Revelations upon Forum Policy

As is well known, I have been absent for the last two weeks. This is because I was banned from the Eyes on Each Other and Eyes on the World forums.

I was banned because I made a thoroughly unacceptable post, entitled "Hunter S. Thompson is a Loser who Should be Hurled into a Pine Box and Tossed into the Nearest Mineshaft"... or maybe I said "an abandoned mine", I'm afraid I just can't remember for sure.

Either way, I do believe that Hunter S. Thompson was a loser, and that he should indeed be put into the ground simply, inelegantly, and without all the hero-worship that for some reason he somehow recieved. Amusingly enough, however, I screwed up the title--I was referring to Brandon Vega, the dopehead who overdosed on methadone (and about a dozen different other drugs) while chatting on IRC with his friends. Apparently his last words were "I told u I was hardcore". So if anyone's wondering why I said Hunter S. Thompson died of a drug overdose when he actually shot himself, there's your reason.

Even so, I had made this post after seeing a few days worth of the rhetoric that regularly passes muster on the EyesonFF forums, and it was with much surprise that I was called a 'jerk' and banned for two weeks. Nobody likes being banned or being called names, of course, and so when I again had access to the forums in question, I looked over several threads to see just what was acceptable and what was not.....

Acceptable:

Quote:

---

However, current US foreign policy seems to be thus:
"If they're different from us, and they don't like us, then they're a threat and must either be destroyed or changed so that they're just like us".

For now, this policy has only been enforced against small, relatively defenseless states.

---

Quote:

---

These minutemen bastards are jsut racists.

---

Quote:

---

Yeah, I think everyone who wants a gun should have one so they can all shoot each other dead.

---

Quote:

---

Then those dumbass soccer moms aklfhshflkzdhfjfklsddafdsfds I'm pissed.....

---

Quote:

---

The american government know their Hitler.
"The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category."

---

Quote:

---

George read this BA-STA-RD!!. I sure hope he can read...

---

Quote:

---

George Bush reminds me of Vinzer Deling in so many ways...

---

Since this is a Final Fantasy Forum, I don't believe I'm going astray to assume that the "Vinzer Deling" in question is the tyrannical president of Galbadia in Final Fantasy VIII. Especially since the poster's icon was a picture of Selphie, the most absolutely useless character in FFVIII.

Unacceptable:

Quote:

---

Hunter S. Thompson is a loser who should be hurled into a pine box and tossed into the nearest mineshaft.

---

At first, I found myself unable to understand this. Calling someone a dictator and comparing them to Hitler should at least be comparable in scope to denying a dead druggie the dignity his supporters think he's due--especially if there is indeed a "zero tolerance" policy towards such activities. Under that concept, it seems cursing at someone and wishing for their death would apply as well, and yet they clearly do not. This caused me some trouble, until I arrived upon the answer.

Therefore, in accordance with the EyesonFF Forum's real spam/flaming policy, I will from now on only direct curses, epithets, death-wishes, and general hatred towards Conservative persons. There are, after all, conservatives I dislike (I can't stand Bill O'Reilly, for example, and found the "falafel" accusation hilarious), and with effort I'm certain I can find plenty more.

It is my hope that this solution will be fair and equitable not only for myself but for my fellow forum-posters.

There does seem to be a general lack of American conservative points of view here, so I'm hopeful you do stick around. Just keep in mind that right now, for some reason or another, neither side cares very much about making peace with the other and instead seem intent on stirring up emotions until we can't find any common ground at all, when in fact, the very ideals that America was based upon came through people working together, finding those common bonds and working to understand, not disregard what others had to say.

Take care all.

This belongs in Feedback.

As for myself, I'm a brand new mod and I've tried to be fair and not let any of my personal or political biases get in the way. However, we're only human, and seeing as how I've already been accused of being biased in my edits, I suppose I'll just try harder.

