| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/09/2011 09:27:57 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
its sad that this is my entertainment on a Friday night... |
Tell me about it.. I am a college student on a Friday night in the dorms by myself. -_- |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:29:18 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by cynthiann:
Originally posted by mike_311:
its sad that this is my entertainment on a Friday night... |
Hadn't thought of it that way until just now. Now I'm sad too. Thanks ;) |
You made me LOL! Hey, now I'm starting to think....
edited to add: Ban Art!
Message edited by author 2011-09-09 21:29:57. |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:32:00 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by amsterdamman:
Originally posted by cynthiann:
Originally posted by mike_311:
its sad that this is my entertainment on a Friday night... |
Hadn't thought of it that way until just now. Now I'm sad too. Thanks ;) |
You made me LOL! Hey, now I'm starting to think....
edited to add: Ban Art! |
Art's already been banned. Have you seen my scores lately? Pffft.... what do they know about Art?
And I'm sad too. |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:32:05 PM · #79 |
So I'm hopeless? Someone gets banned from posting in forums for nothing more or less than many other opinionated members do and that's ok with you?
IMO the member that called me a DOUCHBAG should be banned for the same amount of time as Rugman. I did not attack anyone in this thread and I have been insulted by more than one member. That is fair to you?
I
Originally posted by mBastin:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Expecting results? Why not? It has happened before ! SC can be wrong you know. They can jump on someone too fast. Why not show Rugman the complaints? Why be so general? My guess is they're aren't many complainers out there. Members defend themselves just fine. I guess it is against rules to argue about photos, comments, politics and other topics but its ok to publicly call me a DOUCHBAG? Where is the fairness of SC ?
Originally posted by mBastin:
Originally posted by kenskid:
So calling someone a douchbag in a forum about banning for misusing the forums is ok with you? Unreal! I started a thread to discuss the unfair banning (because others do the same as Rug) and someone calls me a douchbag - and you tell me to grow up? Come on...that's a little ridiculous.
|
It's not the fact that you started this thread, it's the way you started it. This is hardly a discussion, it's you throwing bold sentences and exclamations at everyone and expecting results. Good luck. |
|
Well I tried, you're hopeless. |
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:42:01 PM · #80 |
"Gee John... the thread started out slow but the offence is really flowing now. What is your take on the other side of the game, John?"
"Well Bob, the defense has a new strategy here and it seems to be really fooling with the offensive side."
"Right you are, John! Back to you in the station... This has been eye witness news reporting for DPC channel 4.... Susan..." |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:42:50 PM · #81 |
Ken, sorry, but it's all a little surreal to me. First of all, we have *no* evidence from which to judge, other than your post. So he got suspended from posting (not banned) for a whole three or four days? How are we to know if it was "unfair" or not?
If he has a beef with the suspension let *him* take it up with the SC. Your public display and use of inflammatory language isn't helping his case. And no, I don't think it's proper for someone to call you a "douchbag" (sic), but your strident, public reaction (rather than just hitting "report post" and typing "personal attack" for instance) is telling.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:45:27 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
That's right.... SC did not even show Rugman the complaints. Go look for yourself. Search Rugman in the forums. There are many others like him. SC says "complaints" but who complained? What did they complain about? How many members have to complain before someone gets banned? |
Why should I go look for myself? So far, the only person in this thread who seems concerned about this is you. I have been here long enough to feel confident that the SC is thoughtful and careful, and probably more patient and tolerant than they really need to be.
The banned person should take this "cause" up with the SC if HE feels it is unfair. You should put your concerns, questions to the SC in a ticket directly if you feel the need to create and take up this "cause". The SC should not (and will not) discuss or post private communications here, and for all you know, they have taken down the posts that got him banned.
This thread just feels like yet another stunt to get attention. It is not a considered (or considerate) discussion. Your response to my post simply proved my point. But if flailing around in a thread is how you get your jollies, flail away....
Message edited by author 2011-09-09 21:48:31. |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:48:58 PM · #83 |
Why don't you just ignore it? Don't post. Simply tune out. Can you do it? I think not.
