The banning of BAP

[Grayman]

Let dead things die.

Dead things can't die.

The past is to be learned from.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

ok... Let me try to be clearer.

What I mean is, don't harass members for things you were not involved with and have long since past.

Try learning from the present.

 

[Kuu]

"That is not dead which can eternal lie
And with strange aeons even death may die."

 

[Grayman]

In his last posts he claimed all admins here are Js and had alluded more than once to his belief that this makes them unsuitable to moderate an INTPforum. He also made claims that moderators are Fs and majorly women as a way to disqualify in the past. The funny thing is that he got genders of some moderators wrong. BAP neglected to take into account that being in an executive role makes people behave in J like ways, because this is the nature of the work. BAP on the other hand favored an excessive "P" mindset of endless tangents, endless possibilities and never making any type of call, or ending anything at any point. It's ironic he was the one with a huge agenda.

I ignored this thread. Translating from MBTI lingo to reality was an irritating process I have been straying from recently.

 

[Grayman]

ok... Let me try to be clearer.

What I mean is, don't harass members for things you were not involved with and have long since past.

Try learning from the present.

What was perceived as harassment?

 

[Base groove]

What was perceived as harassment?

Although I am inclined to agree with the more senior posters that it's not worthwhile to argue over a defunct thread, I also think you have a right to an answer to this question so maybe I can try to provide it.

In this instance, BAP had just received numerous warnings in numerous threads and suffered through a trip to Siberia. In fact, I believe that thread was created in Siberia, by BAP, no?

So we have a punishment and then a subsequent re-offense...with no cooling off period; he committed the offense he was being punished for at the first opportunity after being handed his punishment. Do you see this as disrespectful toward the judicial system?

There is also the notion that he was requested by RB to not have that discussion, however... I'll have to review the facts once more as that might be some dubious information.

 

[Cognisant]

Opening a banpool on Grayman, taking all bets, odds are low but rising!

 

[Grayman]

Opening a banpool on Grayman, taking all bets, odds are low but rising!

BAP was banned for things long past. Now he has done little to nothing to deserve this but the eye of scrutinty is on him. This incendent has turned his parania into truth for those who have fresh eyes and have only seen the end.

 

[Cognisant]

You sound just like him.

Don't be so indignant, this is a forum, a clubhouse on the internet and we are nonpaying patrons so if you want to cause trouble for the management you'd better have a DAMN good case or you're just going to get banned, this isn't a democracy.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

 

[Grayman]

You sound just like him.

Don't be so indignant, this is a forum, a clubhouse on the internet and we are nonpaying patrons so if you want to cause trouble for the management you'd better have a DAMN good case or you're just going to get banned, this isn't a democracy.

I was only indicating how it can be perceived to those who have not seen things long past about BAP. I was providing a reason why I felt a need to pursue this.

Regardless, I am not worried about being banned.
I have said in the past that I am more honest and forthcoming of perceived issues to those I respect. I do appreciate the effort the admin puts into this place and have expressed my appreciation in the past. My appreciation means I will state a problem if I see one even if it risks that my intentions might be taken as an accusation instead of a statement of cause and effect.

…You do bring up a good question... " What is the purpose of this forum to the purpose of the one who is paying the bills?"

I could not find a statement of purpose on this forum….

EDIT:

BAP = entire threads and years of pursuing anything and everything
Grayman = one thread questioning and pursuing because of the loss of a member

Hardly comparable and the tolerance level of the admin seems much higher than what you are making it out to be by a 100 fold.

 

[Cognisant]

@EyeSeeCold
And I'll be there

 

[Cavallier]

In fact forget the clubhouse....and the blackjack!

 

[Red myst]

I'll bring the antibiotics!

 

[Grayman]

, this isn't a democracy.

Sorry Cog but this statement has come up a few times and I feel a need to address it. I had an undefinable disagreement with this statement and I finally pinned it down and realized where the problem exists.

They can do what they want with this forum and make the rules they wish to make but when working with people they don't have the right to dictate and do whatever they please. I have always felt it my duty and obligation to ensure fair and proper treatment of individuals around me from others as much as myself.

