I think that was handled all wrong. The guy had cancer and was angry and the forum was running worse than Al Bundys dodge. A time out would have been a better choice IMO. I think this permanent ban rule makes as much sense as zero tolerance rules in school at times.
Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
I think that was handled all wrong. The guy had cancer and was angry and the forum was running worse than Al Bundys dodge. A time out would have been a better choice IMO. I think this permanent ban rule makes as much sense as zero tolerance rules in school at times.
I am sure that Adirondack Jack could start posting here at any time and nobody would say a peep.
Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
I remember the Jim wars. I think Rice was the first one that Marshal Dan leveled after he came on board. That was back before SS3 went off Military School.
Has anyone heard from Undercoverbrotha in a while?
"To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
.........A time out would have been a better choice IMO. I think this permanent ban rule makes as much sense as zero tolerance rules in school at times.
There were a couple of bans that happened in the early days that I disagreed with, but for the most part on this forum a member really had to work at it to get their ticket punched.
I did not know that but if they let a guy back who's avatar is a translucent Coelacanth that just swallowed a Coke Cola can, then I think ghostsniper deserves a second chance. If he wants one.
Consider, he's made his apologies and Zee who egged him on has accepted them.
The kid was going through a very rough time and bared his soul to us all. IIRC he lost his Daddy about the same time.
So, if the aggrieved party, ZEE, says he has no problem then I think the guy should get a second chance. Again, if he wants it.
My $0.02
Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
I did not know that but if they let a guy back who's avatar is a translucent Coelacanth that just swallowed a Coke Cola can, then I think ghostsniper deserves a second chance. If he wants one.
Consider, he's made his apologies and Zee who egged him on has accepted them.
The kid was going through a very rough time and bared his soul to us all. IIRC he lost his Daddy about the same time.
So, if the aggrieved party, ZEE, says he has no problem then I think the guy should get a second chance. Again, if he wants it.
My $0.02
IIRC, GS got banned on the previous forum under a different name, he WAS on probation.
I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
It's up to Moderator's discrection and it's a commitee decision now, in the Time of Dan, he was lord of the land.........was the person flagrantly rude and uncivil, or were they out of control? Did they contribute while being good, or are they just angry trash? Being on the banned wagon, I respect their responsibilities. I was out of control as was Ghostsniper. Both of us being self-affirmed alcoholics at the time, we realize what we did was wrong, and we live with those repercussions, both of us have turned our lives around.....this is why I support Jeff and his recovery.......Dan J had a heavy but fair hand. The Mods have an ROE to make it pure and simple.....and we've all crossed the line at times. Some have said what was done to someone was a bit harsh, but so is life.
I agree on the time-out scenario...give a 90 day suspension over an outright banning, cause people do stupid things but they shouldn't be banished forever from the friends they've made on here.........however, this is not our playground, it belongs to G&A (is it still Primedia?), and what we say reflects upon them, this being social media.
If one remembers the days of Florida Sportsmans and Flyfishing Outdoors.....heck, we all thought that everyone was a D**K!
Exceptions have been made with with the change of reign, and considerations given and adhered to. One Mod really went out on his neck for me, and I promised not to embarrass his trust, nor the trust of the other mods he conferred with....all three of with I've either hunted/traded/confided with. I respect them as men of value and will do my best to not to dishonor that trust. I was a Soldier for the better part of a decade and honor in a person's word means a lot to me.
In respect to my friendship with Ghostsniper....I think getting away from the Forum and concentrating on his new life is better for him however painful that may be....but sometimes we need to break away from the computer and LIVE a new life...........there is always other means of contact if one is truly a friend to another.
God show's mercy on drunks and dumb animals.........two outa three ain't a bad score!