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Originally posted by kenskid:
That's right.... SC did not even show Rugman the complaints. Go look for yourself. Search Rugman in the forums. There are many others like him. SC says "complaints" but who complained? What did they complain about? How many members have to complain before someone gets banned? |
Why should I go look for myself? So far, the only person in this thread who seems concerned about this is you. I have been here long enough to feel confident that the SC is thoughtful and careful, and probably more patient and tolerant than they really need to be.
The banned person should take this "cause" up with the SC if he feels it is unfair. You should put your concerns, questions to the SC in a ticket directly if you feel the need to create and take up this "cause". The SC should not (and will not) discuss or post private communications here, and for all you know, they have taken down the posts that got him banned.
This thread just feels like yet another stunt to get attention. It is not a considered (or considerate) discussion. Your response to my post simply proved my point. But if flailing around in a thread is how you get your jollies, flail away.... |
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:51:54 PM · #84 |
The posts were not removed. All of his posts are there for all to see. There was no personal attacks...no vulgarity...nothing but his strong opinions.
Originally posted by kirbic:
Ken, sorry, but it's all a little surreal to me. First of all, we have *no* evidence from which to judge, other than your post. So he got suspended from posting (not banned) for a whole three or four days? How are we to know if it was "unfair" or not?
If he has a beef with the suspension let *him* take it up with the SC. Your public display and use of inflammatory language isn't helping his case. And no, I don't think it's proper for someone to call you a "douchbag" (sic), but your strident, public reaction (rather than just hitting "report post" and typing "personal attack" for instance) is telling. |
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:53:16 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Don't post. Simply tune out. Can you do it? I think not. |
You're right! - I....can't.....resist.
How do you do it? - How do you keep drawing me back to this thread? It's 2.50am here, but I had to have one last gawk before going to sleep. I wasn't disappointed! |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 09:57:37 PM · #86 |
It's fun huh !
Originally posted by JH:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Don't post. Simply tune out. Can you do it? I think not. |
You're right! - I....can't.....resist.
How do you do it? - How do you keep drawing me back to this thread? It's 2.50am here, but I had to have one last gawk before going to sleep. I wasn't disappointed! |
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:04:00 PM · #87 |
Ban Art! Ban Art!
(And now the gents..) |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:08:04 PM · #88 |
Ban Art! Ban Art!
And now EVERYONE! :D |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:09:44 PM · #89 |
| "He's a lumberjack and he's OK. He sleeps all night and he works all day." |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:09:58 PM · #90 |
| You forgot Art is ban proof. The SC is too afeared of the wrath of Godzilla |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:11:42 PM · #91 |
'||'''|, /.\ '||\ ||` /.\ '||'''|,|''||''|
|| || // \\ ||\\ || // \\ || || ||
||;;;; //...\\ || \\ || //...\\ ||...|' ||
|| || // \\ || \\|| // \\ || \\ ||
.||...|'.// \\..|| \||. .// \\..|| \\. .||.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:16:04 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
The posts were not removed. All of his posts are there for all to see. There was no personal attacks...no vulgarity...nothing but his strong opinions.
Originally posted by kirbic:
Ken, sorry, but it's all a little surreal to me. First of all, we have *no* evidence from which to judge, other than your post. So he got suspended from posting (not banned) for a whole three or four days? How are we to know if it was "unfair" or not?
If he has a beef with the suspension let *him* take it up with the SC. Your public display and use of inflammatory language isn't helping his case. And no, I don't think it's proper for someone to call you a "douchbag" (sic), but your strident, public reaction (rather than just hitting "report post" and typing "personal attack" for instance) is telling. |
|
Well, Ken, it may surprise you to learn that I actually *had* looked at every (yes every) post in his list of last 10 threads posted to. I agree with you that in those posts, I see nothing that warrants a suspension (my personal opinion only). Now, whether the SC is acting on something older, I have no way of knowing. And I was not party to their discussion of the facts of the matter, so I will not comment. I *will* reiterate that a strident, public airing like this is not a good reflection on you, and it does nothing to support his case either. Take it up with the SC. And may I say: man, am I glad I don't have to deal with this stuff from that end anymore.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:17:52 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
"He's a lumberjack and he's OK. He sleeps all night and he works all day." |
He cuts down trees. He eats his lunch.
