Current affairs ban for posting requested link?

Howard Beale

I got banned from current affairs by Baggly for being asked about links to a failed left politician who was removed from a political party for beating up on his ex missus. A mod asked for evidence despite the links requested being on the previous page. They on the next page ask for evidence and as I am typing out my response they put up a do not respond to thread (sneaky!) of course I posted the links (again!) and this constitutes me apparently ignoring mod instructions when I never saw the do not repost request as it was like 2 minutes after requesting the now twice provided links.

How can you ignore instructions you never see? and how can you be asked to provide links only to immediately be asked not to post then when you provide said links you get banned?

This strikes me as being amazingly deceptive as why ask for the links then immediately post you can't post anymore and ban someone for providing them (again) a minute later.

Then baggly says in DM how could they know I didn't see the threadban then 2 minutes later so they don't believe I didn't see it so which is it??

Amazing shenanigans go on when you have a difference of opinion some folk don't like.

Beasty

The mod note to you made it clear you were banned for ignoring a threadban, not for posting the link. That post merely triggered the forum ban because you had ignored the threadban.

With that context, can you confirm whether you have made an attempt to resolve this with the banning mod?

Howard Beale

Beasty wrote: »

The mod note to you made it clear you were banned for ignoring a threadban, not for posting the link. That post merely triggered the forum ban because you had ignored the threadban.

With that context, can you confirm whether you have made an attempt to resolve this with the banning mod?

Of course. They openly admit they know I might not have seen the request not to post as it came about one minute after the link request.

I was sending the link again in a post and when they posted do not post in this thread? Surely people must be given bit of time to respond to an actual request not

provide link (one minute later) do not post?
Sneaky if you ask me!

Beasty

Very well. I will alert the CMods.

Pawwed Rig

I can look at this for you.

Can you please provide them exchange you had with the mod where a resolution was discussed?

Howard Beale

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I can look at this for you.

Can you please provide them exchange you had with the mod where a resolution was discussed?

Wasn't a resolution discussed. Was basically how could I know you didn't the instruction now go and go to dispute resolution.

Me thinks he/she didn't like their mate being challenged on thread and it's more personal than what I posted. They admit themselves I may not have seen 'do not post' then next message said I did? Come on!

Pawwed Rig

Can you show me the exact correspondence you had with the mod per step 1 of the DRP process?

Howard Beale

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Can you show me the exact correspondence you had with the mod per step 1 of the DRP process?

Responses from Mod. Exact words copied verbatim from his responses. Copied from his/her response. I didn't know then I don't believe you so which is it?

I have no way of knowing that you didnt see the threadban - and your aggressive attitude and the fact that you responded to a mod instruction on thread and called a mod out on thread doesnt lead me to give you the benefit of the doubt on this.

As i have said before, i am not inclined to believe you didnt see the threadban. If there was any remorse for missing it, i would be. There isnt, so im not.

In relation to this I posted several links, twice actually from official media sources and the political party that kicked out a member for beating up his ex girlfriend. Some didn't like this being shown for some reason and TOTALLY ignored the links provided (again twice!)

You do not get banned for posting links, but you do get banned for bad faith posting where you ignore other users requests for substantiation (more than once) and in turn demand they substantiate your points.

Pawwed Rig

Can you put in your bits aswell?

Howard Beale

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Can you put in your bits aswell?

I think this should be clear, Baggly completely IGNORED my post with the links then asks for them again then bans from thread as they are being sent again. If one checks the thread the links are posted TWICE. The Mod decided to ignore them and ask again then very quickly ban from that forum.

Well if they went to the previous page on the thread they see all the links they requested but they decided to ignore that and ask again as an excuse to ban with a near immediate response do no post after it.

Totally deceitful and underhanded!

Response below.



Originally Posted by Baggly View Post
Mod

You have been asked multiple times to back up your points and you are responding without doing so and challenging others to back up points you want backed up. This is inherently bad faith posting. Please improve the standard of your posting, or you will lose your posting privileges in this thread.


I have. Did you ignore the post?? Exactly my point even profit before people admiting he violently beat his ex missus and you still ignore it!!

So I will post the link again but amazing you ignore exactly what you asked to see!

Perhaps you don't want to see it but it's there. He was expelled from profit before people for beating the crap out of his ex.


Even look at the profit before people post second paragraph. They are there for damage limitation yet even they refer to it as a 'violent attack' on a woman

https://www.pbp.ie/statement-on-joe-loughnane/

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30980566.html


Admitting to drug dealing below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mc2IrSHOQU

That was posted AFTER they asked to see the links and AFTER they asked not to post and the links were already up by then.

Pawwed Rig

Ok last chance. Can you post the whole conversation you had with the mod on this thread please. In chronological order?

Howard Beale

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Ok last chance. Can you post the whole conversation you had with the mod on this thread please. In chronological order?

Last chance despite it being first time of asking for chronological order???

Same as in thread. Asked to Provide links AFTER they have been provided.

There is no point in copying and pasting loads of messages you have made it very very clear you are going to side with mod buddy despite them being in the wrong.

The links were provided BEFORE being asked for them this is obvious even to Stevie Wonder you only have to look at the thread for a one single second to see the links were put up before a request to see them. Don't believe me? Have a look! It's there plain as day.

This is fact and is the issue and facts are ignored to side with mod buddies.
Shame but perhaps naive of me to assume anyone would be impartial and fair in relation to this.

Whats the point in this resolution forum if folk agree with mod buddies 100% of the time despite them being in the wrong?

Pawwed Rig

I haven't agreed with anybody. In fact I haven't even looked at the issue yet. Step 1 in the process is to post the correspondence you had with the mod. You have posted extracts. I need the whole conversation. I would have thought chronological order would be a basic assumption.

One we have cleared step 1 I can then look at the actual issue on hand.

Beasty

OP it is a very simple instruction. You must make a genuine attempt to resolve this issue with the mod via PM before coming here.

Once you have done that please post your PM to the mod initially seeking reconsideration/making representations, then the mod's reply to you, and then any further PMs following this up. If you do not do that, this appeal goes no further here.

Hence the next post I expect to see from you in this thread is to include the full transcript of each message in the PM chain. Anything else and I will close the thread.

Howard Beale

Beasty wrote: »

OP it is a very simple instruction. You must make a genuine attempt to resolve this issue with the mod via PM before coming here.

Once you have done that please post your PM to the mod initially seeking reconsideration/making representations, then the mod's reply to you, and then any further PMs following this up. If you do not do that, this appeal goes no further here.

Hence the next post I expect to see from you in this thread is to include the full transcript of each message in the PM chain. Anything else and I will close the thread.

Ah can't be arsed close away. Don't think I'm going to get restitution here.

Beasty

If you cannot follow a very simple instruction then please do not complain

Resolved