[serious] Off Topic Moderation Input - Part 2

[giblets]

I don't know anything about Norv Turner so I'll vote against it.

[Al B. Sure!]

It's not a serious request. It was an attempt to get under Ben's skin while he was viewing the thread.

[giblets]

He's banned but he's still reading the forum compulsively. He really has no life.

[Hauldren Collider]

He still registers as "logged in," he just can't post.

[ZEE]

He's banned but he's still reading the forum compulsively. He really has no life.

wow.

even by AAHZ-standards™ this whole part of the thread is a bit creepy.

[Herman Cain]

Do you even have standards?

[ZEE]

all too easy.

[Al B. Sure!]

No. He likes the Seattle Seahawks.

[ZEE]

as long as they don't fire Pete Carroll i am just riding this season out.

and we beat the Giants.

[Nikolai]

Nikolai: Moral Relativist Extraordinaire

And no, while I can't recall anybody else on apolyton making threats, I highly doubt that anybody has repeated their threats multiple times over the course of a month (with the possible exception of Dale, I was absent during that debacle). That's what crosses the line from "being a schmuck online" to "being a dangerously unbalanced schmuck online"

Stick to your standards, that's all. There is a lot of questionable **** going on here every day, but when it's Ben, everything is suddenly much worse and must be stopped with a half year ban. I haven't read the thread in question, but to me this seems like just another case of treating him worse than others because he isn't a part of the gang.

[loinburger]

Stick to your standards, that's all. There is a lot of questionable **** going on here every day, but when it's Ben, everything is suddenly much worse and must be stopped with a half year ban. I haven't read the thread in question, but to me this seems like just another case of treating him worse than others because he isn't a part of the gang.

Who else has physically threatened another poster? Rather, who has physically threatened another poster, been reported to the mods, and not been punished?

Since you can't be arsed to read the thread in question before blindly defending BK: He physically threatened another poster (me, and other posters as well), continued to do so over the course of a month, and was banned as a result. Are you still going to say that he shouldn't have been banned? If so, then if threatening another poster isn't worthy of a ban, then what is worthy of a ban?

And for ****'s sake, read the thread before you opine on it. If BK were going to be banned for "not being part of the gang" then he would have been banned years ago. Maybe he was banned for a good reason! Not that you would know this if you can't even read the thread before jumping to his defense.

[Al B. Sure!]

as long as they don't fire Pete Carroll i am just riding this season out.

and we beat the Giants.

[Thoth]

He still registers as "logged in," he just can't post.

Good ****ing riddance.

Loin, I'm sorry it took actual threats of violence against you to rid this forum of it's worst asinine moron, but I'm glad that it has finally happened.

[Jon Miller]

Since I am getting PMs from Ben.

Remember the rules:
"The Off Topic Forum will be moderated more lightly than other forums.
Topics that might be considered 'spam' or 'trolling' in on topic forums will more often be tolerated in the Off Topic.
Posters who want to have serious debates can insert the label "[serious]" into their thread titles. We'd ask users to respect their wishes and remain on topic in those threads. If you wish to have a lighthearted thread on the same subject, start a new thread.
Jokes / mild name-calling / banter etc. are allowed as along as their attitude is jovial or humorous. Malicious personal attacks, attacks that are deemed to be aimed at driving other users from the site and personal threats will not be tolerated.
There may be some quirky traditions in the Off Topic that appear to break some of the main site rules, such as the Finnish thread. These are allowed."

Many of you have at some point broken one (probably I have too), and some are prone to breaking them. Neither I nor Mike nor anyone who moderates the OT are inclined to strictly enforce the rules and even HC is old enough to be reasonable and responsible and behave (generally).

If someone, in this case Ben, repeatedly breaks the rules and behaves inappropriately, then that person will be banned. This means 6 months or more.

If you don't want to be banned, behave appropriately.

Jon

[notyoueither]

attacks that are deemed to be aimed at driving other users from the site... will not be tolerated