He goes to the lavatory.
On Wednesdays he goes shoppin'
And has buttered scones for tea.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:22:18 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I actually *had* looked at every (yes every) post in his list of last 10 threads posted to. I agree with you that in those posts, I see nothing that warrants a suspension (my personal opinion only). Now, whether the SC is acting on something older, I have no way of knowing. And I was not party to their discussion of the facts of the matter, so I will not comment. I *will* reiterate that a strident, public airing like this is not a good reflection on you, and it does nothing to support his case either. Take it up with the SC. And may I say: man, am I glad I don't have to deal with this stuff from that end anymore. |
Ditto on the reading of old posts and ditto on the analysis. |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:23:02 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by Melethia:
"He's a lumberjack and he's OK. He sleeps all night and he works all day." |
He cuts down trees. He eats his lunch.
He goes to the lavatory.
On Wednesdays he goes shoppin'
And has buttered scones for tea. |
That song is now going to be in my head all sad Friday night. Eh... could be worse. |
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:24:40 PM · #96 |
I bet you are glad. I'm about done with it anyway. I just know that SC jumps the gun at times and I feel that this is one of those times. Remember, I was banned because of a SC member jumping the gun.
Oh well.... it's a shame that Rugman won't even be able to gripe about it in the forums...someone might complain.
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by kenskid:
The posts were not removed. All of his posts are there for all to see. There was no personal attacks...no vulgarity...nothing but his strong opinions.
Originally posted by kirbic:
Ken, sorry, but it's all a little surreal to me. First of all, we have *no* evidence from which to judge, other than your post. So he got suspended from posting (not banned) for a whole three or four days? How are we to know if it was "unfair" or not?
If he has a beef with the suspension let *him* take it up with the SC. Your public display and use of inflammatory language isn't helping his case. And no, I don't think it's proper for someone to call you a "douchbag" (sic), but your strident, public reaction (rather than just hitting "report post" and typing "personal attack" for instance) is telling. |
|
Well, Ken, it may surprise you to learn that I actually *had* looked at every (yes every) post in his list of last 10 threads posted to. I agree with you that in those posts, I see nothing that warrants a suspension (my personal opinion only). Now, whether the SC is acting on something older, I have no way of knowing. And I was not party to their discussion of the facts of the matter, so I will not comment. I *will* reiterate that a strident, public airing like this is not a good reflection on you, and it does nothing to support his case either. Take it up with the SC. And may I say: man, am I glad I don't have to deal with this stuff from that end anymore. |
|
|
|
|
09/09/2011 10:30:52 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
...Remember, I was banned because of a SC member jumping the gun. |
I certainly do remember; if you recall, I *was* a party to that discussion. I will say that I would not characterize it as jumping the gun. I will say it was an error, and one that the SC corrected when additional evidence was brought to light. That's what professionals do when they discover they are in error. Fix it, learn from it, move on. The SC is a team of dedicated volunteers, and they will not always be right, but they will work to make right an error that is brought to their attention in a well-reasoned, non-confrontational manner.
|
|
|
|
09/10/2011 12:28:52 AM · #98 |
My probably, but not-likely final thoughts:
- The douchebag comment was out of line
- an appeal hearing for rugman is set for 9am, Sep 13th
- BAN ART! BAN ART! |
|
|
|
09/10/2011 01:33:43 AM · #99 |
Originally posted by mbrutus2009:
Originally posted by mike_311:
its sad that this is my entertainment on a Friday night... |
Tell me about it.. I am a college student on a Friday night in the dorms by myself. -_- |
Jesus you two.., I worked 11 hours today, yet managed to hit two bars and Mortons steak house, get three numbers from chicks (one of which was an amazing asian chick who works in civil rights) and get generally trashed... we're going to need to do a training session soon.,, ;) |
|
|
|
09/10/2011 02:47:37 AM · #100 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
who complained? What did they complain about? How many members have to complain before someone gets banned? |
That's none of your business!
I have complete faith that the SC have acted properly. They don't need to justify the decisions they make to you.
If your not happy about it leave! your continuous ranting is not winning you any friends. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 03:04:05 AM EDT.
