Banned for being "off topic"

matt-dublin

Hey guys,

I've been banned for being off topic on one of the forums here and i want clarification why.
http://nologin.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054900174

i've been told i have been off topic.

I gave advice to someone and was backed up by someone else.
Now i can understand there was a few posts between myself and another user but surely nothing to be banned for?

The moderator in question never gave me a warning and i got a PM from him this morning. Now as i understand a moderator is there to protect the user from unwanted material and bitchyness?

am i not right in saying that the mod should have deleted the posts and not banned me and another user for a very minor misdemenor?

Your responses are greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Matt

Karl Hungus

matt-dublin wrote:

The moderator in question never gave me a warning

Really?

Beruthiel wrote:

next person to post a useless, unhelpful comment gets banned.

Sounds fairly warning like to me.

tbh

if you want a neutral opinion:

Beru warned that posting off-topic would lead to a banning - you posted twice off topic after that - IMO:

only on thursdays lol

@grimlock: someone caught me out!

what were they supposed to do? If they didn't ban you, the warning would have been meaningless.

ow as i understand a moderator is there to protect the user from unwanted material and bitchyness?

I don't really want to read comments like "only on thursdays lol" - I know it's just a joke, but if everyone did it, PI would be AH. Sorry dude, it's just a week - learn the lesson.


edit: or I could have said all that in two concise lines like Karl Hungus did. Damn you hungus!

Gordon

matt-dublin wrote:

am i not right in saying that the mod should have deleted the posts and not banned me and another user for a very minor misdemenor?

At least you understand that it was a misdemeanor. Why should we spend time pming people and removing their posts when there is a high likelyhood of them simply going off topic again and spoiling threads. Nothing is learned.

6th

You deserved the banned.

Beruthiel originally warned keyser and said "another comment like that will get you banned".

Beruthiel then warned Dragan with "are you blind?
did you not see my warning above?
next person to post a useless, unhelpful comment gets banned."

You then followed up with:

"only on thursdays lol"

and

"@grimlock: someone caught me out!"

Welly was banned aswell as warnings had been issued - that your ban and deal with it, its not forever.

matt-dublin

I would also like to add the fact that that this was months ago and i have since not posted in that thread and it is only came up today?

Banning someone for something done months ago and also in which the manner it was done by a moderator with an unsuitable avatar for a publin board seems highly unprofessional imo

The Hill Billy

Mod says no more off-topic posts.
OP posts twice off-topic.
Mod bans OP.
Seems fair.

Karl Hungus

tbh wrote:

edit: or I could have said all that in two concise lines like Karl Hungus did. Damn you hungus!

Haha! I dash your hopes and dreams to dust once more! Take it, peon, and remember you place!

matt-dublin

and now two moderators are off topic?
now warnings?

hardly seems fair???

Gordon

What's wrong with my avatar?!

The Hill Billy

matt-dublin wrote:

Banning someone for something done months ago and also in which the manner it was done by a moderator with an unsuitable avatar for a publin board seems highly unprofessional imo

How the hell is either point relevant?
On the first point - You just happened to be found out later rather than sooner.
On the second point - WTF?! Gordon's reputation on boards.ie (from what I have seen) is beyond reproach. I'd apologise post haste if I were you.

matt-dublin

depicts a picture of a naked woman

matt-dublin

I will apologise as i didn't see the post from the first mod and to gordon for the same point.

i will not apologise for something i was banned for and to watch someone else do without reprise?

The Hill Billy

matt-dublin wrote:

depicts a picture of a naked woman

Tis a pity that you're banned from PI because if you have a problem with the naked female form there are a few nice people over there who could help you.

Karl Hungus

matt-dublin wrote:

and now two moderators are off topic?

One could almost think that I do so out of sheer mischeif.

tbh

matt-dublin wrote:

highly unprofessional imo

you mean they are acting like they don't get paid?

matt-dublin

Hill Billy wrote:

Tis a pity that you're banned from PI because if you have a problem with the naked female form there are a few nice people over there who could help you.

slander aimed directly at another member.

Also i have no issues with the female naked body, i do however believe that from a moderator who is supposed to be a form of role model on the boards should not be using an avatar that depicts nudity on a pulic board where children and feminists may view and be offended.

matt-dublin

Karl Hungus wrote:

One could almost think that I do so out of sheer mischeif.

Now ur just being mean

Gordon

What makes you think it's a naked woman? It could be an owl. Or it could be a bicycle jumping over an upside down traffic cone. I made it adaptable.

The Hill Billy

matt-dublin wrote:

slander aimed directly at another member.

It is called humour.
A pitiful attempt maybe, but humour nonetheless.

sprinkles

matt-dublin wrote:

I would also like to add the fact that that this was months ago and i have since not posted in that thread and it is only came up today?

Banning someone for something done months ago and also in which the manner it was done by a moderator with an unsuitable avatar for a publin board seems highly unprofessional imo

I'm sorry I fail to see your point about the avatar or indeed the timeline.....
IMO you broke a very simple rule that the mod clearly spelled out. Resulted in a ban.

matt-dublin

first impressions!
we know what it looks like, and i think most people will say the same...
Certainly when i look at it the first thing that comes to mind certainly isn't a bicycle and upside down traffic cone!

@billy, i didn't find it funny

tbh

matt-dublin wrote:

slander aimed directly at another member.

OOHH! 50/50 chance of getting the right term, but you didn't.

Also i have no issues with the female naked body, i do however believe that from a moderator who is supposed to be a form of role model on the boards should not be using an avatar that depicts nudity on a pulic board where children and feminists may view and be offended.

quality

Gordon

You don't think it looks like a cute wee owl face? I do sometimes. It's a cute bird isn't it?

Firewalkwithme

matt-dublin wrote:

Certainly when i look at it the first thing that comes to mind certainly isn't a bicycle and upside down traffic cone!

I thought it was a bike and a traffic cone but now I see things so differently.

Won't someone please think of the children!! (And the feminists)

tbh

I think that fly is too close to those fried eggs for comfort.

matt-dublin

tbh wrote:

OOHH! 50/50 chance of getting the right term, but you didn't.

Slagging?
Bullying?
Taking a dig?

Monday morning, mind issues!

Diogenes

matt-dublin wrote:

Banning someone for something done months ago and also in which the manner it was done by a moderator with an unsuitable avatar for a publin board seems highly unprofessional imo

Two circles, two dots and "v" is an unsuitable avatar?

Dude you're on the internet? I get more hardcore stuff than that in my spam folder every day...

matt-dublin

we're not on a porn site, we're on a public forum of discussion

Firewalkwithme

matt-dublin wrote:

we're not on a porn site, we're on a public forum of discussion

Are you seriously suggesting that someone could get off on Gordon's avatar? Could that someone be you? Maybe you should be let back into P.I.

matt-dublin

I give up!