Each staff member at EoFF has at least a slightly different set of values, and therefore has a different view on what crosses the line, so I guess you just got on the wrong side of the wrong mod. That doesn't excuse inconsistancy, of course, but I always hope that people don't expect the group of individuals that make of the EoFF staff (or any staff anywhere) to make up a flawless machine.

I do agree with you though. :lol:

*applauds*

...is THAT really what you were banned for? .-.

Ah, it was foa, was it? I knew someone with that many underscores wouldn't be anything but trouble.

It takes awhile to get in-sync with the rest of the staff when you're new, and the slight thrill of the new power is likely to cause something that's borderline to get closed/deletes/warned without a second thought. I wouldn't worry about it, and next time if you feel something like this is unfair, you can always appeal it before the time is up, rather than just leaving for two weeks. Heh.

You're going to be accused of it eventually--and I'll add that you weren't the one who did it, nor do I want the mods to pore over every post and hit the 'ban' button every time somebody cusses without making it "s:mad2: :mad2: :mad2:".

I just wanted to note that the matter seemed extremely lopsided.

MoonsEcho--
And the worst of it was, I couldn't go back and fix the name, because they'd already banned me!

You still could've said something sooner. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

Ah, it was foa, was it? I knew someone with that many underscores wouldn't be anything but trouble.

It takes awhile to get in-sync with the rest of the staff when you're new, and the slight thrill of the new power is likely to cause something that's borderline to get closed/deletes/warned without a second thought. I wouldn't worry about it, and next time if you feel something like this is unfair, you can always appeal it before the time is up, rather than just leaving for two weeks. Heh.

---

It wasn't me, you goof. I haven't banned anyone from anything. WAY TO ACCUSE THE NEWBIE >O

Sorry, that sounded like a confession. I still blame you though. *whip*

I got banned for saying something along the lines of "OMG UR STUPID!!!1" or whatever, so you aren't alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sexy McAwesome

I got banned for saying something along the lines of "OMG UR STUPID!!!1" or whatever, so you aren't alone.

---

I got banned for saying "J00 R wr0ngz!!11" in reply to something you had said. I think we were banned at the same time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

I will from now on only direct curses, epithets, death-wishes, and general hatred towards Conservative persons.

---

Please dont tell me ur actually saying that EoFF is a liberal??! :lol:

I agree the decision to ban u was a lopsided one, and based on whatelse has been said u were well within ur rights to say what u said and not be banned, but seriously u just crossed the wrong Admin on the wrong day.

Yes: record it as a case of mod abuse.

Dont: pretend to be the picked on conservative minority in the media's light. It might work in the real world for Tom Delay, it wont work here.

The Hunter S Thompson post was, apparently, a deliberately provocative attack on a person who had just died in unpleasant circumstances, and seemingly directed at his fans and supporters as well.
That's why an EoEO ban was applied.

If you'd just said, in the course of a thread, "I think HST is a loser who should be forgotten", that'd be fine. People mightn't like it, but you're entitled to your opinion. You're not, however, entitled to make threads where the entire purpose (as it seemed) is to enrage people who're still deeply upset over something.

Let's look at another example: the Pope, as well all know, recently passed away. If someone made a thread entitled "Good job he's dead!", then I'd have EoEO banned them straight away. The same would be true if President Bush had just passed on.

However, if someone subsequently makes a post in which they express their dislike for someone, I wouldn't have so much of a problem.

There's a big difference between "This person sucks and here's why!" and "A meaningful topic about this person in which I will also express my dislike for him".
One is little more than trolling, the other actually has a point.

I have personally EoEO banned people for flaming conservative EoFF members; I've done the same when liberals get flamed. Poltical views aren't that important to me when it comes to enforcing the board's policy. However, there's a big difference between criticising a public figure - e.g. a president or politician - and going out of your way to make a deliberate attack on those who admire said person. Expressing opinions is fine, but trying to wind people up is not cool.

