myhypocricy wrote:

haha Paul from PF is hilarious when he banns people though. I've been banned a few times, once on a poetry forum. I criticized the admin's poetry and I was instantly banned. I don't really take it personally. I have some sympathy for Paul though, because even though he is exclusionary, I feel he is exclusionary for the better. If someone goes on there and writes absolute nonsense, he is pretty quick to ask some follow up questions. He then lets the thread continue until the person has finally philosophically backed him/herself up. If the person continues to not only spit nonsense, but harass others and insult them, he then makes his move and..."BALETED."

I'm not saying I endorse that kind of structure, but I do understand it. It is after all not a "Free-do it yourself-forum." He pays for it. So it is his personal property. He can run it in any way he pleases. If you don't like it...leave. I'm still part of PF as I find it to be one of the most engaging Philosophy forums out there...but I do see the problems involved when it comes to instant banning, even if it is unjustified.

that's the fucking point! It's exactly that!

a forum, as UR has said to me in another thread, is the property of its administrators. Paul does what he think it's better for him to do. If he didn't try to control whatever he can control, that place would become a mess. PF has a goal, it wasn't created to be a place for useless/crappy conversation. As long as the users respect and post according to the forum rules (which happens to include a SERIOUS advice to avoid unreasonable/bad written English), they have no problems....

i don't really see what's so offensive/hateful/intolerant in the general attitude of Paul (from PF) and Faust (from ILP)...they aren't 'slaves of the system'. They are men who happen to be moderators/administrators of big web communities and don't have time nor patience to deal with childish, hateful or disrespectul people. They simply follow the guidelines of their boards. And they're justified in doing so.

and we must remember that the judgment/criticism of banned folks is ALWAYS suspect...

Hitler did the same thing.

only he just happened to ban Jews from existence....permaban....I believe.

Ah, if only we can be that understanding with Neo-Nazi forums.


Then, is not the administrator's ideals the ones that determine the forums quality and atmosphere?

Censorship with style is truly entertaining and quite admirable.

what a pathetic comparison

ILP's moderators banned you because you broke the rules, man

that is all.

Drone wrote:

what a pathetic comparison

ILP's moderators banned you because you broke the rules, man

that is all.

Meanwhile another threatens with murder and torture, almost on a weekly basis, but that goes unnoticed, and many others insult daily, and they are forgiven.

Some knives cut deeper than others, you imbecile.

Your butter knife, for instance, would be tolerated, if not laughed at, because no matter how viciously it is yielded, it is blunt and only good for spreading shit around evenly.

Drone wrote:

i don't really see what's so offensive/hateful/intolerant in the general attitude of Paul (from PF) and Faust (from ILP)...they aren't 'slaves of the system'. They are men who happen to be moderators/administrators of big web communities and don't have time nor patience to deal with childish, hateful or disrespectul people. They simply follow the guidelines of their boards. And they're justified in doing so.

What makes you believe that Paul or Faust is not "childish, hateful, or disrespectful"???

Faust has personally-taunted & insulted me many times on ILP. Is that not "childish"?

Faust denies, but does not deny-well, his hatred toward himself. Is that not "hateful"?

Faust has greatly-offended me, Satyr, and even Ingenium on ILP! Is that not "disrespectful"?

Drone wrote:

and we must remember that the judgment/criticism of banned folks is ALWAYS suspect...

The shepherd is "ALWAYS" right then?

True ... if you are the sheep that follow.

Satyr, I think you haven't so far realized why Aidan Mclaren is 'tolerated' on ILP.

people don't take his threats seriously there. Most see him as a rebellious adolescent trying to get some attention.

however, when we forget about his calling people 'imposters' and threatening to 'murder' them all, what is left us? But your case is different. You always act as if you demanded seriousness and respect from other people, and nonetheless you're incapable of following some basic guidelines of courtesy and civility.

you demand respect, Aidan does not. You want to be respected, Aidan wants to be noticed. I am sure you can perceive the difference, can't you?

...........

Unreasonable, I'm pretty aware that you had problems with Faust, but that doesn't mean you have the right to say so much shit about him.

when has he offended you personally, I mean, not as a jest? He has a very good sense of humour, so it's probable that he was trying to be ironic or sarcastic, and you took it as a true 'insult'

you needed to relax a little, maybe he was just telling you: 'Stop taking yourself so seriously'

UR wrote:

The shepherd is “ALWAYS” right then?

True...if you are the sheep that follow'

take attention at what you read if you want our further conversation to be productive.

i said that the judgment of the banned user is suspect, for obvious reasons, not that the 'shepherd' is always right. My post was very clear about that: the admin pays for the board, and has a goal for it. He then determines that his board will be either lightly or heavily moderated by a set of rules. It's pretty logical that everyone who joins the board will have to obey to these rules if they want to participate there: when they register, the rules are shown them and they are told that they can ONLY post if they agree with them.

is there something simpler than that?

here there is no set of rules, so the user can, theoretically, say what he wants. However, in other boards, like ILP and PF, there are rules, and every reasonable men knows what they are: nothing very special, just some basic guidelines that every man interested in having decent, productive discussion will be ready to accept and to adopt as essentially needful parameters.


again, Faust is just a man, and he has no authorship whatever over what you say or do. His attitude is based upon mere logic. But somehow I suspect you already know that...

a propos, let me declare again that I think this 'anti-herdish' posture is ridiculous. ILP's members aren't a 'herd'. Faust can 'control' just what they say on board, and when it's offensive or disruptive. He has nothing whatever to do with what they do in their personal existences.

