Wannabe Freemason is now a CT mod.

Podman

My name is URL wrote: »

Nah.. it's just dickish behavior, and it happens all too often here in FB. When a user is doomed they're easy pickings.

Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition.. but the banned guy got it.. so why not whoever is denying that they altered a user profile?

It's not very nice to mess with a user's profile, if that's what happened. What's next, change their posts to say something different?

It'll be interesting to see if anyone owns up to changing DS's avatar.

Nevyn

phantom_lord wrote: »

Are they not a pro catholic organisation?

You are thinking of the order of Hibernian which was formed as freemasonry back that didn't admit catholics but this changed over time. But the Hibernian order still exists but the rosy cross is more active.

Nevyn

My name is URL wrote: »

Nah.. it's just dickish behavior, and it happens all too often here in FB. When a user is doomed they're easy pickings.

Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition.. but the banned guy got it.. so why not whoever is denying that they altered a user profile?

A subscriber can be a subscriber and choose to not have the red stars which marks them as a subscriber turned on.

Mahatma coat

if he's SiteBanned does he get his fiver Back??????????

old_aussie

demonspawn wrote: »

Ok, I love a joke now and again but seriously, what the f**k? Is this a really bad joke? Yehaks has been so openly critical of CTers and denies any and all CTs on that forum and now someone at the top as seen fit to make him a moderator.

As conspiracies go, this one is just so obvious it's not even funny. Great job, this whole website has just been sussed.

Obvious conspiracy is obvious.

Sounds like you are bitter about being overlooked for the mod position.

RoundyMooney

Thaedydal wrote: »

A subscriber can be a subscriber and choose to not have the red stars which marks them as a subscriber turned on.

Indeed, and it's not beyond the realm of possibility that this "worthy" chap did it himself, nor of course that it was done for him just before he ducked under for the third time.

My name is URL wrote: »

Nah.. it's just dickish behavior, and it happens all too often here in FB. When a user is doomed they're easy pickings.

Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition.. but the banned guy got it.. so why not whoever is denying that they altered a user profile?

Agreed, the circle jerk is a sight to behold. Balancing that against disallowing folk redress is a long standing problem. A middle ground where restraint is encouraged and transparency allowed by virtue of an open and tightly moderated forum is a solution that some have been posting in support of for some time now, as opposed to an outwardly promising talking shop prodded on by DeBoss once a month;)

Pity in this case that the baying masses happened to be mods though, see below*.

Whatever about disabling your usercp and avatar makes the mind boggle.

My name is URL wrote: »

Are you saying that an Admin did not change his avatar a few times this evening?

that carry on has as much use as Demon's own overly hostile and personal approach to raising issues.. I'm not impressed one bit that an Admin would sink to the level of altering a users avatar in order to entertain the uninvolved.. it stinks of a cliquey & bullish mentality. He should have been banned much earlier or have his thread here closed rather than been made up as some sort of sideshow for people to laugh at..

Agreed, if that's what occurred. I'm still trying to figure out the Manglish (not in the Malayan sense) quoted above though...


*FTR I see this as mostly coincidental, there are more mods here than posts from Frada seeking thanks these days, so it's hardly evidence of conspiracy, more a case of people jumping on the choo choo bandwagon, which anyone who reads and posts on FB will be well aware of, if not participating thereof.

RoundyMooney

Mahatma coat wrote: »

if he's SiteBanned does he get his fiver Back??????????

If he did sub, not necessarily, although it has been done in the past, solely out of goodwill.

Paying a sub grants no one immunity, nor should it.

My name is URL

Thaedydal wrote: »

A subscriber can be a subscriber and choose to not have the red stars which marks them as a subscriber turned on.

Whether or not subscribers add themselves to that 'group'; their names still appear here

My name is there and I left the Subscriber's group.. Demon'sPawn was not listed there before his ban..

Look, only an Admin can refute the claim that one of their crew altered a person's profile.. I believe that it happened.. bizarre as it may be that this is a thread about the CT forum, on 9/11

Actually, does mentioning those coincidences disprove my belief?

