Who do I see about getting my PolyPLUS refunded?

[MarkG]

Originally posted by CyberShy
I think you just totally missed the entire idea of the church.

i was joking about the hell thing

[Robert]

Originally posted by MarkG
i was joking about the hell thing

I know, but as a good christian I never miss a change to speak good about my faith

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Can we add that smiley to the Herresson demand list?

I like it

QFT

[Nubclear]

It's not often that I agree with CyberShy but that was well argued.

No. "Apolyton, right or wrong!" is not a particularly good argument. It can easily be counterargued that Joncha didn't donate because he has "Apolyton patriotism" or believes "Apolyton above everything!", but rather because he enjoyed the site and wanted to support it, and now he does not enjoy it and thus does not want to support it. Apolyton is not an intrinsic good itself, and it seems rather absurd to put forth that it is - Apolyton is good extrinsic to some other thing that it fulfils, and if it no longer actualises that, then it isn't good. The objections expressed by CyberShy don't particularly work against this point.

Also, the point about using money to influence an organisation being "wrong" seems somewhat inane. If I give money to the Democratic Party here in the United States, and it suddenly begins to adopt positions that I am opposed to, should I simply say "lol it would be wrong to use money to try to influence them!"? Of course not - one could argue that it would not be moral for me to support a thing that I now oppose, but furthermore, the funds themselves were contingent upon some thing, and thus with the condition no longer being fulfilled, it is natural that the funds be withdrawn.

To say that you either have to support Apolyton 100% in absolutely everything through thick and thin and fire and rain OR you shouldn't support it at all (a more inane version of "LOVE IT FOR LEAVE IT!!!111!") is so obviously a false dichotomy that I'm not really sure how it even remotely qualifies as a "good argument".

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Ming


Nahhh... plus, he's not as bad as some
But he is currently banned for other actions

This is exactly what people are complaining about.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by DaShi

This is exactly what people are complaining about.

People are complaining about nothing.

The way it works here is that if you get put on the mods' "bad list", they will ban you for the least infraction of the rules, and often for things that people not on the bad list would get away with.

There's nothing unfair about that, since you have to do quite a bit of work to get on the bad list in the first place. If you are not a troublemaker, you likely will get a mere warning. On the other hand, if you are a notorious troublemaker, you will get banned and banned until you stop breaking the rules. If you are someone who deliberately tries to brush the limits to annoy the mods, then they will interpret the rules liberally and ban you.

It's quite simple.

I know this from personal experience. I was for a time being banned on sight, but I haven't been banned since about 2004 IIRC, because I stopped breaking the rules all the time.

Saying that it is unequal treatment is like saying that a judge who gives a repeat offender a harsher sentence is being unfair.

[MarkG]

agathon = logic =

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by CyberShy


I know, but as a good christian I never miss a change to speak good about my faith

I'd never noticed

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by MarkG
agathon = logic =

Yes. Clearly, basing one's argument on anecdotal evidence shows a firm understanding of logic.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Lorizael

Yes. Clearly, basing one's argument on anecdotal evidence shows a firm understanding of logic.

What's anecdotal about it?

The same thing has happened to numerous people. The moderators have stated until they were blue in the face that this is the policy. You have been here long enough to know it.

Your problem is that you simply cannot handle the facts, and just keep whining when you have absolutely no case at all.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


I'd never noticed

Learned from you

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Agathon
What's anecdotal about it?

The same thing has happened to numerous people. The moderators have stated until they were blue in the face that this is the policy. You have been here long enough to know it.

Your problem is that you simply cannot handle the facts, and just keep whining when you have absolutely no case at all.

What's anecdotal would be the part where you talk about your "personal experience."

Anyways, I won't dispute that the moderators here apply the rules inconsistently and unfairly; I just felt like being an ass about it.

The argument that I've been trying to make over the past couple of weeks is that while the moderators are perfectly within their rights to treat repeat offenders differently than some of the more benign posters, this has an effect on the culture of Apolyton.

It makes it look as if people are taking sides. As if the administration has favored posters. As if the administration has grudges against certain posters. All in all, it creates an environment where people distrust and disapprove of the moderating because of the relative extremes that can be witnessed here.

Ming is not a fascist. DanQ is not a fascist. A lot is tolerated here that wouldn't be tolerated elsewhere. But they look like fascists when they start deleting threads and waving the banning rod around as if it were a weapon. It's about the image, imo. The admins are - at least on this website - public figures, and how they present themselves has consequences.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Agathon


People are complaining about nothing.

The way it works here is that if you get put on the mods' "bad list", they will ban you for the least infraction of the rules, and often for things that people not on the bad list would get away with.

There's nothing unfair about that, since you have to do quite a bit of work to get on the bad list in the first place. If you are not a troublemaker, you likely will get a mere warning. On the other hand, if you are a notorious troublemaker, you will get banned and banned until you stop breaking the rules. If you are someone who deliberately tries to brush the limits to annoy the mods, then they will interpret the rules liberally and ban you.

It's quite simple.

I know this from personal experience. I was for a time being banned on sight, but I haven't been banned since about 2004 IIRC, because I stopped breaking the rules all the time.

Saying that it is unequal treatment is like saying that a judge who gives a repeat offender a harsher sentence is being unfair.

Sanity returning to Poly