Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Banned and Post deleted in Chrsitianity forum

Options
  • 08-04-2009 9:39pm
    #1
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭


    Hi
    I have been banned from the Christianity forum for telling the moderator that it was nonsense that he did not have the opportunity to reply to a particular point that I made. he immediately accused me of calling him a liar and then banned me deleting the below post from here



    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055533656
    stevejazzx post 102 from above link - now deleted wrote:
    Apologise? You clearly had the opportunity. That is what all the evidence suggests. I said it was nonsense that you did not have this opportunity because of your posts in the meantime in this thread in reply to me. You want to ban me for that? Boy oh boy talk about true colors.
    I cannot count the amount of people who have brought you to question on your countless snarly vitriolic comments which you always claim are harmless despite the posters advising that they do not like them. There are lots of examples of this. Regular readers of this forum will be and are aware of this. So go ahead PDN and issue your ban for I am very satisfied that I have not behaved in a bad manner in this or any other thread therefore I am very confident that the posters will be able to see this for what it is really is.

    I am on boards for many years. Never a problem. PDN, the moderator in question is a like loose cannon tbh he is throwing out insults all over the place in a&a and Christianity and getting away with it. He is not interested in discussion just propagating his own type of belief.

    Aggrieved

    Steve


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    It would probably be best not to air your grievances about another mod on a separate forum. Besides, the barney was not about religion, so I can't see it having much relevance to this thread.


  • Options
    #3
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    In fairness steve that's a bit over the top...


  • Options
    #4
    Morag
    Registered Users Posts: 8,423 ✭✭✭Morag


    Yeah the christianity forum has gotten more hostile of late, leave'em too it tbh.


  • Options
    #5
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    Sharrow wrote: »
    Yeah the christianity forum has gotten more hostile of late, leave'em too it tbh.

    Maybe, maybe not. This is not the place to discuss it, though.


  • Options
    #6
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    bluewolf wrote: »
    In fairness steve that's a bit over the top...

    I honestly -and I mean that- do not see what I did that is not being done all the time on the forum. Absolute nonsense is what I said not you are 'liar', there are degrees of things. He chose to purposefully exaggerate it into the worst kind of accusation. As I said - he has said far worse things (if people want examples I can post many- regular posters will be aware ot them). The phrase absolute nonsesne is used frequently on the boards, people don't get one month bans for them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    It would probably be best not to air your grievances about another mod on a separate forum. Besides, the barney was not about religion, so I can't see it having much relevance to this thread.

    Oh I already have one going in the helpdesk but this thread is relevant to it I think and I think will be seen by more relevant parties. If dades doesn't think so I won't post further.


  • Options
    #8
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    stevejazzx wrote: »
    I honestly -and I mean that- do not see what I did that is not being done all the time on the forum. Absolute nonsense is what I said not you are 'liar', there are degrees of things. He chose to purposefully exaggerate it into the worst kind of accusation. As I said - he has said far worse things (if people want examples I can post many- regular posters will be aware ot them). The phrase absolute nonsesne is used frequently on the boards, people don't get one month bans for them.

    Steve, seriously, you should discuss this via PM, the Help Desk (not feedback) or keep quiet. You have overstepped the mark.


  • Options
    #9
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Steve, seriously, you should discuss this via PM, the Help Desk (not feedback) or keep quiet. You have overstepped the mark.

    I do not accept that, I said 'absolute nonsense'. Is this now the climate where we cannot challenge things. I backed up that statement with the fact that he had had the opportunity. It wasn't an out of no where comment. You know what this is madness. Read the thread and tell me where I overstepped, he accused another poster of not having had 'proper schooling' in the same thread. Is he exempt?


  • Options
    #10
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    robindch wrote: »
    Feedback's the place to discuss user bans. There's a thread set up to discuss this one at the following URL:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055534146

    Ban-related posts will be moved over to the feedback thread.

    Relevance to topic claimed..removal understood.


  • Options
    #11
    BuffyBot
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 24,924 Mod ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    From what I'm seeing you started what might be seen as an agressive/challenging thread. That alone isn't so much of a problem for me, although I feel that the users of the religious forums shouldn't have to defend themselves from others, or "prove" their faith to anyone.