In short, they can do as they please with this forum but we have every right to question their motives ensure proper treatment of members in this forum.

IT IS IMPORTANT to note that this is not an accusation and I have not found wrong with this forum admin. I think they have treated people well. I simply think that it is still within my right and duty to ensure that people are not mistreated, especially when I have some involvment in that community. In these situations it does not matter who owns what or who is in charge because no one owns people therefore people must always be respected.

I suddenly feel INFJ...

 

[Cognisant]

You have a right to leave, that is all.

Don't take that the wrong way, I'm not asking you to leave in fact I've been advising you alter your course of behavioural progression because I don't want you to be banned.

But when it comes to what's factually correct lets be perfectly clear, here the only right you have is not to log in, whereas you have the privilege to question the admins to ensure that people are not mistreated.

You're an American right? People who confuse rights and privileges usually are.

 

[Jennywocky]

You're an American right? People who confuse rights and privileges usually are.

^^... The ghost of Variform? OoOOooOoooooOooooo.....

 

[Grayman]

You have a right to leave, that is all.

Don't take that the wrong way, I'm not asking you to leave in fact I've been advising you alter your course of behavioural progression because I don't want you to be banned.

But when it comes to what's factually correct lets be perfectly clear, here the only right you have is not to log in, whereas you have the privilege to question the admins to ensure that people are not mistreated.

You're an American right? People who confuse rights and privileges usually are.

It is more of a matter of you confusing idealistic rights "Human Rights" with lawful rights.

Don't get me wrong, I am aware and accept the consequences of my actions under law and written and unwritten rule. I still prioritize my human rights and will face the consequences of my actions and work with them to extablish what is a greater good.

You worry too much about me being banned. I have commited no offense. I have been cordial and have not attacked the moderators or anyone else. I am simply discussing a topic that many find tender and painful to touch. Many fear the dangers that may arise from this but in truth I intend to sustain a very constructive and honest position. If you feel I have gone outside that position then I would appreciate your redirection but I do not think I have offended anyone or broke any rules. I do not think the Admins are upset with my questions or my perceptions, as they have not addressed any such concerns. They may not agree but I hope they understand that I respect and will eventually accept their final verdict and most of all I respect the sensitive positions they are in and difficulty it poses.

My position is equally sensitive but from the opposite end of the spectrum. While moderators have to consider and prioritize the progress of this forum, I am a member and an inidividual who has silent bonds and connections with each of its members. For every member that is lost or removed I feel a pull to at give it my best to fully undersand their position and to give them some defense when they are no longer able to defend themselves.

Regardless of what happens in this forum I have to live with myself in real life. I have to feel like I was there for the individuals that I care about when it matters. Perhaps I am dulsional in thinking this but... I have shown past resilience in stepping in and breaking down arguments and trying to understand everyones positions. I feel like I have done what is right and stepped in when an argument was taking a turn for going out of control at the cost of myself. It is a bad thing to be a middle man and many feel that other people should stay out of their business and in many ways they are right but in the end I would rather them feel a little violated and be a little angry with me for stepping outside of my expected role than let a greater damage occur.

I don't expect that my position in this will change as it in ingrained within my being. Perhaps one day this will be the end of me when I step over the line at the wrong time but that is okay. As long as I do my best to address everyone and understand the situation and be polite and respectful I do not see any harm in putting a defense for BAP and Variform. I do not beleive I did a great job but much of the responsiblity lays with their past actions and I can only do so much.

 

[Cognisant]

It is more of a matter of you confusing idealistic rights "Human Rights" with lawful rights.

Reality cares not for human ideals.

Human rights, legal rights, whatever it doesn't matter, that which is your right is only that which you have the power to impose, that which is your privilege is anything that either can be denied or taken away by another's power.

You only have the right to leave, everything else is a privilege given to you.

In a democracy human rights are imposed by the majority, here if the admins decided to censor certain views or ban people whimsically for the lulz it's entirely within their right to do so, at least insofar as Ragnar allows them as he is the ultimate arbiter of this forum, on these hyperlinked pages he alone has the power to write the definition of good and evil.