Analysis of banned users on ilp,

RealUnoriginal: 5,205 Posts + 11.27PPD
Satyr: 3,868 Posts + 2.81 PPD
Unreasonable: 662 Posts + 7.36 PPD
Maynard James Keenan 425 Posts + 4.89 PPD
Maquis: 91 Posts + 0.76 PPD
Jim Profit: 86 Posts + 0.86 PPD
6666: 50 Posts + 1.72PPD
Dom Claude 25 Posts + 0.30 PPD
Acacia 14 Posts 0.30 PPD

The average banned poster has posted 1,158.44 times.

The average banned poster posts 3.363 times per day*

*This number is slightly deflated due to the fact that after a user is banned (as a result, having the inability to post) that user's post per day average continues to drop despite the fact that the user is incapable of posting. In the event that I am successful in collaborating a list of all banned users I will index the posts per day back to the last day that the user in question was logged on and will come up with a more accurate figure regarding true PPD's.

http://ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=167191&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Point I don't know?

You banned individuals seem happier/less argumentative here, so maybe things happen for the best.

Unreasonable wrote:

Tor wrote:

You banned individuals seem happier/less argumentative here, so maybe things happen for the best.

You are spewing feel-good-about-myself-holier-than-thou rhetoric.

...but that's the kind of person I am UR: you should know that by now - as I have come to understand the kind of person you are.

Quote :

And since when was there a connection between happiness and amounts of argument?

Arguments are what those who are unhappy have: I see you guys doing less of that here, but instead having proper discussions and discourse - is that a bad thing I say here?

Tor wrote:

you should know that by now - as I have come to understand the kind of person you are.

Quit playing games with me.

I have exposed myself; you have not. You are a phantom.

Regardless, your reasoning is clearly-lacking...

Unreasonable wrote:

Quit playing games with me.

I have exposed myself; you have not. You are a phantom.

Regardless, your reasoning is clearly-lacking...

You see it as playing games with you, but I'm just being myself, and I like how I am for it serves me well.

Exposed yourself? not in public, I hope...

Tor wrote:

You see it as playing games with you, but I'm just being myself, and I like how I am for it serves me well.

Of course you like how it serves you. You are a will-o-wisp, a shadow upon the wind.

I will use my Light of Reason and shine it upon you only to see you escaping into the void.

If you expose yourself, then will it be over for you I wonder? What have you got so important worth hiding?


...anything I have not already-seen I wonder??? I doubt it. I know my own soul.

you expect too little from women

let them surprise you every once in a while...

Drone wrote:

you expect too little from women

let them surprise you every once in a while...

Haha, I like that.

Perhaps UR expects females to act a certain way, and is thrown off course when they do not follow that expectation...

Unreasonable wrote:

Tor wrote:

You see it as playing games with you, but I'm just being myself, and I like how I am for it serves me well.

Of course you like how it serves you. You are a will-o-wisp, a shadow upon the wind.

I will use my Light of Reason and shine it upon you only to see you escaping into the void.

If you expose yourself, then will it be over for you I wonder? What have you got so important worth hiding?


...anything I have not already-seen I wonder??? I doubt it. I know my own soul.

what you call 'hiding' I call 'being myself', for that is all I am doing - should I be putting my full agenda out there for all to see? wouldn't that be a very unwise and foolish move...?

Tor wrote:

Drone wrote:

you expect too little from women

let them surprise you every once in a while...

Haha, I like that.

Perhaps UR expects females to act a certain way, and is thrown off course when they do not follow that expectation...

Bingo!!!!!

Satyr wrote:

Bingo!!!!!

Did I get a full house...?

If everyone was as 'easy' as UR thinks they are/wishes they were, the planet would be one mass orgy (shudders ) and there'd be no progression, which is paramount for longevity...

Unreasonable wrote:

The mind of women/girls/females are completely-passive & practical, unthinking.

Quote :

I have known this for about several months now. A few women I have histories with confirmed it to me.

...but that's your experience of those females you encountered: not of all females - perhaps these relationships were just sexual, and therefore didn't progress beyond such/the need for anything beyond sex never arose...

Or perhaps I know what I am talking about...

OR...perhaps....donkeys can fly!!!!

I proclaim myself God Emperor.
From now on what I say goes.

I say sex is funny.
The female GETS the joke.
The male delivers IT.

It all makes sense ...in some far off alien landscape where retards rule.

Here's a better joke:

Daddy was never there or too weak to matter, so now I seek a daddy on the internet.
And I hate mommy....THAT BITCH!!! who dared to bring me into this life!!!!

No, I do not hate ME....I hate HER...for having ME!!!!

Oh kids....what would I do without the internet?

Bye...Bye....until next time....whenever that may be.

You guys should really stick to what I *HAVE* said in the past, not to what you falsely-assumed I meant.

P.S. You come off to me looking like complete idiots and jackasses.