    However, from looking at this thread it seems that from the outset you carried a certain chip upon your shoulder. Immediately
    stevejazzx wrote:
    you could have said

    'insignificant creatures like us'
    but I suppose being PDN you couldn't resist.

    stands out has nit-picking and having a jab at the moderator over a turn of phrase. You then continue advancing the level of debate with such gems as
    stevejazzx wrote:
    May I inquire, are you drunk?
    . I'm not sure how comments like that help anything. You then badgered and badgered the moderator in question like he is some sort of paid for question answering service. No one is under any obligation to a) answer your questions b) do so within a timeframe that you feel is acceptable or c) do so in the order you wish them to do it. People will answer in their own time, if they choose to do so. This is where you fell down. You have no right, and no position to *demand* people act in a certain way, moderator or not.

    Now, I feel that PDN may have reacted badly. I'll PM them and ask them for their input on this, and hopefully some agreement can be reached. However, I'm not in the least surprised that they reacted due to your behaviour. I'm assuming that you are an adult, and what you did wasn't very adult-like behaviour. You had a very poor attitude going into that thread, and seemed particularily intent on goading that particular moderator.

    So - the ban stands for the moment, while I converse with the moderator in question. Somehow I suspect this attitude isn't something that's just occurred and you have a back story going on. If this is the case, I'd suggest you say so now :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    BuffyBot wrote: »
    From what I'm seeing you started what might be seen as an agressive/challenging thread. That alone isn't so much of a problem for me, although I feel that the users of the religious forums shouldn't have to defend themselves from others, or "prove" their faith to anyone.

    However, from looking at this thread it seems that from the outset you carried a certain chip upon your shoulder. Immediately

    Ok first you are missing a lot of context:

    The comment was in relation to the way PDN has been voicing his comments to other posters. What I was trying to do was show him what he was doing. For exmaple out of the blue last week PDN asked me if I 'was drunk' on thread. Read that thread there is no incitement from me at all. This was after he asked another poster if that poster was 'somking something' the poster was 'mickeroo' as I remember. So I know how it seems but I genuinely was showing him what he had been doing regularly.

    pdn wrote:

    Huh? Are you smoking something?

    from here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055521310&page=6

    pdn wrote:
    Are you drunk
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055521310&page=4

    pdn wrote:
    Good grief! Don't they teach people how to think any more in schools?
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055533656&page=6







    bb wrote:
    stands out has nit-picking and having a jab at the moderator over a turn of phrase. You then continue advancing the level of debate with such gems as . I'm not sure how comments like that help anything. You then badgered and badgered the moderator in question like he is some sort of paid for question answering service. No one is under any obligation to a) answer your questions b) do so within a timeframe that you feel is acceptable or c) do so in the order you wish them to do it. People will answer in their own time, if they choose to do so. This is where you fell down. You have no right, and no position to *demand* people act in a certain way, moderator or not.

    Now, I feel that PDN may have reacted badly. I'll PM them and ask them for their input on this, and hopefully some agreement can be reached. However, I'm not in the least surprised that they reacted due to your behaviour. I'm assuming that you are an adult, and what you did wasn't very adult-like behaviour. You had a very poor attitude going into that thread, and seemed particularily intent on goading that particular moderator.

    So - the ban stands for the moment, while I converse with the moderator in question. Somehow I suspect this attitude isn't something that's just occurred and you have a back story going on. If this is the case, I'd suggest you say so now :)

    I wasn't badgering him. I only posted on reply to him. I did keep asking for him to answer the same question but again only when he replied to me without answerering it. My poor attitude was in relation to again that Mods behaviour all over a&a and christianity.
    I may appear negative but if you like I will post up all PDN insults to other posters? This is why my attitude with PDN was not as it is normally with most others.
    I don't accept the accusation that I called him a liar or challenged his integrity.


  • Options
    #13
    BuffyBot
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 24,924 Mod ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    The comment was in relation to the way PDN has been voicing his comments to other posters. What I was trying to do was show him what he was doing. For exmaple out of the blue last week PDN asked me if I 'was drunk' on thread. Read that thread there is no incitement from me at all. This was after he asked another poster if that poster was 'somking something' the poster was 'mickeroo' as I remember. So I know how it seems but I genuinely was showing him what he had been doing regularly.

