IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Closed TopicStart new topic
Why is AJ banned?
CodeCat
post 12 Oct 2009, 15:02
Post #1


ELJGSCBD!!!
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 6 June 2009
From: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Member No.: 22



I came here and saw that AJ has been banned, but I don't see any rules that he's broken. All he did was trying to prevent another member from getting banned unfairly, and instead was attacked and then banned for it by Stinger. If you ask me, Stinger has broken more rules than AJ has.

QUOTE (Stinger)
So here's my advice to you: stop trolling our forums and go back to Fallout Studios as it caters to your taste. Second of all, get a life.


The rules say no personal attacks, yet this is quite clearly an attack on not just AJ but on just about any member that is on both this board and FS. Stinger accuses AJ of trying to stir up trouble between SWR and FS, but his own post does exactly that.

AJ himself was just voicing an opinion, as is allowed within the rules:

QUOTE (Rules)
4. Opinions/equality.

Opinions are just that: opinions. No one's opinion is better than anyone else's so we ask you to please be mindful of how this affects another user when entering into a discussion with them regarding a topic or burning issue.


From what I've seen, Stinger's opinion was at odds with AJ's and Stinger subsequently banned AJ because Stinger couldn't take being disagreed with.

Now here's another part of the rules:

QUOTE (Rules)
We view warn Level increases and Bans as a last resort as we believe everyone has something to offer our forums.


This is quite clearly contradicted by Stinger in his post:

QUOTE (Stinger)
There is another issue at hand, and that is that you have broken a four month long posting hiatus to come back for this. You wouldn't be trying to stir up trouble between Fallout Studios and SWR Productions, would you? You're obviously not here for the mods as you show no history of activity in those areas. In fact, what your history does reveal is that you are only here to argue with the SWR Leadership about how we run our forums. You thrive of conflict.


If you believe that everyone has something to offer, why accuse someone of the opposite? AJ came here to offer what he could - to prevent an innocent member from being banned, just as I am doing now. AJ may have had nothing else to offer, but as the rules state everyone has something to offer. Therefore, to attack someone for actually trying to solve a problem, and then banning him when he responds to his motives being questioned, contradicts the statement in the rules above.

This post has been edited by CodeCat: 12 Oct 2009, 15:06
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alias
post 12 Oct 2009, 15:34
Post #2


Cool Guy
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 1317
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Sydney
Member No.: 46



If you look at all seven of AJ's post counting posts you'll see they are all criticising here. Now, while I have no problems with critics, the problem is his motive.
I'm sure you remember that I was a heavy critic of the management at Fallout. This however was motivated with improvement of Fallout, and as such will have direct positive benefits to me if the changes suggested are actually implemented. However in the case of AJ, all seven of his posts are criticisms. It is obvious that he has no purpose in 'suggesting' improvements as they wouldn't benefit him anyway, it would be pointless. Not to mention the way he put forward his points were rather arrogant and the tone he portrayed it in made it sound like "because I'm moderator at Fallout I know better than you".

Thus we can concur he's just trying to stir up trouble, he was "trolling", I believe is the terminology you'd use. Same reason you "banned" me for. I could argue that his ban is as rubbish as mine is at Fallout but I really show no feeling of wanting to go back there, similarly to AJ saying he had no interest in coming here.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MARS
post 12 Oct 2009, 15:36
Post #3



Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 5870
Joined: 2 June 2009
Member No.: 10



Since we had already unbanned Nuclear a whole week ago, any continuation of this whole debate in the old thread wasn't really necessary in the first place. The thread was dedicated to proving Nuclear's innocence and as far as we're concerned, this has been resolved. While I'm not wishing any offence to AJ, it was him who decided to take this further. That's all I'm gonna say, just thought I'd throw this out here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CodeCat
post 12 Oct 2009, 15:46
Post #4


ELJGSCBD!!!
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 6 June 2009
From: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Member No.: 22



Your ban at FS is not in question here. Nor are AJ's motives, because they are quite clear from the beginning:

QUOTE
They are indeed brothers, they both tend to use the same computer and email. Admittedly, retarded may be a tad on the strong side, but they are not the brightest bulbs in the box. However, I can verify Zhao's point, having played with them both independently, and together, and having seen them communicate on a level that is possible only in real time. I think that you've been overtly forceful here, and have tried, found guilty, and executed two members who are in fact innocent....


