banned for attacking the post

aDeener

got banned there in AH which is an absolute joke, for calling a post condescending and dicklike - in no way indicating that the poster was either of those rather his post was. however it was okay for the poster i was quoting to label the 1 in 5 who voted in a poll "retarded".

i pm'd dr.bollocko about this and of course since i pointed out this blatant double standard he has not since replied.

i also think itis vital to mention that the poster i quoted is also a mod :rolleyes:

murraymarmalade

aDeener wrote: »

got banned there in AH which is an absolute joke, for calling a post condescending and dicklike - in no way indicating that the poster was either of those rather his post was. however it was okay for the poster i was quoting to label the 1 in 5 who voted in a poll "retarded".

i pm'd dr.bollocko about this and of course since i pointed out this blatant double standard he has not since replied.

i also think itis vital to mention that the poster i quoted is also a mod :rolleyes:

as we say on cork.........thats shocking.

Tom Dunne

Moved from Feedback.

First port of call is the Category Moderators, and if you are not happy with the outcome of that, come back to this thread in the Help Desk.

aDeener

category mod hasnt got back to me and its over a day since i pm'd him

Zaph

It's the weekend and the weather has been beautiful. Mods and CMods have lives outside of Boards and I'm sure they were off enjoying the sun somewhere, so please be patient, I'm sure they'll be back to you as soon as they can.

dr.bollocko

I believe I have been somewhat misrepresented in the first post.
I have replied to every PM aDeener sent me trying to further clarify my point. I have just checked and these messages are all happily sitting in my sent items addressed to the chap.
My take on this is that the nature of the post was offensive to the poster

and the award for the most condescending dick like post of the year

That is an attempt to drag personal abuse into the argument. It is unnecessary and not dissimilar to other negative content generated, in my opinion, by this poster in after hours. The difference is a semantic one rather than one of intent. The post was offensive to the person it was directed at and was unnecessary. It didn't argue any merits of the posters point at all.
That'd be my thinking on it. Again, this is all something I mentioned in the PMs I definitely did send and were received and replied to before this thread was opened.

aDeener

dr.bollocko wrote: »

I believe I have been somewhat misrepresented in the first post.
I have replied to every PM aDeener sent me trying to further clarify my point. I have just checked and these messages are all happily sitting in my sent items addressed to the chap.
My take on this is that the nature of the post was offensive to the poster

That is an attempt to drag personal abuse into the argument. It is unnecessary and not dissimilar to other negative content generated, in my opinion, by this poster in after hours. The difference is a semantic one rather than one of intent. The post was offensive to the person it was directed at and was unnecessary. It didn't argue any merits of the posters point at all.
That'd be my thinking on it. Again, this is all something I mentioned in the PMs I definitely did send and were received and replied to before this thread was opened.

you did not reply when i pointed out the abuse by the poster i quoted claiming that the 1 in 5 who voted on the poll was "retarded" so you are not being misrepresented at all.

so if anything is offensive to any poster they can get the other banned? nonsense.

plus that is not a direct quote aimed at the person, it was clearly left open so in no way can that be construed as direct personal abuse.... unlike being called retarded.

dr.bollocko

you did not reply when i pointed out the abuse by the poster i quoted claiming that the 1 in 5 who voted on the poll was "retarded" so you are not being misrepresented at all.

You never sent me any such PM aDeener...
Well at least I never received it.
Please do forward again.

aDeener

hmm i was nearly certain i sent that but there is no trace of it in my account so my apologies.
nevertheless my point still stands:

1. it was not a direct attack on the poster, it attacked the post
2. even if it was construed that this was not an attack on the post, it cannot be said that it was directly at the poster as my post was left open. "the award goes to......" does not say who the award actually is for. which brings me to my last point

3. considering you obviously do not agree with points 1 and 2 makes it double standards in the extreme not to ban the poster who called 20% of poll voters retarded - far more of a direct attack. but said poster is a mod, so well ya know, nothing is hardly going to be done there is it.... :rolleyes:

how a 2 week ban is justified is beyond me.

dr.bollocko

I think myself and aDeener are in agreement that this one has been resolved via PM folks.