    You may very well have had a point - but all that is irrelevant to the thread in hand. You should have taken it to PM, or Help Desk. I suggest that if you take a step back from this interaction, you'll probably find that even you realise that you shouldn't take it out in thread. Keep the thread to the topic in hand, and your disagreements with people in a seperate, more appropriate place.

    By not doing so, you've placed your position on to shaky ground because you took the path that you did.


  • Options
    #14
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    BuffyBot wrote: »
    You may very well have had a point - but all that is irrelevant to the thread in hand. You should have taken it to PM, or Help Desk. I suggest that if you take a step back from this interaction, you'll probably find that even you shouldn't take it out in thread. Keep the thread to the topic in hand, and your disagreements with people in a seperate, more appropriate place.

    By not doing so, you've placed your position on to shaky ground because you took the path that you did.
    \

    I completely accpet that.
    All I want from this thread is that posters acknowledge all the story.
    I wouldn't be hostile in any way to any poster usually but in this case I tired to show him his own methods. You are right I did it in the wrong way.


  • Options
    #15
    Asiaprod
    Registered Users Posts: 6,737 ✭✭✭Asiaprod


    Just woken up. I need some time to digest this mess. Will get back when I have absorbed the facts
    Asia.


  • Options
    #16
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    pdn wrote:
    That is nonsense, and you know it's nonsense

    from

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59628908#post59628908


    By PDN's definiton in this case then he has also accused me of being a liar last week. Remmeber all I said was nonsense, the same thing he says twice abvoe. If we use PDN's criteria he did the same to me last week.

    This again is why I used the phrases I did.
    after thowing some veiled attacks at user Goduznt Xzst
    he says this
    pdn wrote:
    A bit of verbal sparring with opponents in a debate is all part and parcel of the fun on internet fora.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59201157#post59201157

    But he obviously only plays by this rule when it suits him.


  • Options
    #17
    BuffyBot
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 24,924 Mod ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    By PDN's definiton in this case then it was he infact he who accused me of being a liar last week in the above quoted. Remmeber all I said was nonsense, the same thing he says twice abvoe. If we use PDN's criteria he did the same to me last week. Guess it dones't wirk both ways though?

    Again, you're dragging in stuff that isn't relevant to this thread. If you had an issue with stuff that has happened in the past, you should have dealt with it there and then. It's pointless dragging it all up after the event.

    You got banned as a result of this particular thread and your actions upon it. Let's keep the focus.


  • Options
    #18
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    BuffyBot wrote: »
    Again, you're dragging in stuff that isn't relevant to this thread. If you had an issue with stuff that has happened in the past, you should have dealt with it there and then. It's pointless dragging it all up after the event.

    You got banned as a result of this particular thread and your actions upon it. Let's keep the focus.

    Hold on - in fairness I do believe that is relevant. I don't like this notion that I am dragging up anything. I am showing that the very phrase I got my ban was used by the moderator himself against me directly in a thread where there was nothing happening but debate. Surely that shows something relevant to this?
    I am not making this personal. He did that with his over zealous ban. I don't want to be ungrateful becasue I believe in the aftermath the comments from most people have been fair. But I have got a right to defend my actions. I'll leave it there.


  • Options
    #19
    BuffyBot
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 24,924 Mod ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    I am showing that the very phrase I got my ban was used by the moderator himself against me directly in a thread where there was nothing happening but debate. Surely that shows something relevant to this?

    What I'm saying is that if you had a problem then, you should address it then. You've been a member here quite a long time, so you should know that there are channels about it.

    With regard to it's relevancy - I've already asked PDN to address the banning reason, which, you may note from one of my earlier posts. I'm sure he will when he gets the chance.
    I am not making this personal

    You, did - unfortunately. See the comments I made in my first post about your remarks on the thread. Had to have kept to the topic and not got personal, we probably wouldn't have been having this debate.


  • Options
    #20
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    A little bit of context to all of this.

    Posters of all beliefs and of none are welcome to the Christianity forum if they genuinely want to discuss issues relating to Christianity. However, the forum gets more than it's fair share of those who see it as a platform for attacking Christianity.