There is nothing offensive or criticising whatsoever in that post. It just states the facts and experiences of AJ himself.

Stinger's first reply tries to refute AJ's first-hand experience with the two being banned, while at the same time stating that one of the members has been unbanned. AJ's reply after that only criticised what he thought was a rather extreme action, which furthermore caused considerable collateral damage. AJ was never trying to get Nuclear to be unbanned, he was trying to prevent members from being banned without reason other than that, as Stinger stated it, being 'retarded'.

This post has been edited by CodeCat: 12 Oct 2009, 15:48
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RaiDK
post 12 Oct 2009, 15:48
Post #5


GAAAAAAAAAIKIIIIIIIIING!
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 215
Joined: 7 June 2009
Member No.: 68



In before a few full pages of this topic going nowhere.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alias
post 12 Oct 2009, 16:00
Post #6


Cool Guy
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 1317
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Sydney
Member No.: 46



QUOTE (CodeCat @ 12 Oct 2009, 22:46) *
Your ban at FS is not in question here. Nor are AJ's motives, because they are quite clear from the beginning:
They are indeed quite clear from the beginning;
AJ's first four posts after he registered in June:
http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.ph...8&#entry608
http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.ph...3&#entry633
http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.ph...5&#entry685
http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.ph...3&#entry713
Are all directly dealing with criticising SWR.
Then, four months later he decided to pop back in just for the sake of sorting out an issue that was already sorted?
I cannot see how he could foreseeably be a productive member of the community if his only purpose on this forum is to criticise on issues that don't even concern himself.

QUOTE (CodeCat @ 12 Oct 2009, 22:46) *
There is nothing offensive or criticising whatsoever in that post. It just states the facts and experiences of AJ himself.
One post out of seven.

QUOTE (CodeCat @ 12 Oct 2009, 22:46) *
Stinger's first reply tries to refute AJ's first-hand experience with the two being banned, while at the same time stating that one of the members has been unbanned. AJ's reply after that only criticised what he thought was a rather extreme action, which furthermore caused considerable collateral damage. AJ was never trying to get Nuclear to be unbanned, he was trying to prevent members from being banned without reason other than that, as Stinger stated it, being 'retarded'.
If you actually bothered to read the thread in the first place you'd realise I was the one that called them 'retarded' and the reason the two were banned was because:
QUOTE
The members had the same writing and paragraphing style. There was the close proximity of posts and the fact that they had the same internet protocol address. Then Generalh created an account with "nuclear" in the email address. In the presence of these facts, the ban was imposed on Nuclear's account. Given all of that, it was hard not to believe they were the same person.

Once it was realised that there was a misunderstanding, the ban was reversed. However, even after the issue was solved, AJ continued his crusade.

This post has been edited by Alias: 12 Oct 2009, 16:04


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The_Hunter
post 12 Oct 2009, 16:23
Post #7



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 5732
Joined: 31 May 2009
From: The Netherlands
Member No.: 1
Projects: SWR Productions
Bitch slapping SAGE since 2003



QUOTE (RaiDK @ 12 Oct 2009, 13:48) *
In before a few full pages of this topic going nowhere.


You got that right so i'll end it right here.

If you wonder we do things differently the combined administration and moderation had backing on the actions token by Stinger so if your going to blame anyone blame all of us and not point a finger at one person of our administration or moderation.
Finaly we are not blindly tied to the rules so that people can find loop holes that allow them to behave in an annoying and frustrating way so instead of constantly changing rules to fix the loop holes we just get rid of those who decide to behave in such a manner.

Simple as that if you don't like that nobody is asking you to stay.

What's done is done and it aint going to change.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28 March 2024 - 22:20