Moderation

The u is dumb. There, I said it.

no u

3 Likes

I still grind my teeth a bit when I do CSS. Iā€™ve accepted that itā€™s just the way it is for the actual compiled files but my LESS variables also follow the same nonsense as it would be churlish to do background-color: @background-colour; (eg)

(if thereā€™s a user called background-colour so I @'ed you)

Soā€¦ when does @anachronistic get the boot?

2 Likes

lmao at background-colour btw.

Poll didnā€™t have much support, right? Seems like he gets to stay.

30 to 25 in favor of banning as it stands.

Thatā€™s not good enough for a ban, imo.

Is there a nuclear option?

2 Likes

Is this the god damn US Senate now?

2 Likes

:man_shrugging:

My feeling is that you need to be pretty damn unpopular to get banned. 45% of the community wants him to stay, which seems like heā€™s fine. Of course there are no actual rules about this so maybe you can convince a mod to pop him.

FWIW I voted for a ban.

Something something something tyranny of the minority something something

1 Like

You guys wanted to ban nbz and he is a solid contributor nowadays from what I can see - so i voted no. I also took ano off ignore and have had very little of the issues I had before. I cant really tell what his crime is

image

Itā€™s been less noticeable since I started the poll, but he was constantly trolling fast moving threads and the few posters that didnā€™t have him on ignore kept engaging him. When something like the COVID or Floyd thread has 300 posts in one day, I donā€™t want to wade through 100 of those being Raids and the people engaging him. Most of the forum agrees.

6 Likes

Itā€™s 30-25. That makes it 29-26. But w/e. Hard to keep up the big threads daily as is. If I hear one person cry about the US senate going forwardā€¦

I think it should take more than a simple majority of posters for a ban because of selection bias. All the posters who ardently want X poster banned will vote, the ones who donā€™t really give a shit will not even open the thread or be aware of the controversy. If a poster is barely losing a getting banned vote then if everyone were forced to vote theyā€™d probably bigly defeat the getting banned vote.

If weā€™re having a simple majority to ban vote some other poster should have to volunteer as the opposition in a binding survivor thunderdome.

3 Likes

i agree with Keed here, i voted to ban him because he was truly truly awful when that poll came around but he has gotten better and I donā€™t support a simple majority ban at the moment. Given the current goings on I would switch my vote if i could

Ditto

eta: I was ā€œdittoā€-ing a post which I thought I saw that said that 55% of a forum voting to ban someone should carry the day (I think it was in response to a post that said that 45% of a forum voting not to ban someone is a significant pct, or something like that).

eta2: I do NOT want to change my vote.

I said Iā€™d change my vote if he demonstrates who he is on 2p2, so if itā€™s 28-27 thatā€™s all he has to do to get a majority.