    I've often wondered how such behaviour would be tolerated in other fora. How would a poster fare if they entered the Soccer forum and started saying how Soccer fans were deluded fools who lack intelligence? Somehow I think a ban would follow in record time. Similarly, the Islam and Paganism fora are moderated much more strictly. If a Christian entered the Paganism forum and started pushing their beliefs in the way Steve and others push their atheistic beliefs in the Christianity forum then within a few posts a banning would result.

    When I first began posting in the Christianity forum I was amazed at the unbridled hostility that was displayed by non-Christian posters. I remember how, in one of my early posts, I simply shared how we had enjoyed a good service in Church that day. That became an excuse for all kinds of attacks to be launched and I received a PM, from a seemingly otherwise reasonable atheist person, accusing me of coat-trailing! That's right, to post anything positive connected with Christianity was viewed as an unwarranted provocation that interfered with the inalienable right of atheists to mock Christians uninterrupted.

    So, myself and one or two others have stood toe-to-toe with those who want to constantly attack Christianity and have given as good as we've got. And guess what? Bullies don't like that. They never have, and they never will. Have I overstepped the mark at times? Probably. But at least we have a forum now where Christians and others can actually debate Christian issues with slightly less distraction than before.

    I've lost count of the number of posters who enter the Christianity forum and who, in posts littered with logical fallacies, historical bloopers, and atrocious spelling and grammar, tell us that Christians are uneducated, irrational, deluded fools. Then, when you challenge them, they start bleating about how the bad nasty Christians hurt their feelings.

    This has made me unpopular with many of the atheist posters - and they are not slow to respond with insults and slurs. And I freely admit that if someone is acting the goat, or ignoring basic principles of logic, then I will tell them so - frequently with sarcasm.

    I'm quite sure if Steve wants to search through the thousands of posts that I have made, particularly by quoting them out of context, then he can construct an argument about how horrible and nasty PDN is.

    Now to the issue in hand.

    Steve started a thread at 1.46pm entitled "The major probelms (sic) in believing in religion". His initial post contained eight separate arguments against religion.

    My initial response concentrated on just one of those arguments. In fact I said,
    PDN wrote:
    I haven't got time to respond to all the points right now (stuff at work etc), so I picked this out as one of the quickest and easiest to answer.
    So, right from the word go, I made it clear to Steve that I didn't have time to answer numerous questions and would be selective in answering due to time constraints.

    As the debate continued to and fro, Steve asked a question about the significance of man in Creation. I didn't think his question added anything at all to the argument, and could see no logical importance to it, so I concentrated on answering other points that I thought were more salient.

    At 5.47pm I posted what I felt was an adequate rebuttal to Steve's argument, IMHO effectively nullifying his question about the significance of man in Creation, logged off and went to do some work in the real world.

    At 8.30pm I returned to my computer and found messages and questions in 8 separate threads that demanded my attention. I began dealing with them one by one, beginning with one in Steve's thread.

    Within 5 minutes I find Steve has posted this:
    stevejazzx wrote:
    Any chance of you answering thie question

    'do you consider christinaity a major part of gods creation'

    this is my 5th time in this thread asking you that question

    I felt that kind of badgering was unacceptable. I don't think I should be expected to drop everything and everybody else just because one poster thinks he deserves an answer more than everybody else. To add a touch of irony - I am currently supposed to be in a public one-on-one debate in the A&A forum where the atheist moderator specified that responses must be made within 24 hours or the debate is forfeited. I have been patiently waiting for 10 days for my opponent's non-existent response. Yet now I'm getting hassled by someone for not answering their question within a few hours?

    So, just 18 minutes after logging back onto the site, I answered Steve's question. Of all the posts demanding my attention, including some trolling on another thread that required infractions, Steve's was the third post that I addressed. However, I also expressed my annoyance at his badgering by posting the following.
    PDN wrote:
    Just hold your horses right there. I have just come on line again in the last 15 minutes after looking after something at work. I have questions addressed to me and points being made in 8 different threads and I don't appreciate being badgered because you are feeling impatient and you think your question is more important than anyone else's. Do I make myself clear?

