Behaviour and bans

[Donny osmond]

I have a cunning plan. UG, why don't you register under another name? That way the mods can continue to stand in the corner they've painted themselves into with the "death penalty for threats" stance, while quietly allowing the will of the board (except Donny and Cas) to prevail.

"The will of the board" fucking hell, give yourself a crown why don't you

Thanks.

I hereby dub thee, Sir Cryalot.

Nice one

[Zhivago]

I have a cunning plan. UG, why don't you register under another name? That way the mods can continue to stand in the corner they've painted themselves into with the "death penalty for threats" stance, while quietly allowing the will of the board (except Donny and Cas) to prevail.

This is really the heart of the issue.

Actually, the heart of the issue is a poster who has repeatedly broken the board rules and has failed to respond to any previous requests to moderate his behavior. The rules apply to everyone, and whilst we don't operate a zero tolerance approach on here, a line has to be drawn somewhere. We have been very tolerant, far more so than many websites, but there are limits.

That is the heart of the issue.

No one disputes that. But there is clearly a dispute about where the line should be drawn. And the general opinion/will of the majority of 'Politics and stuff' posters seems to be that the nuclear option was used when it shouldn't have been.

[Sandydragon]

From the board rules, acceptance of which is a condition of being able to post on here:

ules

1. By registering for membership, you agree that you shall abide by the laws of any relevant jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, that jurisdiction in which you reside, the law of England and Wales, and the law and policies of the European Union. Members agree to indemnify the owners, administrators and moderators against any breach of criminal or civil law committed by them by posting on the board. Members accept and agree that any dispute will be determined by the law of England and Wales and in the courts of England and Wales.

Threatening behavior on a social media website is contrary to English Law. The line gets drawn at the point where a poster's activity breaches said law.

[Zhivago]

From the board rules, acceptance of which is a condition of being able to post on here:

ules

1. By registering for membership, you agree that you shall abide by the laws of any relevant jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, that jurisdiction in which you reside, the law of England and Wales, and the law and policies of the European Union. Members agree to indemnify the owners, administrators and moderators against any breach of criminal or civil law committed by them by posting on the board. Members accept and agree that any dispute will be determined by the law of England and Wales and in the courts of England and Wales.

Threatening behavior on a social media website is contrary to English Law. The line gets drawn at the point where a poster's activity breaches said law.

I trust you also reported him to the police then, right?

[Sandydragon]

From the board rules, acceptance of which is a condition of being able to post on here:

ules

1. By registering for membership, you agree that you shall abide by the laws of any relevant jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, that jurisdiction in which you reside, the law of England and Wales, and the law and policies of the European Union. Members agree to indemnify the owners, administrators and moderators against any breach of criminal or civil law committed by them by posting on the board. Members accept and agree that any dispute will be determined by the law of England and Wales and in the courts of England and Wales.

Threatening behavior on a social media website is contrary to English Law. The line gets drawn at the point where a poster's activity breaches said law.

I trust you also reported him to the police then, right?

A poster could take that initiative if they so wished. That would be their call, the role of the moderators (one of them) is to keep the board out of trouble if such an incident occurs. We do that by removing such posts, handing out sanctions to prevent/deter future occurrences and providing evidence to the police if they so wish to receive it.

The rules on here apply to everyone; a kind of universal justice that I assumed you would be comfortable with. Rest assured, if someone else threatens anyone, the sanction will be consistent.

[Stooo]

I have a cunning plan. UG, why don't you register under another name? That way the mods can continue to stand in the corner they've painted themselves into with the "death penalty for threats" stance, while quietly allowing the will of the board (except Donny and Cas) to prevail.

This is really the heart of the issue.

Actually, the heart of the issue is I'm a right wing fascist and I wanted to get my own back.

That is the heart of the issue.

Helped you out there mate.

[morepork]

I still find it odd that people consider the only way to have a discussion is with people ranting and screaming from an extreme position. There'd be plenty of disagreement on how to go forward on a great many general policy areas and specifics from the broad mass in the middle

Yeah. Nice one. Stay in the middle or fuck off. "Extreme" is a very relative definition. I think the current political centre that is so in fashion these days to be quite extreme.

Except that "stay in the middle or fuck off" isn't remotely the point digby was making.

I still find it odd that people consider the only way to have a discussion is with people ranting and screaming from an extreme position. There'd be plenty of disagreement on how to go forward on a great many general policy areas and specifics from the broad mass in the middle

Yeah. Nice one. Stay in the middle or fuck off. "Extreme" is a very relative definition. I think the current political centre that is so in fashion these days to be quite extreme.

A riveting amalgam of the middle masses.

[Zhivago]

From the board rules, acceptance of which is a condition of being able to post on here:



Threatening behavior on a social media website is contrary to English Law. The line gets drawn at the point where a poster's activity breaches said law.

I trust you also reported him to the police then, right?