 

[Hawkeye]

Showing people the door regarding the community is a narrow-minded approach in my opinion. The reason people question such actions is precisely because they want to remain in the community and develop it into something better...

Cog, stop being a muppet.

 

[Base groove]

Grayman: Spending the first 60% of his posts brooding in his F.
Cognisant: Down to business every time. Cold facts.

Who reminds who of whom?... Whom reminds who of whom?.

Who..

no wait.

whom reminds who of who?... aargh! WHO reminds whom of whom??

 

[Grayman]

Reality cares not for human ideals.

Human rights, legal rights, whatever it doesn't matter, that which is your right is only that which you have the power to impose, that which is your privilege is anything that either can be denied or taken away by another's power.

You only have the right to leave, everything else is a privilege given to you.

In a democracy human rights are imposed by the majority, here if the admins decided to censor certain views or ban people whimsically for the lulz it's entirely within their right to do so, at least insofar as Ragnar allows them as he is the ultimate arbiter of this forum, on these hyperlinked pages he alone has the power to write the definition of good and evil.

They are not immune. What is the cost to the admin if they abuse their power? What could be the eventual outcome and consquence of whimsical banning of people of this forum? Anger, fear, mass leaving and an eventual empty forum? They may be there at the button it is easy to see they have the power to push the button but it does not exempt from consequence.

I think your view of their rights is not as objectivly placed as you might think. Law, society, people, cultures, wars, jobs, families all shaped and functionally developed by a measure of idealized concepts of rights.

 

[Cognisant]

Showing people the door regarding the community is a narrow-minded approach in my opinion. The reason people question such actions is precisely because they want to remain in the community and develop it into something better...

I know, I want him to stay as I've said, it's just that people confusing rights and privileges is a pet peeve of mine.

They are not immune. What is the cost to the admin if they abuse their power? What could be the eventual outcome and consquence of whimsical banning of people of this forum? Anger, fear, mass leaving and an eventual empty forum? They may be there at the button it is easy to see they have the power to push the button but it does not exempt from consequence.

Of course, but that still doesn't make privileges into rights and confusing the two only serves to endanger those privileges we hold dear.

I think your view of their rights is not as objectivly placed as you might think. Law, society, people, cultures, wars, jobs, families all shaped and functionally developed by a measure of idealized concepts of rights.

Wars have been fought and atrocities committed because people forgot the contrivance of their ideals.

 

[Hawkeye]

Perhaps privilege is the wrong word?

 

[Jennywocky]

Let's take this back to the practical rather than the figurative:

What's our ban rate, numbers and percentage-wise?
I mean, out of active members, how many actually ever get banned?

And are they impromptu bans, or bans after repeated warnings and over a period of time?

I'm thinking we're not really seeing "abuse of power," we're just seeing disagreement over the fact the forum bans at all... which is really a practical policy issue and one that is simply decided over practical matters by whomever is setting policy. I don't think these particular incidents are likely to lead to a "ghost forum" outside of an abstracted slippery slope scenario.

BG: Who whomses the Whom-men?

 

[Fukyo]

Who are these hookers? You can't recruit them on my turf, or you have to pay a fee.

 

[Grayman]

Let's take this back to the practical rather than the figurative:

What's our ban rate, numbers and percentage-wise?
I mean, out of active members, how many actually ever get banned?

And are they impromptu bans, or bans after repeated warnings and over a period of time?

I'm thinking we're not really seeing "abuse of power," we're just seeing disagreement over the fact the forum bans at all... which is really a practical policy issue and one that is simply decided over practical matters by whomever is setting policy. I don't think these particular incidents are likely to lead to a "ghost forum" outside of an abstracted slippery slope scenario.

BG: Who whomses the Whom-men?

Yes, we all agree that the admin is not abusing its power.

My issue is not that there was a ban but as an individual and person who respects other individuals I feel a need to know it was justified. Cog seems to be indicating, unless I am misunderstanding him, that I do not have the right to question and state opinions on the matter. My argument is that we have that right as this is a necessary function of a forum and a human right to do so as long as we are responsible with this freedom and are respectable. He is indicating it is not a right but a privilege. He is really just getting into a philosophical debate. My argument to him is that human rights exist and they are very important and should not be ignored in any situation. Ignoring such things has led to the toppling of kingdoms and the removal of many authorities. Ignoring this can lead to the destruction of this forum. Without people in the forum there is no forum and thus no authority without members to make rules for. The people on this forum do have rights. Their rights are just less evident but they should never be ignored.

