I’m not trying to be a dick. If you read the thread I’m not sure how you could come to the conclusion that it is the reason he is stepping down. That would be a pretty wild and condescending thing to think, that jmakin is leaving because people said that people sometimes rage quit the site.
2 Likes
I think it’s an accurate conclusion. They are linked.
1 Like
People razzed him for being wrong about something. That’s not why he stepped down.
Ok so we’re equivocating on “because”. It would have been any other confrontation an hour or day from now if not this one. He doesn’t want to do it anymore. That’s obviously fine and a very sane thing to decide. But let’s not get wild and assign blame to that thread or those individuals who set him off.
1 Like
Not to be condescending but I propose everyone just give this entire subject an 8-hour cooling off period and re-assess.
1 Like
The notion that the volunteers that keep this place going should just take bottomless amounts of misery on the chin is not really a good one.
1 Like
So when the mods or the admins post something incorrect we should just let it slide?
Sounds like 22
1 Like
Just so people don’t make false connections, I publicly posted that the thread should be closed but did not PM any mods asking for it to be. I am glad it was though.
Yes, they should of said it had .000001% to do with him stepping down. “Nothing” was not correct.
As usually the people who are wrong play the semantic game rather than just saying “yeah, maybe he overreacted to people making up fake arguments in a debate thread”
2 Likes
You need to wait 4 hours between posts in this topic
Please make this permanent.
1 Like
Pretty sure it’s well more than .000001%
I swear so many of you want to bicker all day. You specifically have been banned how many times? Yet apparently can’t stop? really?
Not everyone can be Joe Manchin.
He’s not RAIDS.
1 Like
This was said
Then
I’m saying you are correct. It did not have “nothing” to do with it.
This was the point they were making.
It’s alway a projection
That one 24 hour ban wasn’t enough I guess?
3 Likes
Grunching severely here, but just gonna state for the record that I trust our mods to do whatever they feel is in the best interest of this forum and it’s community. There are likely a lot of people like me who don’t voice this opinion enough simply because we avoid the forum drama so we don’t see any reason to.
11 Likes
I’ll use my 4 hour post to say welcome back bud. Glad to see you.
2 Likes
Welcome back Marty & my apologies for getting upset at you, I did indeed take some offence in the heat of the moment.
What can I say, but I love Scotland and its people, even if we fail sometimes.
My bad 
4 Likes
There seems to be two distinct approaches to moderating “repeat offenders”:
-
Escalating sanctions (e.g., increasing the length of temp-bans)
-
Lowering the violation threshold (e.g., give a shorter leash to past offenders)
UP is lightly moderated and the “repeat offender” phenomenon is somewhat rare but it seems as if UP goes for the escalating sanctions approach though I am not sure.
Yes, you were technically correct.
You also are missing the point.
This really isn’t hard, I’ll put you on team miserable.
Sending love your way
My point was that the correction is ignoring the point the poster was making.
My intention was not to be disrespectful but after reading my post again I think it was an asshole thing to say.
Im going to apologize and try to stick to the sports threads.
1 Like