I guess I need to post more so I don't find myself on a MIA list. School has me pretty busy so I haven't had much time to devote to shooting. My new Bushmaster AR should be arriving any time now so I bet I can squeeze in some range time for that.:cool2:
It's up to Moderator's discrection and it's a commitee decision now, in the Time of Dan, he was lord of the land.........was the person flagrantly rude and uncivil, or were they out of control? Did they contribute while being good, or are they just angry trash? Being on the banned wagon, I respect their responsibilities. I was out of control as was Ghostsniper. Both of us being self-affirmed alcoholics at the time, we realize what we did was wrong, and we live with those repercussions, both of us have turned our lives around.....this is why I support Jeff and his recovery.......Dan J had a heavy but fair hand. The Mods have an ROE to make it pure and simple.....and we've all crossed the line at times. Some have said what was done to someone was a bit harsh, but so is life.
I agree on the time-out scenario...give a 90 day suspension over an outright banning, cause people do stupid things but they shouldn't be banished forever from the friends they've made on here.........however, this is not our playground, it belongs to G&A (is it still Primedia?), and what we say reflects upon them, this being social media.
If one remembers the days of Florida Sportsmans and Flyfishing Outdoors.....heck, we all thought that everyone was a D**K!
Exceptions have been made with with the change of reign, and considerations given and adhered to. One Mod really went out on his neck for me, and I promised not to embarrass his trust, nor the trust of the other mods he conferred with....all three of with I've either hunted/traded/confided with. I respect them as men of value and will do my best to not to dishonor that trust. I was a Soldier for the better part of a decade and honor in a person's word means a lot to me.
In respect to my friendship with Ghostsniper....I think getting away from the Forum and concentrating on his new life is better for him however painful that may be....but sometimes we need to break away from the computer and LIVE a new life...........there is always other means of contact if one is truly a friend to another.
You could get banned by Dan for one mistake that could be a whole lot less than the golden haired boys on here get away with; though I admit I would hate to see them gone.
I can't imagine getting worked up over something so much to get banned. Especially since I own nothing here...it is just too easy to turn off the screen and walk away. I am surprised though you guys have let me goad a few arguments on here ....
"To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
1) Banning is not, as previously suggested, "by committee". When a member commits a bannable infraction, the first mod to see it tends to it.
2) We don't do "time outs".
The reasons are pretty simple. One only needs to remember the Florida Sportsman's Fly Fishing Off-Topic forum.
Banning was done by a vote of the mods. There were, as best I recall, as high as seven voting mods on that board. The middle of a hot-headed flame war at 2AM is not the time nor place to try to arrange a cyber-vote. This meant that the offensive behavior usually went on for quite a length of time before the "voting" could take place. Not a good thing. That's why as moderators we don't call a huddle to discuss the issue. Very little has changed since Dan's time.....the same jerk-wad behavior that would get you banned then will result in the same now.
As for time outs.....once again I bring up for exhibit the previously mentioned forum. To the worst offenders temporary bans seemed akin to badges of honor. The more, the better. Which meant that the worst offenders got a cyber slap on the wrist and were back in the game in a few weeks or so. That board was, (and may still be, for all I know), a complete zoo with a side-serving of freak show.
Just offered for your consideration.
Mike
"Walking away seems to be a lost art form." N454casull
An observation by someone who's had his own posts censored...
The mods aren't exactly paid lavish salaries. They in fact get zero and are volunteer mods who take their personal time to do this job, and it tends to be thankless. They simply don't have time to go through a time-out process and keep track of all the necessary stuff.
Way I understand it, if you break the rules (which you ought to know in advance you're doing so), and then get warned once, and still persist, banning is okay with me. I do think that one warning is a good idea mostly, although if the posting is maybe vicious and contains illegal threats, no warning. Realize that G&A can be liable for allowing illegal (cyber threats) to be posted without any actions.
I think the mods do a great job and this is from someone who's been warned (and properly so).
An observation by someone who's had his own posts censored...
The mods aren't exactly paid lavish salaries. They in fact get zero and are volunteer mods who take their personal time to do this job, and it tends to be thankless. They simply don't have time to go through a time-out process and keep track of all the necessary stuff.
Way I understand it, if you break the rules (which you ought to know in advance you're doing so), and then get warned once, and still persist, banning is okay with me. I do think that one warning is a good idea mostly, although if the posting is maybe vicious and contains illegal threats, no warning. Realize that G&A can be liable for allowing illegal (cyber threats) to be posted without any actions.