EDIT: correct me if I am wrong Cog but I assume you view the first amendmen tof the constiution of USA as a privilage given by the majority.

 

[crippli]

Was giving admin rights to BAP discussed? I'm a great fan of this approach. If they complain, let them do the job themselves.

 

[Absurdity]

Was giving admin rights to BAP discussed? I'm a great fan of this approach. If they complain, let them do the job themselves.

 

[crippli]

My issue is not that there was a ban but as an individual and person who respects other individuals I feel a need to know it was justified. Cog seems to be indicating, unless I am misunderstanding him, that I do not have the right to question and state opinions on the matter. My argument is that we have that right as this is a necessary function of a forum and a human right to do so as long as we are responsible with this freedom and are respectable. He is indicating it is not a right but a privilege. He is really just getting into a philosophical debate. My argument to him is that human rights exist and they are very important and should not be ignored in any situation. Ignoring such things has led to the toppling of kingdoms and the removal of many authorities. Ignoring this can lead to the destruction of this forum. Without people in the forum there is no forum and thus no authority without members to make rules for. The people on this forum do have rights. Their rights are just less evident but they should never be ignored.

I like this paragraph. I'm actually a bit dumbstruck. As I had the impression BAP had a lot of respect for the admins, and people of this forum. I stopped reading most of the resent threads, as I'm not particularly interested in politics. And wasn't sure/couldn't figure out what that was about. So there is certainly things I have missed. As the ban reason was not how I experienced BAP. He was a smart fellow, much more then me. I will presume BAP played this game as he wanted. The ban is the direct effect. And nothing ever was direct with BAP. So, well. Too little information for me.

 

[Grayman]

@Cog

How about this.

Rights are what are pursued but not what is received.

Example: I can ask a question but I am not entitled to an answer.

Privileges are given but not necessary pursued.

Example: Bob is willing to tell me his secret but I don't really want to know.


Being on this forum is a privilege but speaking is a right. Abuse my right and my privileges may be removed which include being on this forum.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

It's a product of structure. Bureaucracies rooted in tenure/experience have a regulatory fault in which higher level occupants show a certain flavor of attraction/bias toward things they haven't experienced and resentment towards things they've experienced repeatedly. This results in a more narrow and divided community that consists of two main subpopulations: 1) people very similar to/compatible with the old guard 2) noobs. No man's land inbetween.

Spoiler

I tried to quit, but it's shit like this using this place as a case study that brings me back. I'm sure Cog's thrilled.

 

[Jennywocky]

Was giving admin rights to BAP discussed? I'm a great fan of this approach. If they complain, let them do the job themselves.

ROFL!

I would have paid to see that... from afar.

 

[Cavallier]

I tried to quit, but it's shit like this using this place as a case study that brings me back. I'm sure Cog's thrilled.

I'm kind of tickled to see you myself.

 

[Base groove]

resentment towards things they've experienced repeatedly.

+

I tried to quit, but it's shit like this using this place as a case study that brings me back.

So you say you have returned out of resentment, then...?

 

[Kuu]

Was giving admin rights to BAP discussed? I'm a great fan of this approach. If they complain, let them do the job themselves.

If they prove incapable, will they also be doing the cleanup and damage control afterwards?


Riiiiight.

 

[redbaron]

Resentment towards things they've experienced repeatedly.

"Sick of dealing with bullshit."

 

[The Gopher]

I like this paragraph. I'm actually a bit dumbstruck. As I had the impression BAP had a lot of respect for the admins, and people of this forum. I stopped reading most of the resent threads, as I'm not particularly interested in politics. And wasn't sure/couldn't figure out what that was about. So there is certainly things I have missed. As the ban reason was not how I experienced BAP. He was a smart fellow, much more then me. I will presume BAP played this game as he wanted. The ban is the direct effect. And nothing ever was direct with BAP. So, well. Too little information for me.

