Your*
2 Likes
This thread finally convinced me to pick an avatar.
3 Likes
It wasn’t intended to be a direct comparison, just a point about having forum standards that rise to the level of banning posters rather than telling people to ignore them.
But if you really want to debate it, denying something about the past is much much worse than advocating for ethnic cleansing in the present?
Taking into account the times we are living in, I personally don’t think those posts are anywhere near any “line”, let alone clearly way way over the line. I honestly cannot imagine any more than a handful of members would think those posts are ban-worthy. And my view has always been that a mod’s job is to reflect the forum’s overall collective views, not his/her own personal views or the views of a vocal tiny minority.
5 Likes
NBZ’s views are shared by several others ITT, Cuse. I disagree obviously, but i respect his honesty.
2 Likes
Fine, let’s do a poll so we see where people stand.
I smrk4 flagged these two posts today, I consider the first one terrible but probably not ban worthy if it were an isolated incident. Although if I were a mod I would ban that shit all day if warnings were ignored. The second post to me is an instaban.
Post 1:
- Ban worthy
- Not my cup of tea, but not ban worthy
- Look at the times we’re living in, basically fine
0 voters
Post 2:
- Ban worthy
- Not my cup of tea, but not ban worthy
- Look at the times we’re living in, basically fine
0 voters
Sorry, re vote in 2nd poll, I made it private by accident
In isolation those posts might not be ban-worthy. It becomes problematic when there is a pattern of them.
4 Likes
I support how cuse is handling this, for whatever that matters.
9 Likes
rob zombie?
2 Likes
This thread is rewarding NBZ for posting the way he does.
1 Like
Yeah… I think the pattern has crossed a line. I get being worked up, but he’s very aware that he’s crossing lines on a regular basis and doesn’t seem to care very much about it.
I would genuinely prefer that this not be that kind of forum. Do with that what you will. I’d prefer that NotBruceZ tone it down, but he’s been asked to do that a lot and doesn’t seem to be able to self regulate.
1 Like
I suppose not if you think he really wants to have millions of people killed, but you don’t think that and neither does anyone else.
As far as the issue at hand goes, his banning, I dunno. I think a vote is reasonable.
I would guess that he’s playing a game with us and if we ban him he’ll have fun with a new account waiting to see until someone recognizes him.
Does anyone even know who this guy was on 22? I don’t remember anyone being a constant edgelord like this.
1 Like
I don’t see why this should present an objection to banning him.
If he posts exactly as he has been, he will be identified immediately.
If he isn’t identified, posts like his will result in the same outcome.
Whether he’s taking some visceral satisfaction in seeing how long he can draw out option #2 doesn’t bother me. A willful troll will find a way.
Edit: Not that I’m claiming this was your point. I read your post again and realized I’m not clear on if this is just a comment from you or an objection.
Yeah, so this guy needs a better hobby and regular visits to a mental health professional.
2 Likes
Could it be metaname? Supposedly he is more angry and less funny than he used to be.
I would vote “both are over the line but not individually ban worthy” with the idea that sometimes you’ll color way outside the lines if you’re trying to hang everything right on the edge. But a few rebukes should be enough information to reassess and pull the reins in. Looking at both together and knowing this is his pattern feels like ban to me. There are so many better ways to say what he’s trying to express without gravity bombing loaded terms like ethnic cleansing.
1 Like
I remember exactly who it is, except for the annoying detail that I can never come up with the actual name. It whizzes by on the periphery from time to time, too fast for me to catch hold of.