Quote:

---

However, current US foreign policy seems to be thus:
"If they're different from us, and they don't like us, then they're a threat and must either be destroyed or changed so that they're just like us".

For now, this policy has only been enforced against small, relatively defenseless states.

---

This post (by me, incidentally:p) is a legitimate expression of opinion on a political matter. It's not aimed at provoking those who support US foreign policy, and it's not trying to present my opinion as 'fact' or an 'absolute' - see use of the words "seems to be thus".

Quote:

---

Then those dumbass soccer moms aklfhshflkzdhfjfklsddafdsfds I'm pissed.....

---

Someone's opinion of 'soccer moms' in general. It's not directed at any particular EoFF member, it's not a grossly insensitive reaction to some recent bad news. Sure, it's a fairly crass and unreasoning statement, but it's not trying to get under anyone's skin. Merely expressing the author's own views.

Quote:

---

George Bush reminds me of Vinzer Deling in so many ways...

---

Again, an opinion - "reminds me of". I'd leave EoFF pretty quickly if policy said we're not allowed to dislike political leaders.

Quote:

---

Hunter S. Thompson is a Loser who Should be Hurled into a Pine Box and Tossed into the Nearest Mineshaft

---

Now this is different. That's a thread title; it's supposed to convey the entire purpose behind the thread. It expresses an opinion as though it is fact. It also fails to consider that there had been several threads made mourning his death, which pretty strongly suggests that a lot of people here cared about the guy and would obviously be upset by such a statement. The thread looked entirely like a "trolling" attempt.

Quote:

---

Therefore, in accordance with the EyesonFF Forum's real spam/flaming policy, I will from now on only direct curses, epithets, death-wishes, and general hatred towards Conservative persons.

---

After the US presidential election last year, a lot of Bush naysayers were EoEO banned after saying that Bush's win demonstrated America's stupidity, and similar accusations. Because their statements impliedly attacked every EoFF member who had voted for Bush, they were considered flame. There is a good way and a bad way of expressing any opinion.

Anyone who directs "curses, epithets, death-wishes, and general hatred" towards a fellow EoFF member will get soundly banned. However, I'm pretty tired of hearing people complain that "he said my favorite religion/politician/tv show sucks, that means he's flaming me!".

To recapitulate:

*A thread in EoEO/EotW which has no topic except the expression of hatred toward another person or group will likely be closed. If "another person or group" includes members of EoFF, replace "likely" with "definitely".

*If it appears that a thread was made entirely to belittle EoFF members by showing blatant disrespect for something that matters to them deeply, then it should meet a similar fate.

*If a thread is made that has a useful, debatable topic, and members express their opinions during the course of that debate, that is usually fine. This does not apply to "opinions" that are invented just to provoke negative reaction ("Well, in my opinion people who say things like you are all dumbasses!").[q=CloudSquallandZidane]I agree the decision to ban u was a lopsided one, and based on whatelse has been said u were well within ur rights to say what u said and not be banned, but seriously u just crossed the wrong Admin on the wrong day. [/q]Moderators and admins can effect EoEO bans. All such bans are recorded in the staff forum, where other staffers can disagree with them if they choose. If the majority of staff think something's a bad call, the ban is generally reversed.

Hey, it takes a while to get used to the feel of a forum. Don't take it too seriously, man. Lighten up and post in GC or go to chat or something. Besides, would you like it if I killed you, hurled you into a pinebox, and tossed you into a mineshaft or something like that? Or maybe did all that without killing you? Well, if it was me, I would think it would kinda suck. :p

True, some people cross the line around here, but that doesn't mean you have to. It's a simple case of common sense, and the Golden Rule. I was definitely abrasive sometimes in my past life here and kinda got away with it, mostly because I shyed away from open, explicit attacks, which I would also allow on myself, but again, I wouldn't like being openly attacked.

Now here, have a cookie. :cookie: :D