A Reluctant Farewell.

[red_jon]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Does anybody here honest-to-god think they should have a special exemption to make personal attacks against a poster because nobody likes him? That the rest of the forum should put up with your flames and rants and taunts and threadjacking and generally wiping your asses with the forum and the rest of the posters because a group of you don't like an individual poster and get your kicks from insulting him? If you think you're exempt, too damn bad, because you're not.

HE SAID HE WANTS ME DEAD. Personally I feel this is far worse than anything I (or anyone else) have EVER said to him.

I have had enough of the debate over his sexuality, no side will change so theres no point.

I wouldn't even have said anything about it if he hadn't given me permission in a pm.

Anyway, I hope PH returns.

[Saint Marcus]

One more insult directed at that poster and you're joining PH.

Insult directed at giancarlo? The guy was talking about killing gays for christ's sake! And in the past he has said that gays don't deserve any rights, and don't even deserve to live. In more than one country on this planet he could face trial for making comments like that!

And then when a person who is offended by mr.adolf-junior and understandably reacts to that by calling the guy an ugly freak he faces a ban. That's just disgusting.

The guy is stupid, we all know that. The guy is repressed when it comes to expressing his sexuality. And judging by the picture he once posted the guy certainly is ugly. And anyone who acts like a wanna-be Hitler is a freak.

It's disgusting to see the special protection the guy is getting from the mod(s). If one talks about killing people from a certain minority he should be banned for good, and certainly shouldn't be protected when people who are offended by him react to that.

[General Ludd]

It's the Golden Rule.

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Does anybody here honest-to-god think they should have a special exemption to make personal attacks against a poster because nobody likes him? That the rest of the forum should put up with your flames and rants and taunts and threadjacking and generally wiping your asses with the forum and the rest of the posters because a group of you don't like an individual poster and get your kicks from insulting him? If you think you're exempt, too damn bad, because you're not.

Just about every single one of his posts contains an insult or death wish/threat at someone or some people - yet you are surprised when all of the replies have the same content?


I'll agree it's really moronic when people make threads specificaly about him, or bring it up in a thread for no reason, though.

[red_jon]

Isn't what Giancarlo said worse than what civnation said?

(I'm not asking a rhetorical question, I'm geniunly asking - what was the worst thing Civvers said?)

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by lightblue
Now I realise I am pretty much a newbie (this time around anyway) who only hangs out in the OT forum, and that therefore my opinion doesn't count for much but still...

I think the penalties are too harsh. I realise that this is a privately-owned forum, and that we can't really complain about what is basically a free service. Still, a couple of days in the tank would've done fine for both of them.

I used to start with one or two day bans, or warnings by private message. With most people, that works. With some people and some issues, it doesn't. Two weeks away from a single internet forum is so inconceivably trivial for anyone who has the slightest semblence of a life - and if it isn't, those people should use the two weeks to get a life.

The problem with short bans and warnings, is that they are very time consuming for the mods, and to a lot of posters, they're a joke. I got all these "tough-guy" PM's about how a two day ban was nothing, blah blah blah.

With the Giancarlo-gay-gay hating-BS subject, I've handed out over a dozen bans, 30 warnings, had about a hunded PM's back and forth, ICQ conversations, and a total waste of my time over the months that adds up to 20-30 hours. So now I hand out bigger bans, and people either get the message, or they get gone.

Some of the remarks went slightly over the top, but these kind of confrontations is what make the OT forum fun. I realise that some of the remarks made might have been PG-13 or even 15 rated, and that they were not suitable for this forum.

Fun for some people, annoying to a large number of others who come here for different reasons.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Since the other thread is closed...

Originally posted by Osweld





Yet, he gets a lesser punishment then provost.

He got two weeks in effect, because he had a week from last time. He's now also a zero-tolerance, one post out of line and your ban doubles to four weeks, then eight, and if you haven't got the message after eight, you're gone for good, and your little DL too.

