10/10 ban appeal
C
Face is a bad boy!!!!
Just curious what happened to @EARTH ? Can't PM him to ask.
I call racebaiting
I used to report some of his blatant racebait posts/threads and they would stay up, so I doubt it was that.
The mistery continues
Looking at his warnings, he wasn't permabanned for any one post, but rather, he accumulated 100 percent in warnings which is an instant permaban.
Most of his warnings were for racebaiting, but his final warning (which put him up to 100) was for making a "rate me" thread. But keep in mind he was already up to 90 percent (mostly for race bait) before that.
Last edited:
G
I swear tf if it turns out @Darth_Aurelius turns out to be an alt..
I was one of my favorites, hopefully he comes back.
EARTH permabanned?? Perfect, great job
@knajjd is this the place to discuss warnings?
Bring back @Tellem-T
D
if you’re referring to one of your own, you can do it by replying to the warning PM the mod sends out
High T idea.
I didn't have an option to reply? I'll start a new conversation
From my personal perspective, if you didn't have the option to reply, it means that the person who issued the warning decided that there is no recourse for what you have posted/said/done and therefore is not interested in hearing what your counterarguments may be. I imagine this is because it was a direct violation of the rules with no plausible exculpatory evidence.
It didn't break a rule. I made sure to thoroughly vet it before and even added mod warnings with explanations in the actual post to show forsight. Mod had to hit his quota I guess.
Lol?
Wait what the cuck happened to the chat?
A week ago Serge said he was planning to delete it because no one was talking in it anyway. It was basically Ser0's spam room lol.
D
He requested his ban
E
Don't kill chat, bring it back, please. I promise that i will post more often, tbhtbh ngl
I will kill myself if they don't bring the chat back tbh.
D
eh I didn't really care for the chat tbh
We are having technical issues and we have removed chat to see if it will help site stability.
Where in the rules does it say that "misinformation" is not allowed?
Depending on the context of the misinformation, the mods and admins retain the right to action posts as they see appropriate even if it is not explicitly covered by the rules. In the past, there was a note in the rules saying that all issues that fall outside of the core rules are decided on a case-by-case basis by the mods. This note was removed because it is implied that we run this site and therefore we make decisions that may fall outside of the simplistic core rules, because it's nonsensical to write out a rule for every possible infraction that can be committed on an online forum. The rules only cover the basics and most frequent and direct violations.
Wait are you saying that the note itself implied you run the site? Or that you being mod implies you run the site?
Sorry if I wasn't clear, I meant that the note directly said that issues that fall outside of the rules are handled according to the mod's discretion. I only realized that it was removed a month or two ago and asked Serge about it directly, to which he said that it is an implied fact of how a forum works.
Would you not agree that that leaves too much open to interpretation? Or that it has potential for abuse? For example, a mod using the "mod discretion" excuse for personal goals when they wouldn't have otherwise? Or one post being warned when another mod would have overlooked that same post? What's the extent of "mod discretion"? Inconsistent moderation like that will lead to unhappy users.
I had a long paragraph about @Improvecel 's ban(?) from his thread but it got deleted but basically I'm a bit confused why his thread got deleted, it wasn't really controversial in any sense and a lot of users do exaggerate about things like 80/20 or they'll say things like "Only 10% of men get laid" or some drivel like that. I think things like that hurt blackpill discussion more than direct confrontations to them like ImproveCel's thread. I think we certainly could have came to a consensus with the OP and met him halfway. That's all. Thanks for reading.
Would you not agree that "too much" in itself is open to interpretation and is highly subjective? Do you think that we need to have a longwinded list of every possible offense that can happen on a web forum and the repercussions of any such behavior listed? How do you account for every type of trolling possible on an incel website without writing a book?
I agree that there will be individual differences between how moderators and janitors handle things, but we also discuss between ourselves when issues arise that we are not sure about, and we discuss decisions that we feel are unfair by another mod (and some have been reversed as a result of consequent discussion). I think that there does not exist a single hierarchy in this world or in all of humanity which one could say is purely unbiased or does not have a potential hole in the power structure for abuse (if someone were so inclined), but I feel that we are doing a decent job so far and that any accusation or discomfort you are trying to push onto us on a theological level without concrete examples is just fearmongering.
Here's a good example of why:
Yeah, very obviously a troll trying to start shit. Perm'd him, no regrets.
Thanks for the info, didn't know that. Btw, I created a thread earlier in this forum and it got deleted and they told me to post in the ban megathread discussion. Check this out:
So if I can't ask here or the Meta forum I'm not really sure where to ask since I got pointed in different direcitons.
I am going to guess that you wrote this post before receiving my PM.
I deleted your post in this thread because I misunderstood the scenario you were discussing. I have since undeleted the post, and Ryo responded to it. I also sent you a PM explaining all of this, but as I said, you must have been writing this post and not have seen the PM before making it. I apologize for any confusion.
Gamefaqs comes to mind. Probably a bunch of other forums using XenForo too. As far as your other point I'm not saying mods should stand idle when someone circumvents the rules, I'm referring to the mod discretion thing being used to justify a biased decision.
D
>Please reply to this pm
>This conversation is closed for new replies
Why exactly did this happen when all I did was post a thread advocating suicide by fire?
Comedy that writes itself, for free.
This is truly the best place to be in.
Lmfao fastest ban in history?
Holy shit what did he even do?
T
Probably an alt of a banned account
lmao@anondump getting banned for a trap thread
fucking called it
fucking called it
Similar threads
Emba
Toxic Femininity
North Dakota Judge Says Abortion Ban Unconstitutional Because Abortion Makes Women Happy
- Shaktiman
- The Lounge
Lurkercel_678
Users who are viewing this thread
- tayhrdl
- light
