Okay, I don't remember that very well, but I think I might know what you're talking about. If I'm right, though, it was more like Tony baiting the guy.

Don't want to derail the thread (such as it is) but, again, it's a serious charge to make without any context.

I don't think TonyLB was involved at all.

Yeah I checked and Mythusmage actually is not banned.

I think he was temp-banned, IIRC, after his last outburst about his disgusting kiddy fucking ideology, a fact I remember because I was partly to blame for instigating it.

I didn't take kindly to receiving moral judgement from a fucking pedophile.

Quote from: Ladybird;552799On private property though, the host is perfectly welcome to tell people things they can and can't say, because it's their property; your choice is to accept it, try to debate with them otherwise, or leave. And web sites are private property; the hosts can essentially ban you for whatever reason they like (And when you sign up, you usually agree to that). Make no mistake; ultimately we are all allowed to post here at Pundit's discretion, but from all his actions, we're safe unless we engage in months-long disruption campaigns. If the Pundit was the oppressive character people are making out he is, we wouldn't be getting to have this discussion now.

To make this crystal clear, if I haven't already, I fully understand that RPGPundit can ban anyone for whatever reason he wants.  I'm questioning the reasoning and criteria for the ban, in light of the stated moderation policy, and the moderation policy, not his authority to ban.  And to also be clear, I have no problem with more restrictive moderation policies than what's in place here.  What I want is for the moderators to live up to the stated policy as a safeguard against arbitrary enforcement, make what will get one banned as clear as possible, and give people crystal clear warnings before a banning whenever possible.  And as someone pointed out, a while back, RPGPundit basically asked the community if people should be banned before they were banned, and I think that was a good policy that probably would have been ideal for handling someone like B.T.

Quote from: John Morrow;553046And as someone pointed out, a while back, RPGPundit basically asked the community if people should be banned before they were banned, and I think that was a good policy that probably would have been ideal for handling someone like B.T.

Not only would B.T. have been shown the door months ago, but there wouldn't be any questions about his banning.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552656Site disruption is when someone consistently threadcraps, derails subjects, stalks another user through various threads, makes every thread even vaguely related (or altogether unrelated) into the platform for his personal (usually odious) favorite subject/complaint, intentionally tries to make the site less harmonious or stable as part of a sabotage effort, or has an extremely high consistency of making threads he appears in turn into debates about himself rather than the subject at hand.

To be honest, I see a lot of people doing those things here and a lot of people accusing other people of doing those things here, which is why I don't see the clear distinction that you apparently see.  And it seems like some people get dog-piled for it while it's largely ignored for others.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552656Its very simple, really: are you trying to wreck the site? That's site disruption.
Are you not trying but wrecking the site anyways? Site disruption.

Yes, but I think there are times when you are guilty of that, too.  I see a lot of people standing in glass houses throwing stones when it comes to that.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552656And from the experience of all these last few years, aside from a couple of people who were clearly mentally ill, pretty much the only way you could actually commit a bannable level of site disruption is because you actually actively want to; as in you don't care how much damage you do here as long as you "take down" either the site, myself, or some other person here.

OK, I'll keep that in mind, then.

Quote from: John Morrow;553046And as someone pointed out, a while back, RPGPundit basically asked the community if people should be banned before they were banned, and I think that was a good policy that probably would have been ideal for handling someone like B.T.

Some bannings could play out like a poularity contest. A bad idea.

I'd rather we put up with the few-- and occasionally-- arbitrary bannings. Some of these have really pissed me off.

B.T. isn't one of those. He was trying hard to get banned for some time. The post he was banned for is kind of a lame last straw, though.

Quote from: FASERIP;553059Some bannings could play out like a poularity contest. A bad idea.

I don't think that's how it played out.  It wasn't so much a vote as an opportunity for people to make a case for and against to validate the decision.  Sort of like having this discussion but before the ban was finalized.

Quote from: FASERIP;553059I'd rather we put up with the few-- and occasionally-- arbitrary bannings. Some of these have really pissed me off.

I'm expressing my opinions on the subject.  The moderators can take it or leave it.  And to be honest, if I didn't believe the RPGPundit and the moderators had some interest in fairness and consistency, it would be pointless to complain.

Quote from: FASERIP;553059B.T. isn't one of those. He was trying hard to get banned for some time. The post he was banned for is kind of a lame last straw, though.

That he was banned for a lame last straw by irate moderators is a large part of why I raised questions about why he was banned.

I do think if BT was banned for some of his racist posts right as they happened, I and many others wouldn't be bothered to post about it at all. Choosing this particular post as the final straw is just dumb. In my case, I'd prefer only spammers and the worst offenders would ever be banned. Sometimes, it feels like the ban target just shifts around, though.

Quote from: John Morrow;553088That he was banned for a lame last straw by irate moderators is a large part of why I raised questions about why he was banned.

I know I'm late to the party, but this is my issue too. Links to porn (gay or otherwise) is bannable (although perhaps a warning first, and it's not like he did that twice), but the difference between what was actually said, and what was claimed to have been said, is just too far apart.

Having exchanged a few PM's with BT, he writes the same way privately as "in public" as it were, so while there may be some truth to the claim that he's deliberately disrupting the site, there's easily as much truth to the claim that he writes that way because he speaks his mind, no more or less.

You have good reasons for banning him, but they were not the reason that ultimately you did. Reconsideration doesn't appear to be on the table, and I know it's stupid of me to express an opinion so clearly in opposition to the moderation...but I speak my mind as well, and banning for such a wild misinterpretation is bad, plain and simple.

Quote from: danbuter;553110I do think if BT was banned for some of his racist posts right as they happened, I and many others wouldn't be bothered to post about it at all.

Which racist posts, in particular, did you consider ban-worthy?

Quote from: J Arcane;553018I think he was temp-banned, IIRC, after his last outburst about his disgusting kiddy fucking ideology, a fact I remember because I was partly to blame for instigating it.

I didn't take kindly to receiving moral judgement from a fucking pedophile.

No, we don't "temp ban" here.  He was forbidden from talking about his erm... pet subject on pain of banning. And he didn't take that well and left.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Dodger;553120Which racist posts, in particular, did you consider ban-worthy?

I don't bookmark posts. If you want to feel insulted about racist crap, just search for his stuff from a few months ago.

The fact that B.T. could post coherently on game matters only proves to me that he was a troll, since he could control himself when necessary.

There is again, an excluded middle.  Having a moderation policy does not mean, as RPG.net seems to think, getting a ruler and scoping around every microsecond to see whose knuckles to whack for saying something the professionally offended consider objectionable.  Freedom of speech does not mean there are no standards.

Certainly anything that could get this site reported needs to be dealt with.  By that standard, I disagreed with Psuedo's banning, and I hated his guts.  Whereas B.T. was often amusing, but I woulda permabanned his ass for that one porn link.

JG