No EoEO For YOU, Sucka!

[Halifax Housewife]

Now if Rainecloud was banned, then EoFF would be amazing.

[DMKA]

Isn't it funny - you don't miss something when you have it, but when it's gone, you want it desperately.

This is too true.

[Raistlin]

However, I was merely pointing out the distinctiion that she wasn't whining and bitching to the Staff and accusing them of bias and unfairness before even listening to what they have to say.

That's because there wasn't any bias and unfairness involved in ShlupQuack's banning. Funny how that works, ain't it?

Maybe because she's intelligent enough(is this me?) to realize that Staff does their job as well as they can, and if you want to make an actual suggestion instead of just spouting arrogant nonsense, you politely make your case instead of running in with mocking accusations.

Typical conversation:

"Hey, I was banned unfairly from EoEO! There were plenty of people saying worse things than me!"
"Did you Warn any of them?"
"Well...no."

Now, you thought Shlup was out of line, and you Warned her, and she was banned. Funny how that works out, doesn't it? And she didn't go around yelling accusations as to how she was unfairly banned to make an example of a Former Staffer to show there's no bias, which she could have.
Oh, but I forgot, Shlup's conservative. I guess the Staff still has that liberal bias going.

[Big D]

Oh, but I forgot, Shlup's conservative. I guess the Staff still has that liberal bias going.

Yep, there's no-one we detest more than Shlup:<3:

Yeah, I got banned somewhat recently, and after making a thread in Feedback and it being proven that the person who banned me did so because they took a general non-insulting comment as a specific personal attack and acted out of their "anger", nothing was reversed. Maybe we should have a "drunk tank" so CKs and such that get mad won't abuse their power until they cool down, so they don't do something stupid.

Maybe we should Drunk Tank people who can't read properly? You got a perfectly clear explanation in your Feedback thread. The staff unanimously agreed that your ban was valid. You made deliberate, personal attacks and got denied. Too bad if you come back later and pretend there was nothing personal about it. Res ipsa loquitur, dude. However, you DID get a ban reduction, because your ban was longer than normal, on account of you directing your abuse at a moderator and getting him riled up. Instead of thee weeks, you got reduced to just under two. Less than the normal period.

Don't like it? Too bad

[DMKA]

No. You can't just go around drunk tanking anyone. It's an honor only a select few were meant to hold.

[Big D]

HOOT, Linus, DMKA... yup, that's some distinguished company. Actually, the Drunk Tank list could almost double as a de facto "Hall of Fame".

[Psychotic]

You forgot Endless, D.

[Raistlin]

Raf, too.

[Cuchulainn]

Maybe because she's intelligent enough(is this me?) to realize that Staff does their job as well as they can, and if you want to make an actual suggestion instead of just spouting arrogant nonsense, you politely make your case instead of running in with mocking accusations.

Typical conversation:

"Hey, I was banned unfairly from EoEO! There were plenty of people saying worse things than me!"
"Did you Warn any of them?"
"Well...no."

Now, you thought Shlup was out of line, and you Warned her, and she was banned. Funny how that works out, doesn't it? And she didn't go around yelling accusations as to how she was unfairly banned to make an example of a Former Staffer to show there's no bias, which she could have.
Oh, but I forgot, Shlup's conservative. I guess the Staff still has that liberal bias going.

Although I don't see myself ever actually warning a post, you do carry a valid point.

[Leeza]

...and Master Vivi.

EDIT: This is in response to Psy and RSL.

EDIT2: Dang it! Change you av, Raistlin!

[Raistlin]

But I like this av.

Oh, and poo on you, Psy, for pointing out Raf before me.

[Big D]

I wasn't trying to give a complete list... rather, I named but a small sample of those who have been Drunk Tanked, as a demonstration of the kind of people who have such calibre as to hold that mighty position.

[Sasquatch]

Maybe we should Drunk Tank people who can't read properly? You got a perfectly clear explanation in your Feedback thread. The staff unanimously agreed that your ban was valid. You made deliberate, personal attacks and got denied. Too bad if you come back later and pretend there was nothing personal about it. Res ipsa loquitur, dude. However, you DID get a ban reduction, because your ban was longer than normal, on account of you directing your abuse at a moderator and getting him riled up. Instead of thee weeks, you got reduced to just under two. Less than the normal period.

Don't like it? Too bad

It was a general comment. Most everybody in that Feedback thread agreed that the comment was true. The moderator severely misunderstood the comment and took it as a "deliberate, personal attack", when in reality, it was no such thing. I got a ban reduction because the moderator that banned me (partially) pulled his head--err, umm, came to his senses--and realized that the ban was, and is, bogus. (I'd also like to point out that the reason I made a thread in Feedback was because a few days after the ban, I had still gotten no response to my PMs to the moderator that banned me.)

Thirteen people responded to that thread. Fourteen if I include myself. Twelve, without myself or the mod that banned me. Of those twelve, six made direct comments regarding the fairness of this specific instance, and some voiced their opinions on the general bias or lack thereof of the moderation here. Of those six, four agreed that the banning was uncalled for. Describing the banning with terms like "absurd", "wrong", "extreme", and "ridiculous". At least one of those four was somebody with whom I debate(d) quite often. It would be five out of eight if I included myself and the mod that banned me.

If the (or any) moderator can't put his (or her) petty feelings aside and fulfill his (or her) duties as a moderator fairly, maybe a moderating position is too much responsibility for that person to handle.

I debated with a mod. The mod didn't understand what I was saying, so not only did they take it personally, they acted rashly in response to that imaginary personal attack.

[eestlinc]

We're not going to sit here and rehash this.

[The Redneck]

Don't you love how "The Mods have spoken, and no, we are not biased" is a thorough and perfectly clear explanation?

Typical conversation:

"Hey, I was banned unfairly from EoEO! There were plenty of people saying worse things than me!"
"Did you Warn any of them?"
"Well...no."

Actually, I did, and quite a few of them made comments considerably more imflammatory than anything I'd said, and yet didn't get banned--and I know they were warned because I hit the button myself. Any other non-existant conversations to relate?

Previously, I hadn't used the "Warn" option--just because I might get my tender little feelings hurt, I figured, is no excuse to try and get people kicked off a forum. Even after getting banned, I made no claim that I shouldn't have been (I did, after all, call some guy a worthless loser who should be hurled into a pine box and tossed into the nearest abandoned mine--Sasquatch's banning, on the other hand, was indeed ridiculous.). My complaint was, and still is, the proportions to which the penalty is applied, and the double-standards thereof--I can dig out the list again, if you like. This complaint was greated with "No, we're not biased, and that's the end of it--oh, and you're an asshole, too. Now the thread's closed so you can't respond", and that's when I got Warn-happy.

you politely make your case instead of running in with mocking accusations.

It's been done. The mod who did the banning stated the ultimate defense ("We are mods, and you mortals have no right to question our omniscience"), a few of their supporters jumped in to toss out a few random insults, and then the thread got closed. That's the way to make progress, there....