Yeah BAP played games well(ish) only those that were directly effected, those that knew those effected or those that could pick up passive aggression through text (aka 4% of the population [AKA those that aren't intp's ]) could see what he was on about.

I tried to quit, but it's shit like this using this place as a case study that brings me back. I'm sure Cog's thrilled.

Aww I thought maybe my hug brought you back. I guess they don't have healing powers after all.

 

[Grayman]

Yeah BAP played games well(ish) only those that were directly effected, those that knew those effected or those that could pick up passive aggression through text (aka 4% of the population [AKA those that aren't intp's ]) could see what he was on about

That is not accurate. You give BAP too much credit to being so capable of manipulation and malicious intent. He obviously thought he was being helpful to the forum. He simply was oblivious to how his actions were being percieved and did not understand fully the source of the comments against and about him. I spent an insane amount of time researching this and going back through his posts...

He was also oblivious to how his constant statements on the moderators scrutiny of him would lead nowhere productive but that is the way he saw it and I do not disagree. I only think that with every statment to that affect the scrutiny increased.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

Grayman = Bap Jr.

Let's see if the Bap Jr works out better than the original. The last version had a malfunction after Da Blob was banned.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

So you say you have returned out of resentment, then...?

...vacuums.

"Sick of dealing with bullshit."

That phrasing implies that the proposed bias exists in the conscious and the perceptions that produced it originated from a single target of said bias.

Aww I thought maybe my hug brought you back. I guess they don't have healing powers after all.

It was actually the kiss. And no, no it didn't.

Spoiler

 

[Grayman]

Grayman = Bap Jr.

Let's see if the Bap Jr works out better than the original. The last version had a malfunction after Da Blob was banned.

I'm right here if you have something constructive about me you need comment on. Giving people titles and making such comparisons isnt going to productive in this conversation. It would be best if you directly defined the issue.

 

[StevenM]

It was actually the kiss.

Spoiler

I'm done with smoking now.

 

[Absurdity]

I just want to say that I appreciate your feedback Grayman and am extremely pleased at how civil you've been in presenting your views.

I would like it if everyone else in this thread allowed him to speak without resorting to mockery or trollish behavior.

 

[Base groove]

I'm right here if you have something constructive about me you need comment on. Giving people titles and making such comparisons isnt going to productive in this conversation. It would be best if you directly defined the issue.

To address the issue directly: you have been able to identify BAPs perspective as well as that of the admin team, and you have identified that there were irreconcilable differences.

So where are you going from here?

I'm done with smoking now.

yeah that was sick. Hopefully you're serious.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

I'm right here if you have something constructive about me you need comment on. Giving people titles and making such comparisons isnt going to productive in this conversation. It would be best if you directly defined the issue.

How about, no. If you can't grasp what I was saying, meh.

 

[Base groove]

How about, no. If you can't grasp what I was saying, meh.

I think he grasped it perfectly fine and you just don't have the composition to stand behind your bullshit.

 

[redbaron]

That is not accurate. You give BAP too much credit to being so capable of manipulation and malicious intent. He obviously thought he was being helpful to the forum. He simply was oblivious to how his actions were being percieved.

He was also oblivious to how his constant statements on the moderators scrutiny of him would lead nowhere productive

The issues he raised weren't really that difficult to understand and they were all explained to him multiple times in multiple different ways by multiple users. Maybe you're right and he really was as oblivious as you're saying. If that's the case then he's just irreconcilably stupid.

I don't know which one BAP would find a bigger insult. Being called manipulative or moronic.

 

[Hawkeye]

The amount of discussion that goes on behind the scenes regarding bans does not reflect on the overall ethos of the forum: Too serious.

However, this does not mean I advocate trigger-happy banning, rather I think people spend too long focusing on how to deal with issues that are nowhere near as bad as they are made out to be.

In the end, I still think it boils down to over-sensitive softies. ^^

 

[nexion]

BAP was cool.

And now there are 8 pages of irrelevant things on a thread dedicated to him.

Let him die in peace.

Fuck you guys.