    That post reiterated what my first post in the thread had said, that I could not be expected to answer every single argument raised, and that I had to be selective in what I answered and when I answered it.

    Steve's response:
    stevejazzx wrote:
    Absolute nonsense, you clearly had the opportunity in other replies this thread to answer had you so wished.

    That really made me angry. I had explained to the guy that I was dealing with a number of questions and points, and that he should wait his turn. So he tells me that my explanation is absolute nonsense.

    Steve is now trying to make out that he was banned for using the phrase 'absolute nonsense.' He and I both know that there would be no problem in using that phrase if he disagreed with an argument in a thread and, on grounds of logic, dismissed the argument as 'absolute nonsense'.

    However, what he was saying was that my truthful and straightforward explanation about not answering his question immediately was 'absolute nonsense'. I interpreted that, and still interpret that, as an attack upon my truthfulness and integrity. I had tried to be straight with the guy and instead he was accusing me of being evasive.

    I demanded an apology.
    PDN wrote:
    Hold on there. I don't appreciate being called a liar. I can't answer every question and point raised in every post. As it is I'm spending too much time on this board.

    I'm going to give you one opportunity to apologise.
    In retrospect I could have done this in a less confrontational way, which I wish I had done, but boy was I angry!

    Steve's response:
    stevejazzx wrote:
    Apologise? You clearly had the opportunity. That is what all the evidence suggests. I said it was nonsense that you did not have this opportunity because of your posts in the meantime in this thread in reply to me. You want to ban me for that? Boy oh boy talk about true colors.
    I cannot count the amount of people who have brought you to question on your countless snarly vitriolic comments which you always claim are harmless despite the posters advising that they do not like them. There are lots of examples of this. Regular readers of this forum will be and are aware of this. So go ahead PDN and issue your ban for I am very satisfied that I have not behaved in a bad manner in this or any other thread therefore I am very confident that the posters will be able to see this for what it is really is

    Notice that I never said I didn't have an opportunity to answer him. I told him he should be patient and wait his turn.

    So I banned him for a month. The reason given was "Calling a mod a liar".

    He then continued to PM me, calling my explanation why I had not answered his question earlier "an excuse" that was 'Nonsense based on the evidence".

    I don't need to offer any "excuse". I am under no obligation to answer someone's question when and how they dictate, and even less so when they start acting petulantly and demanding that they deserve my attention to the exclusion of anyone else.

    I personally believe that the ban was justified. From the feedback I'm getting it seems like some people feel that I am overly robust in tackling those who come into the Christianity forum purely to stir up strife. I'm certainly willing to discuss my tactics with the other moderator and the CMods and SMods.. Maybe it will be better to follow the lead of the Islam forum and simply infract and ban those who post with the deliberate intent of inflaming and attacking the natives?


  • Options
    #21
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    PDN wrote: »
    Maybe it will be better to follow the lead of the Islam forum and simply infract and ban those who post with the deliberate intent of inflaming and attacking the natives?

    Certainly something for you to think about if you feel it is in the best interest of your forum.
    stevejazzx wrote:
    I cannot count the amount of people who have brought you to question on your countless snarly vitriolic comments which you always claim are harmless despite the posters advising that they do not like them. There are lots of examples of this. Regular readers of this forum will be and are aware of this. So go ahead PDN and issue your ban for I am very satisfied that I have not behaved in a bad manner in this or any other thread therefore I am very confident that the posters will be able to see this for what it is really is

    stevejazzx
    That comment alone warrants a ban.
    Questioning and harrassing a Mod in thread is a big no no on this site.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    beruthiel wrote:
    stevejazzx
    That comment alone warrants a ban.
    Questioning and harrassing a Mod in thread is a big no no on this site.

    He asked me to apologise over saying 'absolute nonsesne'. I pointed out that posters had brought him to question over his comments which posters had said they were not happy with.
    What comment exactly do you refer to?
    Have you read all this thread?
    Do you relasie it PDN who had repeatedly called people 'drunk' or 'smoking something' and that what I was doing was repeating his own phrases against him?


  • Options
    #23
    BuffyBot
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 24,924 Mod ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    Do you relasie it PDN who had repeatedly called people 'drunk' or 'smoking something' and that what I was doing was repeating his own phrases against him?

