A Call to Ban NotBruceZ for Consistently Endorsing Violence

[microbet]

Is the John Brown avatar new?

[NotBruceZ]

I added it after the start of this thread.

[tabbaker]

Alright he’s just a troll ban em.

[Lawnmower_Man]

Regardless of how offended anyone was, the non-violent posts are just straight up better strategically. It’s an unforced error since they can easily be used against you regardless of context. Hopefully this allows NBZ to sharpen up his edgelord/troll game to unexploitable levels.

[cassette]

No one will ever be banned by community tribunal. Feel free to let loose, people.

[anon38180840]

@jmakin

I don’t really care what offends you or makes you clutch your pearls. We live in an offensive world and terrible things are happening. Grow the fuck up and start living in the real world.

If you want anyone from here having any chance to change the world in any way, be it by producing content that could influence people, running for office, etc, then it would behoove us not to make those people defend content that is beyond the pale.

@jmakin

Cuse’s posts about gatekeeping around M4A sum it up perfectly.

Huh? My issue is with attacks that aren’t rooted in the facts. I don’t have an issue with people running in the Dem primary on M4A Lite or whatever.

@jmakin

Lol, people who have shown even slightest support for Pete are getting ganged.

I’ve previously defended Pete and skydiver’s support for Pete. I’ve had him as my #2 or #3 for a while. But his heel turn is some straight up bullshit, and I’m allowed to express that just like anyone else can express whatever. May the best ideas win.

@jmakin

You guys REALLY suck at modding, just fyi.

Sounds like you just want spam removal specialists.

@superuberbob

We don’t hold any legal responsibility for his actions on this forum or outside of it.

Moral responsibility be damned?

@Trolly

Yeah, mark me down as someone who also thinks these posts are problematic and corrosive to the forum culture. There’s like zero upshot of letting people act like teenage edgelords here.

This.

@Deuce

Question for Cuse: Would you be OK with NBZ to backing off a little, and only posting at 6 of 10.

Guess that depends what a 6/10 looks like. I’d appreciate any effort to tone it down and avoid violent rhetoric, dehumanization, ethnic cleansing language, etc. However…

@cassette

He’s been asked to tone it down several times and said (and demonstrated) that he will not.

This is the problem. NotBruceZ wants to take a stand that we should be embracing his type of rhetoric. So we seem to be at an impasse.

@j8i3h289dn3x7

Different than what? Was he banned? As I said, grunching. He’d get escalating levels of warnings and temp-bans if he posted that way back in the forum when Wookie and I moderated.

At least two threads were created addressing his posting - one by JT and then this one. I gave him an additional warning, then a 24 hour ban. Then this thread erupted, I’m apparently viewed by some as a fascist, etc, and here we are. Seems like a lot of the community wants to let him keep posting the same way he has in the past, and I’m taking a stand against it.

@zikzak

The mods back then have in fact already banned him once or twice.

Not taking a position on this, just sayin’.

They banned him back then, you mean? I wasn’t a mod back then, and I’ve banned him once here for 24 hours. As far as I know nobody else has banned him here.

@jmakin

Yea, Wookie set the rules, but he did it in the spirit of the community. Always.

What in the world do you think I’m trying to do?

@jmakin

This just feels like a “huckabeast” situation all over again that led to this situation we find ourselves in. It smells exactly the same to me.

Fuck you @jmakin.

@Trolly

No one wants you to leave, and it looks like things are mostly breaking your way.

I could give a shit what jmakin does after he just compared my 24 hour ban of NBZ to Mat’s “Huckabeast” meltdown.

@Lawnmower_Man

Regardless of how offended anyone was, the non-violent posts are just straight up better strategically. It’s an unforced error since they can easily be used against you regardless of context.

This too.

@cassette

No one will ever be banned by community tribunal. Feel free to let loose, people.

Apparently. Looks like we’re unlikely to reach consensus on any sort of rules, too. Most people just don’t care that much.

[anon38180840]

Finally caught up on this. I figured I’d probably be pretty pissed/annoyed after reading the ~80 or so posts I was behind, and I was not wrong.

[anon38180840]

@anon46587892

@anon38180840

zikzak:

The mods back then have in fact already banned him once or twice.

Not taking a position on this, just sayin’.

They banned him back then, you mean? I wasn’t a mod back then, and I’ve banned him once here for 24 hours. As far as I know nobody else has banned him here.

Back then = on 22

I didn’t know we knew who he was back then to even know if the mods on 22 had banned him there.

[anon38180840]

Oh yeah, that’s right.

[Lawnmower_Man]

My post wasn’t about you.

[anon38180840]

@Lawnmower_Man

My post wasn’t about you.

I’m not sure what you’re talking about. I was quoting your take that non-violent posts are better than violent rhetoric strategically to agree with your take.

[Lawnmower_Man]

Oh I thought maybe you were reading it as a shot about taking the quotes out of context. To sharpen my point, jmakin was reminiscing a bit about the old days with ikestrolls. As if he wouldn’t play the NBZ posts as a gotcha card whenever needed. Dude would be signing his posts with them.

“You support BLM but defend cheering for white cop murders. Interesting.”

[anon38180840]

No, not at all. Yeah I was just thinking in general terms, it’s not helping you influence people and your opponents can easily hit you over the head with it. It can also cede the moral high ground that the left currently holds on a lot of this stuff, which enables us to paint the right (accurately) as irresponsible, irrational, insane, dangerous, violent, etc.

[cassette]

Banning via poll means who gets to say what is based on how many friends a poster has. NBZ has enough friends to not get perma’d immediately. But cuse has more friends overall, so we will keep him over NBZ a couple months from now. Democracy in action.

[microbet]

I’m not sure how NotBruceZ really has friends. Maybe his non-gimmick account does. But there’s something wrong with giving people we know and like more slack around here? We shouldn’t gang up on people and treat unpopular people badly, but if no one is willing to stick up for someone, then maybe we all suck or maybe that person just sucks and it should be easier to ban them.

[superuberbob]

Right we don’t have a moral responsibility for the posts that I’ve seen from NBZ. If they were stopped here, they’d be made elsewhere and I’m not keen on being the thought police.

I haven’t seen NBZ cross the line into making specific threats of violence. Until then, I cannot support taking any action against him.

[Trolly]

@anon46587892

No one knows who he was but he mentioned he’d been banned on 22 back on Exiled

lol, so he was banned for being an ass on 22 (not an easy thing to do!) and now he’s in here stirring up shit just for giggles and people are actually defending him? Y’all are just too much.

[anon10387340]

I was also banned on 2+2 and it was actually a very easy thing to do. It should mean less than nothing here.

[microbet]

There’s a new prime suspect.

[anon38180840]

@superuberbob

Right we don’t have a moral responsibility for the posts that I’ve seen from NBZ. If they were stopped here, they’d be made elsewhere and I’m not keen on being the thought police.

Well, we disagree on that. I think we do have a moral responsibility, especially as mods. Given that I think that I have a moral responsibility, I’m going to follow it.