That account is permabanned, although technically I may have set some end date when I made the ban. Based on the user saying he wouldn’t post here in exchange for having a refund of his donations, I think we would need a forum vote to reinstate him.
It’s hard to talk about why this is problematic without referencing precedents and running foul of the “old drama” rule (nice Kafkaesque nightmare created here) but I think others were perma’d and have since returned.
1 Like
If people want to talk about it, you will be safe from “old drama” infractions. But I think the quickest way to resolve it would be a poll. I will abide by the results.
I don’t know what the legal terminology is for applying a law that doesn’t exist.
Requiring a poll for a member to return has never been a thing. It’s just like not letting new members vote was never a thing, and like not letting gimmicks vote if the member has not voted on their main account was never a thing.
My view is that I’m holding audit_the_audit to his end of a bargain that he made, and that I shouldn’t unilaterally undo the bargain. If the forum as a whole wants to “let him off the hook,” so to speak, then that’s fine with me.
I believe there is precedent for using polls to reverse permabans, so you can frame if that way if you like.
Or he could simply start posting here under a new name. There is precedence for posters creating a new account to avoid the critical scrutiny their known accounts would have attracted, two very obvious regulars springing to mind.
1 Like
The issue here is that the new account announced “hey I’m the poster formerly known as X” where X is a poster that said he wouldn’t post here any more in exchange for monetary payment. I don’t think that applies to the other examples you have in mind.
Since X’s account was deleted at his own request, that makes it a little hard to establish the record. But I think I’ve got the gist of it.
There was no poll to signal the forum as a whole agreeing to any “bargain”.
Also, it is not the same as a permaban.
who?
I permabanned the new account, so you can have a poll to reverse that. Anyway, I think I’ve made my position clear, and I’ve given you a path forward if you want to take it.
1 Like
Come on.
This wasn’t a bargain between an individual and the forum. This was a bargain between two individual members of the forum, and none of UP’s donations were refunded.
2 Likes
Who do you mean by “you guys”? Jman made that poll, most of “you guys” voted to not ban, and your case was substantially different than the issue here.
I mean that you guys prompted that poll. go relitigate it if you want, I won’t, that is what happened.
It appears I’ve fallen into your “clever” trap andI’ll eat a dumbass 4 day ban for correcting falsehoods, oh noes
You don’t need to accuse me of laying a trap. Econo gave the green light to discuss the issue of having a poll for a member to return after voluntarily leaving. The circumstances in your case are significantly different but not completely unrelated so we should be ok.
Like the “rules that don’t exist” examples I listed above, there was no rule or precedent for permabanning that account. Furthermore, the reasoning was flawed.
Vict0ar agreed to be permanently banned in exchange for $90, which he received. A forum of poker players shouldn’t allow angle shooting.
4 Likes
The account I’m talking about there is audit_the_audit.