So he's three more posts from an enforced permaban.

Provost isn't.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by red_jon


HE SAID HE WANTS ME DEAD. Personally I feel this is far worse than anything I (or anyone else) have EVER said to him.

If he said it here, forward me the PM, or give me a link to the post. I didn't see it. If you forward me the PM or send me the link to that particular post, he's one step closer to being gone.

If he didn't say it here, there's nothing I can do about it.

The solution is to notify the mods with the "report this post" link, or to email me directly. Not to attack/insult him back.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Mark L


Insult directed at giancarlo? The guy was talking about killing gays for christ's sake! And in the past he has said that gays don't deserve any rights, and don't even deserve to live. In more than one country on this planet he could face trial for making comments like that!

Until recently, in some countries he could go on trial for not growing a beard. What's your point? He's being banned for his comments (which mostly come about in his denials/rants when people start calling him gay as a joke), and is close to being the second enforced permaban on this site.

And then when a person who is offended by mr.adolf-junior and understandably reacts to that by calling the guy an ugly freak he faces a ban. That's just disgusting.

He doesn't face a ban unless he keeps launching insults at someone who is no longer able to post - to respond to the insults, to provoke the insults, to be provoked by the insults, or to get one post closer to a permaban. red_jon is just taking gratuitous shots at Giancarlo. We ALL know what red_jon (and a lot of others) think of Giancarlo. We don't need to hear it yet again.

It's disgusting to see the special protection the guy is getting from the mod(s). If one talks about killing people from a certain minority he should be banned for good, and certainly shouldn't be protected when people who are offended by him react to that.

What Giancarlo says, when we see it, is dealt with on a case by case basis. If other people are offended, their remedy is to complain to the mods/admins, not to start in on him.

[Dauphin]

It always struck me that Gianni was attention seeking. I think this event has certainly acheived that, if that was his aim.

The decision has been made and MtG has explained the decision he made. If MarkG or DanQ have nothing to add, I personnaly see little point in this discussion.

To coin a phrase "This is not a democracy - Case Closed".

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by red_jon
Isn't what Giancarlo said worse than what civnation said?

(I'm not asking a rhetorical question, I'm geniunly asking - what was the worst thing Civvers said?)

God, there's so many. The gist of it was that all gays are condemned sinners who deserve an eternity of torment, and that "Christian" "love" required consistent and complete harassment and abuse of gays unless they repented blah blah blah.

Throw in the bits about stoning disobedient children, etc. repeated ad nauseum.

His ban became permanent when he insisted that he would continue making such posts. He basically explained that Jesus Christ is really the forum owner (I guess Markos does bear a passing resemblance ) and that I had a duty as a Christian to let him say what he wanted, or else I was condemned to hell.

So I in effect told him "you first"

[red_jon]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
If he said it here, forward me the PM, or give me a link to the post. I didn't see it. If you forward me the PM or send me the link to that particular post, he's one step closer to being gone.

I meant because I'm gay, he wants me dead.


And Provost Harrison, if you see this, don't leave over Giancarlo, that way he has got ust what he wants - attention and more trouble.

[Solly]

He's not leaving because of Giancarlo, he's leaving because of the Mods.

[Ted Striker]

ll these "tough-guy" PM's about how a two day ban was nothing, blah blah blah

How SAD!

The scene: A seedy inner city bar.

James: Yeah, man, I can hang with the best of them.

Tyrone: That so. Where'd you do your time, dawg? Rikers Island? Chino?

James: Naw, man, 2 days banned from Apolyton. Toughest stretch I ever did.

Tyrone: You got street credibilty in my book, player.

*Slaps hands together.*

[MichaeltheGreat]

ROFLMFAO - you got it exactly! And it IS sad.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by red_jon
I meant because I'm gay, he wants me dead.

You really mean "I wanted to decieve the moderator, but he would not buy it"