If jmakin hadn’t already been self banned, would you and the rest of the team permabanned him for what you permabanned his new account for?
‘Hey guys, Jmakin here and I’m about to do the Ice Bucket Challenge!’
1 Like
Probably but why not allow the community decide his fate instead.
I actually have a question about the wording of this proposal. AFAIK jmakin is currently banned, both for threats and for violation of the banned gimmick accounts rule. The question for RFC is whether that ban should be overturned. Accordingly, the question should be “Should jmakin be unbanned?” and 60% affirmative votes should be required for the proposal to succeed.
Jmakin is not currently permabanned. He is currently self-banned. This is an RFC to permanently ban him so 60 percent is required to permanently ban him.
Of course if you are advocating for a system where a moderator can permanently ban someone and have that decision upheld by a 40 percent vote, sounds like there would be some pushback to that, and also Churchill, who just “lost” a ban vote with over 50 percent in favor of the ban, would be permanently banned. The Sabo ban was upheld by a 60 percent vote, for example.
This is yet another example why this whole process is a joke and just goes in circles with constant reinterpretations.
These were posted by Wookie in the Sabo thread just yesterday, with the exact opposite position as starting point:
Team Ban doesn’t even know or follow its own rules consistently. Not only are the opposite takes above posted by two of the biggest AM participants in Team Ban just hours apart, just look at the current RFCs. All but one are standard open straw polls for 3 days, and one is a secret poll open for 6 days. Why did otatop make Sabo’s secret and longer? Who knows and who cares because the rules are all made up as you go.
If you all stopped trying to permaban regulars except for obvious violations of TOS, all this ridiculous, inconsistent, and controversial bullshit would be significantly reduced. You really think any of this constant voting on who stays and who goes is helping anything?
But you all love it as much as anyone or you wouldn’t be going in these circles over and over, and applying or making up the rules as convenient at the moment to get posters you don’t like. Then blame others for the inevitable and predictable ensuing drama that you gleefully participate in.
You are mistaken. Jmakin is permanently suspended under the banned gimmicks rule:
If a poster is banned via moderator action–either temporarily or permanently–any non-passive behavior made on another account will result in that account being permanently suspended. Non-passive behavior is defined as posting, voting in polls, and other actions determined to be hostile at the discretion of the moderators.
Any deviation from this rule requires an RFC, which is what you are proposing.
The poll ITT isn’t a 3 day poll, it has no closing date as far as I can tell. I made the Sabo poll secret and time limited so there can’t be accusations of it being closed when it became a favorable result for one side or the other. It’s open for a week, anyone who wants to vote in it can, and next Friday we’ll know the results.
1 Like
I must have missed the memo where Wookie and I are the same poster.
It’s more complicated than that because jmakin has been banned several times for several reasons.
Jmakin and jmakin_the_wise were self banned by request.
luckiest_man_alive was banned for threatening PMs on 2+2.
darth_brooks was banned for being a banned user gimmick.
These complications are why I made my modest proposal.
Jmakin’s gimmicks are permanently suspended. His main account is and remains self-banned.
It’s the classic in-group out-group dynamic. Where the in-group consists of a variety of different viewpoints and perspectives, while the out-group bands together, never criticizes each other, and has their own private forum where no one from the in-group is allowed to participate.
3 Likes
This is true, although I’m really more on team “Maximum number of users posting here” than team Captains directly.
2 Likes
Didn’t accuse you of being same poster but illustrating what a joke this whole process is that simulataneous opposite positions are being advocated as the permaban process in parallel RFCs.
You’re a lawyer, one of the most engaged members in this saga, and OP of the RFC… If you can’t be or won’t be bothered to understand the basic premises, what’s the whole fucking point of any of this.
Then recommend you consider dual citizenship and also join the so-called captains forum.
Last 7 days:
UP: 4.2k posts
Other site: 2.5k posts
Last 24 hrs:
UP: 557 posts
Other site: 364 posts
Data via About on each site, as of this moment. Note none of the posts on other site involve discussion of banning any of the members. That’s a UP only topic area.
No, n% is required to move on to the next step, which is another vote
It seems to be working fine.
lol. who cares. both of these numbers are pathetic. number of posts is a shitpoor metric too. post your DAU and other data. like what are you even trying to state when you post numbers like that?
1 Like
Pretty clear what I was stating, as I explicitly stated it.
If otatop wants to engage with wider set of active posters, he should consider coming.over.
What does that have to do with you?