I think the mods do a great job and this is from someone who's been warned (and properly so).
I agree with Sam on this, but someone once told me that moderator get free guns and kool stuff. Is that not true?
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
Very little has changed since Dan's time.....the same jerk-wad behavior that would get you banned then will result in the same now.
Mike
Even though I have no issues with any of the policies, I will have to say that quite a bit has changed. Dan ran things with an iron fist and didn't tolerate a fraction of what goes on here now. He allowed no name calling what so ever, he allowed no sexual inuendo or veiled profanity, and if a spirited debate got a little too heated he would lock it down. He was probably a little too strict but he kept things polite for the most part. As for the people that got themselves banned since Dan's passing, I have no sympathy as I'm sure they were warned numerous times and chose to continue their behaviour. GS had been warned openly about his behaviour and posting in the past and brushed it off. There are quite a few other outdoor and firearm related forums out there and several that allow almost anything to be posted and I for one am thankful that this isn't one of them.
I got into a few flame wars with Jim. That boy could FIGHT!
That he could. I had a lot of respect for Jim though and considered him a friend. I hated to see him get banned here.
I'd like to see Martin-A come back...
Wasn't Martin the guy who KO'd a burglar with a 2X4? I remember him did he get banned?
Anyone remember Gunnyragg?
Gunnyragg is a friend of mine. I was an Admin on his forum site for a couple of years, until a group of Antigun Eurotrolls hacked the site and destroyed the archives.
Gunny has a gunshop down in Texas and he's published a few books. Gunny is very critical of the NRA and some of their actions/inactions. Quite a few of us have been bitter toward the NRA especially in the aftermath of the Clinton AWB. A lot of us feel that the NRA threw away a golden opportunity at that time by not holding the politicians feet to the flames after the election following the AWB when many who signed the AWB were thrown out of office including the speaker of the house.
Wasn't Martin the guy who KO'd a burglar with a 2X4? I remember him did he get banned?
he KOed the home invader by pistol whipping him with a 1911. Epic thread on that one. He was also a bronze star awarded Special Forces Vietnam veteran. Hope he is OK.
Tell Gunnyragg I said Hi! What town is his shop in?
To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
-Mikhail Kalashnikov
Replies
Has anyone heard from Undercoverbrotha in a while?
Yes there is. There are people posting in this very thread who have been banned and came back.
I'm one of them, but that was a long time ago.
I did not know that but if they let a guy back who's avatar is a translucent Coelacanth that just swallowed a Coke Cola can, then I think ghostsniper deserves a second chance. If he wants one.
Consider, he's made his apologies and Zee who egged him on has accepted them.
The kid was going through a very rough time and bared his soul to us all. IIRC he lost his Daddy about the same time.
So, if the aggrieved party, ZEE, says he has no problem then I think the guy should get a second chance. Again, if he wants it.
My $0.02
IIRC, GS got banned on the previous forum under a different name, he WAS on probation.
Didn't know that either but I will refrain from any further comments.
I agree on the time-out scenario...give a 90 day suspension over an outright banning, cause people do stupid things but they shouldn't be banished forever from the friends they've made on here.........however, this is not our playground, it belongs to G&A (is it still Primedia?), and what we say reflects upon them, this being social media.
If one remembers the days of Florida Sportsmans and Flyfishing Outdoors.....heck, we all thought that everyone was a D**K!
Exceptions have been made with with the change of reign, and considerations given and adhered to. One Mod really went out on his neck for me, and I promised not to embarrass his trust, nor the trust of the other mods he conferred with....all three of with I've either hunted/traded/confided with. I respect them as men of value and will do my best to not to dishonor that trust. I was a Soldier for the better part of a decade and honor in a person's word means a lot to me.
In respect to my friendship with Ghostsniper....I think getting away from the Forum and concentrating on his new life is better for him however painful that may be....but sometimes we need to break away from the computer and LIVE a new life...........there is always other means of contact if one is truly a friend to another.