    "He started it" as a line simply doesn't work here. You've already accepted that you've done wrong by taking the approach that you did. PDN has admitted that he may have been a little robust with how he came back as you, and wishes that he did it differently. He's also stated that he'll discuss how the forum moderation will progress from here with those responsible. I don't think he could be much fairer than that.

    This doesn't invalidate the ban, however and I've no intention of overturning it. I think that when your month is up, you re-enter the forum having taken stock about how you post on issues which will arouse strong passions on both sides. There is always room for debate. There is little room for incivility though, as it helps no one and drags the valuable discourse down - something I hope both sides have realised, and will learn from.

    I'll leave this thread open for a while, but I consider this pretty much closed.


  • Options
    #24
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    PDN wrote: »
    A little bit of context to all of this.


    PDN wrote:
    I'm quite sure if Steve wants to search through the thousands of posts that I have made, particularly by quoting them out of context, then he can construct an argument about how horrible and nasty PDN is.


    No I purposedly did not post a handful of comments with the following phrases from you becasue they were out of context
    pdn wrote:
    the op's muppertry
    you are a tool
    you must be idiotic

    You are a confrontational moderator. It has been said by myself and many others (would you like names and specific posts? I have them ready to be pasted in) that your style is to dismiss posts with thinly veiled insults and then claim a moral victory when poster gets irritated by what you've done.



    pdn wrote:
    Now to the issue in hand.

    Steve started a thread at 1.46pm entitled "The major probelms (sic) in believing in religion". His initial post contained eight separate arguments against religion.

    At 5.47pm I posted what I felt was an adequate rebuttal to Steve's argument, IMHO effectively nullifying his question about the significance of man in Creation, logged off and went to do some work in the real world.

    At 8.30pm I returned to my computer and found messages and questions in 8 separate threads that demanded my attention. I began dealing with them one by one, beginning with one in Steve's thread.

    You are making this about something it is not about.
    It is about you bannig me for the phrase 'absolute nonsense'. You are now adding this background and chosing to get as much mileage out of it as you can. This story of you coming online at x point is all irrelevant. You banned me becasue as you said

    'I accused you of lying' by saying absolute nonsense.

    pdn wrote:
    I felt that kind of badgering was unacceptable. I don't think I should be expected to drop everything and everybody else just because one poster thinks he deserves an answer more than everybody else. To add a touch of irony - I am currently supposed to be in a public one-on-one debate in the A&A forum where the atheist moderator specified that responses must be made within 24 hours or the debate is forfeited. I have been patiently waiting for 10 days for my opponent's non-existent response. Yet now I'm getting hassled by someone for not answering their question within a few hours?

    I never asked you to address me before anyone else. I simply said that there was a point on thread you hadn't answered. I replied restating it. I never demanded - you gave me that attribute. You have given me many attributes.

    pdn wrote:

    That really made me angry. I had explained to the guy that I was dealing with a number of questions and points, and that he should wait his turn. So he tells me that my explanation is absolute nonsense.

    Steve is now trying to make out that he was banned for using the phrase 'absolute nonsense.' He and I both know that there would be no problem in using that phrase if he disagreed with an argument in a thread and, on grounds of logic, dismissed the argument as 'absolute nonsense'.

    However, what he was saying was that my truthful and straightforward explanation about not answering his question immediately was 'absolute nonsense'. I interpreted that, and still interpret that, as an attack upon my truthfulness and integrity. I had tried to be straight with the guy and instead he was accusing me of being evasive.

    So every time someones says nonsense on thread it is an deep seated attack on on someones elese integrity? You yourself said it to me last week.
    pdn wrote:

    Originally Posted by pdn
    That is nonsense, and you know it's nonsense

    from

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showt...8#post59628908


    So should I demand an apology too.

    but you said this also when another poster called you up on your comments -
    pdn wrote:
    A bit of verbal sparring with opponents in a debate is all part and parcel of the fun on internet fora
    pdn wrote:

    I demanded an apology.
    In retrospect I could have done this in a less confrontational way, which I wish I had done, but boy was I angry!