RoundyMooney

My name is URL wrote: »

Whether or not subscribers add themselves to that 'group'; their names still appear here

Didn't know that existed, thank you

RoundyMooney

Worth saying though, that user profiles have been altered in the past, even without a siteban being invoked (such as cheekysomethings "I GAY" avatar of sometime ago as well as others-red background, black font IIRC). I ask genuinely, why this is only becoming an issue now, if the avatar was altered without this individuals consent?

Not taking sides on this, just saying it was done before; then again the banlist used to have a more contentious header as well..., usernames were altered for fun and frolics etc., times change and all that...

Podman

Papa Smut wrote: »

But do you not see since this is a private site, with rules and regulations that specify that you cannot have a second account, that you have to abide by them or find a new place? God knows the internet is big enough.

Boards isn't "just another web site" our usernames are us. I know so many boardsies in real life it's ridiculous (and sometimes scary:P). It's a community. There is absolutely no reason to have more than one login and if you do, you should be banned, permanently, as you obviously don't understand the basic ethic and community behind boards.

Well, if it's so serious then why not search all the IP addresses and ban the hell out of a bunch of unsuspecting people?

Alternatively, there is an option to ask the person which account they'd like merged, as happened in my case. At least that way, multiple users in the same house would have some protection, and single accounts would be spared the firing squad.

Terry

demonspawn wrote: »

They've now disabled my user CT so I can't disable my avatar. I hope this is getting through to people.

This made me chuckle.

I'm off to troll Jim Corr on facebook.

Also, can anyone tell me the meaning behing the avatar? I don't know what it symbolises?
Did anyone read that last sentence in an Australian accent?

The Hill Billy

Tom Dunne wrote: »

It was 40 foot and they went willingly.

Trinity, is that you?

Nevyn

My name is URL wrote: »

Whether or not subscribers add themselves to that 'group'; their names still appear here

My name is there and I left the Subscriber's group.. Demon'sPawn was not listed there before his ban..

Look, only an Admin can refute the claim that one of their crew altered a person's profile.. I believe that it happened.. bizarre as it may be that this is a thread about the CT forum, on 9/11

Actually, does mentioning those coincidences disprove my belief?

Until someone who can look at the database entries forensically we have no way of knowing. It can take anything from 24 hours to longer at the weekend for the lists including that of who is a subscriber to refresh.

Oh and I have been a subscriber and my name is not on that list, so I would notassume it's definitive and 100% correct all the time.

Brown Bomber

Papa Smut wrote: »

But do you not see since this is a private site, with rules and regulations that specify that you cannot have a second account, that you have to abide by them or find a new place? God knows the internet is big enough.

[/QUOTE]
Boards isn't "just another web site" our usernames are us. I know so many boardsies in real life it's ridiculous (and sometimes scary:P).

Papa Smut wrote: »

It's a community.

Papa Smut wrote: »

There is absolutely no reason to have more than one login and if you do, you should be banned, permanently,

Gordon

Aye that's right. Actually we don't have the privileges to merge accounts btw.

If you aren't using the second account to cause trouble then it's cool, we prefer you to use the same account, we can't stop you from signing up again, but please just use the one account. ta
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61920816&postcount=6

BuffyBot
Moderator
It's fine, once you don't use it to get around any forum bans on your old account and/or other nefarious purposes
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64121817&postcount=2

BuffyBot
Moderator

You can have a second account, once you're not using it for trolling/getting around a forum ban etc.

I don't believe it will allow you to create another account using the same email however.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63318162&postcount=2

Zaph
Sugar free gummi bear

While we wouldn't actively encourage people to create and use alt accounts, as long as they behave themselves there's no rule against doing so.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64324643&postcount=2

seamus
Dental Plan!

There's a popular misconception that having another account is banned completely. Don't worry, all/most us Smods thought the same thing at one point.

There's no problem with people having more than one account, unless the second account can be used to circumvent a forum or site ban.

Our actions depend on the context. If someone has a known second account and gets banned from a forum, then it may be a matter of banning both accounts from the one forum, or sitebanning one account. If someone registers a new account *after* having gotten a ban, we'll usually ban both accounts from the site, and all future accounts belonging to that person.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64324643&postcount=2

Papa Smut wrote: »

as you obviously don't understand the basic ethic and community behind boards.

In light of this thread I certainly dont understand the "basic ethic and community behind boards".

The insults flown around about mental illnesses and nervous breakdowns were disgusting and anyone involved should be ashamed of themselves, especially people who are to represent the site itself.

That aside, if you do care about "the basic ethic and community behind boards" you should try to salvage some integrity by sending out the the message of the "basic ethic and community behind boards" you espouse by transparently investigating and punishing whoever is responsible for ****ing around with his sig and avatar to make a fool out of him.

WIZE

Ive read through this thread and noticed My name is Url Questions were not answered

Was Demons Account a Subscriber Account . Im sure this can be checked by an Admin .

If his avatar was being changed to a custom to mock him you were attacking the Poster and not the post which seems to be Rule 1.1

I would really like to know the answer to this

tbh

If you're talking about me there brown bomber, I wasn't insulting the guy, I would have genuine concerns about the guys mental health, and it waobvious that his stress levels were climbing

mike65

Thaedydal wrote: »

You are thinking of the order of Hibernian which was formed as freemasonry back that didn't admit catholics but this changed over time. But the Hibernian order still exists but the rosy cross is more active.

Isn't the Knights of Ni Columbus the Catholic version?

Brown Bomber

Edit: Sorry response to tbh
That's fair enough, to be frank it was initially bluewolf/lonewolf (?) who prior to this thread had been taking the piss in the CT feedback thread too, aggraviting the situation with demonspawn farther still. I just find the whole thing very distasteful. Commenting on someone's mental state and nervous breakdown, which he had admitted to is incredibly low, especially for cheap laughs. It was like a gang of big kids gathered around a small kid with a deformity poking fun. Except we aren't kids, we have responsibilitys as adults, and further still admins/mods have a greater responsibilty again as they are the public face and the moral guides really on how to behave in the "community spirit" that was mentioned before.

FarmerGreen

Next time someone runs amok like that couldnt you give him a week off before he goes completely ever the top and gets banned?

Tom Dunne

Brown Bomber wrote:

That aside, if you do care about "the basic ethic and community behind boards" you should try to salvage some integrity by sending out the the message of the "basic ethic and community behind boards" you espouse by transparently investigating and punishing whoever is responsible for ****ing around with his sig and avatar to make a fool out of him.

I like to think of myself as open, honest and approachable. If somebody comes to me with a problem be it with the site itself, a forum/post or with something I personally have done, then I'm all ears.

That is, if the person approaching me does so in a rational, coherent and calm manner.

To be quite frank, anybody who starts throwing out wild accusations and personal insults is fair game. Demonspawn could have walked away from this thread, but no, he insisted on continuing his borderline hysteria nonsense, resulting in another admin banning both him and his alt account.

He could have kept his ideas to the Conspiracy Theories forum, but the moment he started a thread here on Feedback and started throwing out wild accusations was the moment he opened himself up to ridicule.

I never once engaged in personal abuse against him, yet he continued to hurl abuse at moderators and admins (pigs, burning in hell in particular springs to mind).

So, you and all your other "righteous indignation" buddies will have to accept the fact that, there isn't going to be any investigation, there isn't going to be any witch hunt and there sure as hell isn't going to be any punishment.

mike65

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I like to think of myself as open, honest and approachable. If somebody comes to me with a problem be it with the site itself, a forum/post or with something I personally have done, then I'm all ears.

That is, if the person approaching me does so in a rational, coherent and calm manner.

To be quite frank, anybody who starts throwing out wild accusations and personal insults is fair game. Demonspawn could have walked away from this thread, but no, he insisted on continuing his borderline hysteria nonsense, resulting in another admin banning both him and his alt account.

He could have kept his ideas to the Conspiracy Theories forum, but the moment he started a thread here on Feedback and started throwing out wild accusations was the moment he opened himself up to ridicule.

I never once engaged in personal abuse against him, yet he continued to hurl abuse at moderators and admins (pigs, burning in hell in particular springs to mind).

So, you and all your other "righteous indignation" buddies will have to accept the fact that, there isn't going to be any investigation, there isn't going to be any witch hunt and there sure as hell isn't going to be any punishment.

Once someone like Demonspawn starts there is no way he is not going to try to finish or much more likely be finished as predictably happened this time. Anyone who has looked at his posts outside CT (which I am self banned from) can see what sort he is. This was only going to end one way.

Brown Bomber

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I like to think of myself as open, honest and approachable. If somebody comes to me with a problem be it with the site itself, a forum/post or with something I personally have done, then I'm all ears.

Evidently not so. I came to you with a problem and in the same post you make this comment directed at me

you and all your other "righteous indignation" buddies

That is not "all ears" to addressing a problem.

Tom Dunne wrote: »

To be quite frank, anybody who starts throwing out wild accusations and personal insults is fair game.

Isn't that the Scientology position too?

Seriously though, I was led to believe that nobody on the site is "fair game" in line with the ethos of the "community".

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Demonspawn could have walked away from this thread, but no, he insisted on continuing his borderline hysteria nonsense, resulting in another admin banning both him and his alt account.

He could have kept his ideas to the Conspiracy Theories forum, but the moment he started a thread here on Feedback and started throwing out wild accusations was the moment he opened himself up to ridicule.

I never once engaged in personal abuse against him, yet he continued to hurl abuse at moderators and admins (pigs, burning in hell in particular springs to mind).

I have no intention of defending demonspawn, his actions were indefensible, especially in the CT feedback thread in his actions towards yekahs. I don't question his ban in any way,

However, anything he has done does not excuse an admin from abusing his position and privelidges to abuse and insult a user of the forum, because that is what he still was.

Or am I missing something?

Tom Dunne wrote: »

So, you and all your other "righteous indignation" buddies will have to accept the fact that, there isn't going to be any investigation, there isn't going to be any witch hunt and there sure as hell isn't going to be any punishment.

So bottom line - One rule for us and one rule for you's and if you don't like it you can **** off!

Not very community orientated...

And if nobody has done anything wrong surely there should be no issues with sharing who changed the avatar/sig?

RoundyMooney

Brown Bomber wrote: »

And if nobody has done anything wrong surely there should be no issues with sharing who changed the avatar/sig?

Particularly when it was denied (I think) earlier...

Your man's actions were indefensible, the actions of those who responded, were less so, despite the very dubious statements that no insults were thrown and everything was said out of genuine concern.

Poor show, not the ultimate outcome, but the execution thereof...

smashey

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Edit: Sorry response to tbh
That's fair enough, to be frank it was initially bluewolf/lonewolf (?) who prior to this thread had been taking the piss in the CT feedback thread too, aggraviting the situation with demonspawn farther still. I just find the whole thing very distasteful. Commenting on someone's mental state and nervous breakdown, which he had admitted to is incredibly low, especially for cheap laughs. It was like a gang of big kids gathered around a small kid with a deformity poking fun. Except we aren't kids, we have responsibilitys as adults, and further still admins/mods have a greater responsibilty again as they are the public face and the moral guides really on how to behave in the "community spirit" that was mentioned before.

Okay, lets go back and see...

demonspawn wrote: »

Ok, I love a joke now and again but seriously, what the f**k? Is this a really bad joke? Yehaks has been so openly critical of CTers and denies any and all CTs on that forum and now someone at the top as seen fit to make him a moderator.

As conspiracies go, this one is just so obvious it's not even funny. Great job, this whole website has just been sussed.

Obvious conspiracy is obvious.

He starts off by crying conspiracy on the choice of mods. We make those choices and remain completely impartial in doing so.

demonspawn wrote: »

There's a link to the Grand Lodge of Antrim in yekah's signature. There's a rumor that DeVore is a Freemason. You must think we're all thick or something.

Rumours and speculation.

demonspawn wrote: »

Insults and mockery are the first defense, right? Make the person look foolish so others don't bother investigating. I know how it all works.

Actually, the lies are the first defense. Make yourselves look like some ordinary men's club, charitable and kind, when behind the scenes we know what really goes on. When the lies fail you resort to character assassination.

He knows what is really going on?

demonspawn wrote: »

Nope, nobody is out to get me. I'm out to get you lot. Don't you see that? Freemasons and their kind are the scum of this Earth and their time is up.

I'm out to get you lot?

demonspawn wrote: »

Freemasons are Godless pigs and they will burn in Hell forever for what they do.

Enough said.

demonspawn wrote: »

They've now disabled my user CT so I can't disable my avatar. I hope this is getting through to people.

Disabled the user CT. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt here and say he probably meant CP but as far as I know, that can't be done.

demonspawn wrote: »

That this site really is run by Freemason pigs. I forgot to mention something. My family are well known and these actions by the administrators of this site will also be well known.

We are all "freemason pigs?"

demonspawn wrote: »

I can't take a screenshot. The user control panel button just doesn't work anymore. As I said, my family is well known and this will become public.

The user control panel doesn't work??? My family is well known???

demonspawn wrote: »

This is the problem with you Freemasons. You're all quite thick when you think you're clever. This is why we all know about your secrets, you let too many halfwits in and ruin the whole thing.

Freemasons and quite thick?

Now, as you are all for fairness, equality and community spirit, am I to take it that as Admins/Mods on boards.ie, we just have to suck these allegations up? You may have noticed that we didn't rise to the bait but if he wishes to say things in a public forum that, to put it bluntly, are total and utter crap, and if he really believes in these statements, isn't he leaving himself open to being questioned by people here?

The he posted this gem in the CT forum...

demonspawn wrote: »

Great. Well, seeing as you're a mod now how about you enforce this.

Go fuk yourself and fuk this forum. Now ban me and go fuk yourself again.

I'm all for defending people here but you know, at some stage, things can become indefensible.

Brown Bomber

First of all Devore was a Freemason. He talked about it in a CT thread.

Secondly, I agree his actions were indefensible but nobody is trying to defend them, least of all me.

However, these type of comments are also indefensible

go talk to a doctor

Thick isn't the word that springs to mind.

I think you have mental issues and I shouldn't be winding you up, but.

Since his breakdown I would imagine
Which makes me feel a little guilty
but oh well
_______________

Yet they are defended or conveniently ignored at least.

The actions of the admin(s) who changed his avatar and sig is also indefensible. Yet it appears you have closed ranks because its one of your buddies who broke the rules and not some Joe Bloggs user.

smashey

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The actions of the admin(s) who changed his avatar and sig is also indefensible. Yet it appears you have closed ranks because its one of your buddies who broke the rules and not some Joe Bloggs user.

What rules were broken?

Rubik.

smashey wrote: »

What rules were broken?

The "don't be a dick" rule. He should have just been banned, messing around with his avatar just inflamed the situation.

dr.bollocko

Rubik. wrote: »

The "don't be a dick" rule. He should have just been banned, messing around with his avatar just inflamed the situation.

In retrospect I can see this might have irked people but from my POV this guy was insulting the community and out to troll and ruin a new mod's start on a forum. He had previously called problems in after hours. I would think that tbh, changing the avatar was done in jest and perhaps considering the reaction might not have necessarily been the best move. Objectively, the guy is going crazy on a thread about freemasons moderating the conspiracy theories forum and then he gets his avatar silently changed to an image that presumably has something to do with the freemasons? I'd think it funny myself rather than necessarily dickish.
I've seen it happen before from time to time (They changed me name to dr.sucksbollocko!!) and I think the posters usually took it as a joke in good spirit. Perhaps in the context of such a hot-headed thread it was a step too far. The whole series of events is unfortunate, particularly for the poor guys who have to start modding under a cloud like this.

drkpower

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So bottom line - One rule for us and one rule for you's and if you don't like it you can **** off!

Not very community orientated...

And if nobody has done anything wrong surely there should be no issues with sharing who changed the avatar/sig?

I have never ever agreed with BB and probably never ever will again; and Demonspawn was one of the most cretinous and moronic posters to ever wander through this site, and deserved much of the ridicule he got.

Having said that, if it is true that some Mod/Admin was fcuking around with his Avator etc., it really is pretty pathetic - its like pulling the wings off a dying fly - and the fact that TomDunne is essentially defending the practice is quite unedifying.