I got into a few flame wars with Jim. That boy could FIGHT!
I'd like to see Martin-A come back...
Anyone remember Gunnyragg?
-Mikhail Kalashnikov
I can't imagine getting worked up over something so much to get banned. Especially since I own nothing here...it is just too easy to turn off the screen and walk away. I am surprised though you guys have let me goad a few arguments on here ....
Buffy? Well, I'm not sure if he's "fair haired"....he's a ginger....
1) Banning is not, as previously suggested, "by committee". When a member commits a bannable infraction, the first mod to see it tends to it.
2) We don't do "time outs".
The reasons are pretty simple. One only needs to remember the Florida Sportsman's Fly Fishing Off-Topic forum.
Banning was done by a vote of the mods. There were, as best I recall, as high as seven voting mods on that board. The middle of a hot-headed flame war at 2AM is not the time nor place to try to arrange a cyber-vote. This meant that the offensive behavior usually went on for quite a length of time before the "voting" could take place. Not a good thing. That's why as moderators we don't call a huddle to discuss the issue. Very little has changed since Dan's time.....the same jerk-wad behavior that would get you banned then will result in the same now.
As for time outs.....once again I bring up for exhibit the previously mentioned forum. To the worst offenders temporary bans seemed akin to badges of honor. The more, the better. Which meant that the worst offenders got a cyber slap on the wrist and were back in the game in a few weeks or so. That board was, (and may still be, for all I know), a complete zoo with a side-serving of freak show.
Just offered for your consideration.
Mike
N454casull
The mods aren't exactly paid lavish salaries. They in fact get zero and are volunteer mods who take their personal time to do this job, and it tends to be thankless. They simply don't have time to go through a time-out process and keep track of all the necessary stuff.
Way I understand it, if you break the rules (which you ought to know in advance you're doing so), and then get warned once, and still persist, banning is okay with me. I do think that one warning is a good idea mostly, although if the posting is maybe vicious and contains illegal threats, no warning. Realize that G&A can be liable for allowing illegal (cyber threats) to be posted without any actions.
I think the mods do a great job and this is from someone who's been warned (and properly so).
I agree with Sam on this, but someone once told me that moderator get free guns and kool stuff. Is that not true?
Even though I have no issues with any of the policies, I will have to say that quite a bit has changed. Dan ran things with an iron fist and didn't tolerate a fraction of what goes on here now. He allowed no name calling what so ever, he allowed no sexual inuendo or veiled profanity, and if a spirited debate got a little too heated he would lock it down. He was probably a little too strict but he kept things polite for the most part. As for the people that got themselves banned since Dan's passing, I have no sympathy as I'm sure they were warned numerous times and chose to continue their behaviour. GS had been warned openly about his behaviour and posting in the past and brushed it off. There are quite a few other outdoor and firearm related forums out there and several that allow almost anything to be posted and I for one am thankful that this isn't one of them.
Wasn't Martin the guy who KO'd a burglar with a 2X4? I remember him did he get banned?
Gunnyragg is a friend of mine. I was an Admin on his forum site for a couple of years, until a group of Antigun Eurotrolls hacked the site and destroyed the archives.
Gunny has a gunshop down in Texas and he's published a few books. Gunny is very critical of the NRA and some of their actions/inactions. Quite a few of us have been bitter toward the NRA especially in the aftermath of the Clinton AWB. A lot of us feel that the NRA threw away a golden opportunity at that time by not holding the politicians feet to the flames after the election following the AWB when many who signed the AWB were thrown out of office including the speaker of the house.
Don't think he got banned. Just stopped showing up one day.
Kalrog. Still alive and well. I've tried to get him back on the board a few times. He is just to busy
-Mikhail Kalashnikov
he KOed the home invader by pistol whipping him with a 1911. Epic thread on that one. He was also a bronze star awarded Special Forces Vietnam veteran. Hope he is OK.
Tell Gunnyragg I said Hi! What town is his shop in?
-Mikhail Kalashnikov