    You are always angry at someone it seems - in particular those who bring you to point on certain quesitons and who don't roll over too easy at your dismissive replies. Everyone is saying the same thing about you. Noone says your bad person or anything but everyone comments that you have a temper.

    You were angry? and What about me? I am being humiliated asked to apologise for a phrase that everyone including you is saying on a daily basis. You bet on me not apologising and leveraged that to produce enough grounds for a ban.


    pdn wrote:
    Notice that I never said I didn't have an opportunity to answer him. I told him he should be patient and wait his turn.



    *I was waiting my turn. I never demanded. I restated a point many times but never demanded or insisted anything. You are attributing this quality to me. you have no grounds for calling me someone who was demanding. I was replying to you when you were replying to me (when you were online) or in reference to me on thread to answer it. You were online or at least had just been online every time I restated it.

    pdn wrote:
    So I banned him for a month. The reason given was "Calling a mod a liar".


    Where did I call you liar?
    If nonsense counts then 50% of boards are currently calling each other 'liars'.
    pdn wrote:
    He then continued to PM me, calling my explanation why I had not answered his question earlier "an excuse" that was 'Nonsense based on the evidence".


    Oh my god. Too far PDN. That is not true. I replied to your PM's only. I never continued to PM you. I replied to your PM's. Replied - that's it. Dispicable.

    pdn wrote:
    I don't need to offer any "excuse". I am under no obligation to answer someone's question when and how they dictate, and even less so when they start acting petulantly and demanding that they deserve my attention to the exclusion of anyone else.

    Again painting this picture of me demanding you reply and saying no one else deserves attention - I never did such a thing. please show where I did this.

    pdn wrote:
    I personally believe that the ban was justified. From the feedback I'm getting it seems like some people feel that am overly robust in tackling those who come into the Christianity forum purely to stir up strife. I'm certainly willing to discuss my tactics with the other moderator and the CMods and SMods.. Maybe it will be better to follow the lead of the Islam forum and simply infract and ban those who post with the deliberate intent of inflaming and attacking the natives?

    I'm glad that some of this is giving you some pause for thought.

    -I am very very angered by your comment that I kept pm ing you. I feel it really is poor form. It shows me as the kind of person who incites and gives a false impression of me to poeple who cannot know exactly how it happened, It is not true I replied to your PM's only.

    You sent me 3 pm's @ 9.29, 9.38, 9.49

    I sent 3 replies @ 9.30, 9.42 and 10.06.

    How on earth does that constitue me as the person who kept pm'ing you?


  • Options
    #25
    stevejazzx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    BuffyBot wrote: »
    "He started it" as a line simply doesn't work here. You've already accepted that you've done wrong by taking the approach that you did. PDN has admitted that he may have been a little robust with how he came back as you, and wishes that he did it differently. He's also stated that he'll discuss how the forum moderation will progress from here with those responsible. I don't think he could be much fairer than that.

    I accpet that.

    pdn wrote:
    This doesn't invalidate the ban, however and I've no intention of overturning it. I think that when your month is up, you re-enter the forum having taken stock about how you post on issues which will arouse strong passions on both sides. There is always room for debate. There is little room for incivility though, as it helps no one and drags the valuable discourse down - something I hope both sides have realised, and will learn from.

    It is not really about invalidating ban to me now but rather that people can digest the whole story. I didn't complain here about PDN because as he said in his own that the 'banter was all a part of the interent fora' - as it turns out it is he who choses when to enforce that idea.


    Let me ask a question:

    Was PDN acting on behalf of the nature of the thread and the posters or just himself?

    BuffyBot wrote:
    I'll leave this thread open for a while, but I consider this pretty much closed.

    I do not feel the need to prove myslef further or carry this on. I accept the ban.
    My view of the Mod is he is unift to Mod, that is my view. I intend to carry on my boards experience and I will honestly endeavour to avoid all confrontation s like this in future, in fact I can guarantee it.
    I sincerely will never allow myslef to be dragged into something like this ever again. The smods can rule and from what I see they do pretty well in most situations so that is justice enough for me in the interim.


  • Options
    #26
    BuffyBot
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 24,924 Mod ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    Thread closed as stated earlier.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement