Banned from Aviation?

sin_city

I've been banned for speaking about CT but I actually spoke about history not CT.

Please unblock me.

Taltos

Hi sin city - I will look into this for you.

Have you followed the process above before I begin though - 1st step to reach out to the mod that banned you in this case to discuss it?

Taltos

OK

while waiting for a reply I have gone through the thread.

Noting with interest your first post earned a Warning with this note from the mod:

lord lucan wrote: »

cut it out, there's a conspiracy theories forum if you want to take that line of thinking forward, this is not the place for it.

Jumping forwards to the next day, I can see a few posts from you - I am going to quote some of them here:

sin_city wrote: »

You are oblivious to the propaganda going on at the moment I see and probably assumed the gulf of tonkin was a legit incident for the US to get involved in Vietnam.

People like you have been around for years....I bet someone like you was bragging about the world being flat 600 years ago too.

Incapable of critical thinking and condescending of those that do.

I don't know what happened on this flight but I do not believe the propaganda coming from Western media...anyone that does is a fool...NO PROOF...Thank goodness people stood up to it and prevented airstrikes on Syria last year.

The part in bold is not acceptable at all, why you think it is OK to attack a poster or a swathe of posters is beyond me - irrespective though you were not banned for that, I will though warn you that using such personal attacks is not acceptable anywhere here, please look at your style of posting when this ban is lifted, if you don't change at least this element I am afraid you won't leave the mods with much choice.

I can see repeated references to the gulf of tonkin - I assume that is what you mean in your opening post that you were not banned for CT but for history. Sorry but that argument doesn't hold water. The mods gave clear direction here which you repeatedly ignored.

lord lucan wrote: »

If anyone is going to post photos embedded in thread please ensure they are SFW. If you are linking to pics that contain graphic images please ensure you warn people about them. Anyone who ignores this will be banned, end of.

This thread is only for discussion of MH17,any discussion of Palestine, conspiracy theories or anything else off topic will result in infractions and bans if necessary.

I am going to close out on this oddly prophetic post from you - clearly you knew what you were doing:

sin_city wrote: »

I'd gladly take a ban from a forum if I could convince one person to question everything they read in the news media on both sides.

Ban as expected above - stands.

sin_city

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0722/632484-mh17/

As per the above link you can see that what I was talking about was not at all a conspiracy.

The fact is Lord Lucan was, whether he knew it or not, defending the theory that I was questioning.

I feel totally vindicated and look forward to more backtracking from the western media in relation to this situation.

I had many questions regarding the regulators in Europe banning flights through a war zone but I guess this is CT stuff to some people too.

Asking questions about flight paths, air traffic controllers and the black box details is not CT stuff.

Taltos

OK since we are not in agreement I will move this to the admin team.
In the interests of transparency it might be best to accept Scofflaw's offer to review your other DRF.

LoLth

I know this is after the fact but, this is fairly clear cut here.

you got a warning.

you ignored the warning.

you got a ban.

you were insulting and aggressive on thread, calling users "idiots" for not agreeing with you immediately. This is not an isolated event either. I would suggest you start to learn how and where to have civilised discourse and how to use the boards provided report function to bring posts you see as personal attacks to the attention of the moderators.

I apologise for being so late to respond to this but in all fairness, I would have upheld the ban based purely on the posts in the aviation thread (the fact that a report supports some of your claims may vindicate your argument to a degree but it does not negate your behaviour which took place *before* the rte report.).