A poster could take that initiative if they so wished. That would be their call, the role of the moderators (one of them) is to keep the board out of trouble if such an incident occurs. We do that by removing such posts, handing out sanctions to prevent/deter future occurrences and providing evidence to the police if they so wish to receive it.

The rules on here apply to everyone; a kind of universal justice that I assumed you would be comfortable with. Rest assured, if someone else threatens anyone, the sanction will be consistent.

There pretty much won't be anything left of a board soon, if you continue!

You didn't report it to the police, and neither would anyone else, because the threat was iirc that cashead should watch his personal abuse of UG (abuse of UG relating to his wife leaving him) as UG could 'find' cashead. It's exceedingly vague, not credible, and doesn't threaten violence, and no prosecution would come even if both parties were in the UK. It's just a nice excuse to ban UG permanently, which is apparently what you guys want.

[OptimisticJock]

I can't believe I'm about to wade in on this but I'm on the shitter so may as well.

What criteria, if any, do you suggest to permanently ban someone?

[Stooo]

I can't believe I'm about to wade in on this but I'm on the shitter so may as well.

What criteria, if any, do you suggest to permanently ban someone?

1. Annoy a mod.

[morepork]

2. Take a shit on someone's keyboard.

[Stooo]

3. stray from the right wing gestapo message.

[OptimisticJock]

Sounds like he deserved his ban then.

[Sandydragon]

I trust you also reported him to the police then, right?

A poster could take that initiative if they so wished. That would be their call, the role of the moderators (one of them) is to keep the board out of trouble if such an incident occurs. We do that by removing such posts, handing out sanctions to prevent/deter future occurrences and providing evidence to the police if they so wish to receive it.

The rules on here apply to everyone; a kind of universal justice that I assumed you would be comfortable with. Rest assured, if someone else threatens anyone, the sanction will be consistent.

There pretty much won't be anything left of a board soon, if you continue!

You didn't report it to the police, and neither would anyone else, because the threat was iirc that cashead should watch his personal abuse of UG (abuse of UG relating to his wife leaving him) as UG could 'find' cashead. It's exceedingly vague, not credible, and doesn't threaten violence, and no prosecution would come even if both parties were in the UK. It's just a nice excuse to ban UG permanently, which is apparently what you guys want.

That's your opinion.

If anyone else had a behaviour record over the past months you wouldn't raise a murmur over this ban. This is because it's your mate. Keep the hypocrisy t yourself please. Last time we banned UG the posting rate in here improved so your premonitions of doom and gloom aren't borne out by fact.

He broke the rules. He was given every warning. He crossed a red line. Stop trying to paint him a martyr. Frankly it's pathetic.

[Billyfish]

Rugby Rebels. Lolz.

[Numbers]

A poster could take that initiative if they so wished. That would be their call, the role of the moderators (one of them) is to keep the board out of trouble if such an incident occurs. We do that by removing such posts, handing out sanctions to prevent/deter future occurrences and providing evidence to the police if they so wish to receive it.

The rules on here apply to everyone; a kind of universal justice that I assumed you would be comfortable with. Rest assured, if someone else threatens anyone, the sanction will be consistent.

There pretty much won't be anything left of a board soon, if you continue!

You didn't report it to the police, and neither would anyone else, because the threat was iirc that cashead should watch his personal abuse of UG (abuse of UG relating to his wife leaving him) as UG could 'find' cashead. It's exceedingly vague, not credible, and doesn't threaten violence, and no prosecution would come even if both parties were in the UK. It's just a nice excuse to ban UG permanently, which is apparently what you guys want.

That's your opinion.

If anyone else had a behaviour record over the past months you wouldn't raise a murmur over this ban. This is because it's your mate. Keep the hypocrisy t yourself please. Last time we banned UG the posting rate in here improved so your premonitions of doom and gloom aren't borne out by fact.

He broke the rules. He was given every warning. He crossed a red line. Stop trying to paint him a martyr. Frankly it's pathetic.

Probably has this time, due to the fact we are discussing him...

[Zhivago]

A poster could take that initiative if they so wished. That would be their call, the role of the moderators (one of them) is to keep the board out of trouble if such an incident occurs. We do that by removing such posts, handing out sanctions to prevent/deter future occurrences and providing evidence to the police if they so wish to receive it.

The rules on here apply to everyone; a kind of universal justice that I assumed you would be comfortable with. Rest assured, if someone else threatens anyone, the sanction will be consistent.

There pretty much won't be anything left of a board soon, if you continue!

You didn't report it to the police, and neither would anyone else, because the threat was iirc that cashead should watch his personal abuse of UG (abuse of UG relating to his wife leaving him) as UG could 'find' cashead. It's exceedingly vague, not credible, and doesn't threaten violence, and no prosecution would come even if both parties were in the UK. It's just a nice excuse to ban UG permanently, which is apparently what you guys want.

That's your opinion.

If anyone else had a behaviour record over the past months you wouldn't raise a murmur over this ban. This is because it's your mate. Keep the hypocrisy t yourself please. Last time we banned UG the posting rate in here improved so your premonitions of doom and gloom aren't borne out by fact.

He broke the rules. He was given every warning. He crossed a red line. Stop trying to paint him a martyr. Frankly it's pathetic.

He's not my mate. I'd defend anyone against being permanently banned if I thought it was unjustified and bad for debate, and you can't prove otherwise given the fact that nobody else has been treated this harshly yet. Your accusations of hypocrisy based on hypothetical scenarios are pathetic.

Like I said before, you don't have to believe my predictions, just watch it unfold. I said that 2¹/₂ weeks ago, but my god I did not expect the disintegration to take place this rapidly.

[Mikey Brown]

There pretty much won't be anything left of a board soon, if you continue!

You didn't report it to the police, and neither would anyone else, because the threat was iirc that cashead should watch his personal abuse of UG (abuse of UG relating to his wife leaving him) as UG could 'find' cashead. It's exceedingly vague, not credible, and doesn't threaten violence, and no prosecution would come even if both parties were in the UK. It's just a nice excuse to ban UG permanently, which is apparently what you guys want.

That's your opinion.

If anyone else had a behaviour record over the past months you wouldn't raise a murmur over this ban. This is because it's your mate. Keep the hypocrisy t yourself please. Last time we banned UG the posting rate in here improved so your premonitions of doom and gloom aren't borne out by fact.

He broke the rules. He was given every warning. He crossed a red line. Stop trying to paint him a martyr. Frankly it's pathetic.

He's not my mate. I'd defend anyone against being permanently banned if I thought it was unjustified and bad for debate, and you can't prove otherwise given the fact that nobody else has been treated this harshly yet. Your accusations of hypocrisy based on hypothetical scenarios are pathetic.

Like I said before, you don't have to believe my predictions, just watch it unfold. I said that 2¹/₂ weeks ago, but my god I did not expect the disintegration to take place this rapidly.

I can't quite decide if it's been hilarious or not.

[Zhivago]

That's your opinion.

If anyone else had a behaviour record over the past months you wouldn't raise a murmur over this ban. This is because it's your mate. Keep the hypocrisy t yourself please. Last time we banned UG the posting rate in here improved so your premonitions of doom and gloom aren't borne out by fact.

He broke the rules. He was given every warning. He crossed a red line. Stop trying to paint him a martyr. Frankly it's pathetic.

He's not my mate. I'd defend anyone against being permanently banned if I thought it was unjustified and bad for debate, and you can't prove otherwise given the fact that nobody else has been treated this harshly yet. Your accusations of hypocrisy based on hypothetical scenarios are pathetic.

Like I said before, you don't have to believe my predictions, just watch it unfold. I said that 2¹/₂ weeks ago, but my god I did not expect the disintegration to take place this rapidly.

I can't quite decide if it's been hilarious or not.

It's been farcical. Perhaps that's what you mean?

[Lizard]

Don't the rules allow an appeal of a mod's decision to an admin?

If it's that bad without UG, how about you all thank Hammy nicely for his work over more than a decade, and go and set up your own board and issue a gilt invitation to UG to sign up? It's a free world.

(PS: perhaps check out the RygbiRoom first)

[zer0]

(PS: perhaps check out the RygbiRoom first)

Huh. It's still going?

[Lizard]

(PS: perhaps check out the RygbiRoom first)

Huh. It's still going?

Well, the site is still active but seems to have only one user who has made the most recent post in every single thread.

[Donny osmond]

Don't the rules allow an appeal of a mod's decision to an admin?

If it's that bad without UG, how about you all thank Hammy nicely for his work over more than a decade, and go and set up your own board and issue a gilt invitation to UG to sign up? It's a free world.

(PS: perhaps check out the RygbiRoom first)

This is actually a very good plan.

[Lizard]

Don't the rules allow an appeal of a mod's decision to an admin?

If it's that bad without UG, how about you all thank Hammy nicely for his work over more than a decade, and go and set up your own board and issue a gilt invitation to UG to sign up? It's a free world.

(PS: perhaps check out the RygbiRoom first)

This is actually a very good plan.

Off you go then, son. Post us a link when it's up and running. Reserve username "Lizard" for me.

Just remember, the right to free speech does not imply an obligation to provide a platform.

[Donny osmond]

Don't the rules allow an appeal of a mod's decision to an admin?

If it's that bad without UG, how about you all thank Hammy nicely for his work over more than a decade, and go and set up your own board and issue a gilt invitation to UG to sign up? It's a free world.

(PS: perhaps check out the RygbiRoom first)

This is actually a very good plan.

Off you go then, son. Post us a link when it's up and running. Reserve username "Lizard" for me.

Just remember, the right to free speech does not imply an obligation to provide a platform.

Nah you're alright thanks, I'm not one of those who think this place is all that bad without UG. You didn't get that from my posts?

I think the whole concept of "free speech" is much misunderstood.