Support NeoGAF

[camelCase]

This is great, at work I sometimes follow the banlog of the other place because it can be a reasonably entertaining read .

Is there a link for the post which begat the ban of user TheMikado? I always disagreed with him but I found his posts usually pretty tame and never directly inflammatory towards another user, it would be interesting to know what exactly tipped the scales in his disfavor, lol.

 

[captainraincoat]

As bad as lowtax (somethingawful.com) can be sometimes i was always a fan of how he ran the ban page and rather than banning people straight out he would get them to do stupid challenges in order to keep their account active
the banpage is not only a good tool for transparency but its a clear line to your terms and conditions ...well done mods

 

[Cybrwzrd]

Wow, I am surprised with some of those bans to date to be honest, not that I don’t think they were deserved. This is a another in a line of good turns for the forum, keep it up.

 

[strange headache]

Pretty cool feature, I'm glad that we've got some transparency for those bans now. It's not that I have any issues with moderation so far, just been sometimes wondering why some regular was suddenly banned. I've also noticed that the FAQ section is kinda messy, with valuable information and posting guidelines scattered across multiple threads.

 

[Bill O'Rights]

strange headache - FAQ is on the list to-do. It needs completely updating, we are aware. May be after the redesign goes live as it may affect some parts of the usability.

 

[llien]

=/ @ perma ban of Mikado. WhyGodWhy.gif.

 

[Papa]

Is this an appropiate place for ban discussions then? I have two remarks regarding KevinKeene:
1. The ban message here wildly differs from the one he received, which was a pretty indecent "no pedos allowed".
2. The posting you are referring to does not seem to match the reasoning well, because he, as far as I understand this posting, does not talk about pedophilia in this posting, but generally says that crimes against children (not specifically sexual ones) are not worse or better than the equivalent crimes against adults.

Mind you, I do not agree with this, because the factor of helplessness is important to consider for children, but it is not something specific to sexual abuse of children. Interestingly, there are countries and cases where milder punishments are dealt out for violence against children in specific cases. E.g. in Germany until 1998 and still currently in Austria, deliberately killing your own child as a mother close to birth was / is met with a milder punishment than killing an adult.

I would like to suggest again that maybe Kevin's ban could be relaxed to a month of a full ban and then maybe a continued per-topic ban to ensure no uncomfortable situations arise again.

I didn’t see Kev’s post that got him banned but given there doesn’t seem to be a consensus on what he actually meant, I’d say that’s justification to give him another chance. I just really dislike this whole unperson permaban thing.

 

[Papa]

This is great, at work I sometimes follow the banlog of the other place because it can be a reasonably entertaining read .

Is there a link for the post which begat the ban of user TheMikado? I always disagreed with him but I found his posts usually pretty tame and never directly inflammatory towards another user, it would be interesting to know what exactly tipped the scales in his disfavor, lol.

He was being a bit of a condescending cunny for a few pages in the white privilege thread starting somewhere around here:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/jord...hite-privilege.1464114/page-14#post-253369197

EviLore insinuated on page 16 that he could be on drugs or otherwise unstable. I kinda agreed that his posts came across that way but I guess the consternation that led to him chucking a tanty and requesting a permaban was around some kind of “punching down”.

 

[Hamfam]

Nice feature

 

[betrayal]

I personally didn't know i wanted such a feature, but after i checked a few bans just for fun and that they are all coming with an seemingly appropiate justification plus an example post if possible, i really welcome the new feature. Thanks!

 

[LegendOfKage]

Please remember – just because this information is now public doesn’t mean we will let people run afoul of the site rules regarding derailing threads by discussing bans. We still continue to value your feedback or criticism, but please do so in the appropriate place or by emailing support@neogaf.com.

We will continue to improve this new feature based on user feedback.

Aside from emailing support, what is the other appropriate place you're referring to? Would this thread be an acceptable place to respectfully give our opinions on various bannings, or would you rather we not do that here?

Either way, thanks for making things even more transparent for everyone here. It's definitely appreciated.

 

[Redneckerz]

Is this an appropiate place for ban discussions then?

You ask this, but instead of waiting for the answer, you go ahead and argue a case.

I have two remarks regarding KevinKeene:

I would like to suggest again that maybe Kevin's ban could be relaxed to a month of a full ban and then maybe a continued per-topic ban to ensure no uncomfortable situations arise again.

In advance ill apologize for the rather confronting tone that is about to occur. Please do note that i have nothing against you personally Yoshi.

How often are you going to talk about his ban considering Kevin himself went on to complain on Voat about this prior? (Not going to link this, by the way.) This is the third time i read you are advocating for his release. You know what the appropiate thread is. And it also didnt help that Keene just came back from a prior ban, which is referenced by a staff member dated July 23rd.

And it also does not help that Keene already wanted to quietly leave in June and did so with a lengthy thread. So at the very least, it should be obvious that there is some history involved.

Multiple people have already addressed and one usereven left out of loyalty. If you really consider this such a important case, tag the staff and if that does not work, PM them and invite them to make a statement in that thread (For transparency purposes). Constantly bringing up the case comes across (to me that is) as complaining and nagging. Its consistent negativity.

Ive suggested a parole system for those permbans that can be appealed over time, so that perms may or may not be overturned later on. This is something Tyler and the staff are aware of and are looking into as the next step in transparency. This is an idea i borrowed from another, Dutch forum that i reside upon. (Heck even ERA has such a policy, although it was only very recently introduced).

Note that i have not said anything about his post or whatever and i personally think a statement is in order, if only that people stop bringing up this case and to settle it for once and for all. Also do note that i have nothing against Keene, i am just bringing up these posts to raise a point. Thats just my 2 cents about it however.

 

[Yoshi]

You ask this, but instead of waiting for the answer, you go ahead and argue a case.

It is a question I asked with the strong assumption that this is supposed to be the correct place.

How often are you going to talk about his ban considering Kevin himself went on to complain on Voat about this prior? (Not going to link this, by the way.) This is the third time i read you are advocating for his release. You know what the appropiate thread is. And it also didnt help that Keene just came back from a prior ban, which is referenced by a staff member dated July 23rd.

The information changed. Before, no specific posting was known to me that has caused the ban; the information I had was (1) a mod answer that it was due to the thread the posting is in (2) I also got from Kevin a transcript of the ban reason (it being "sorry, no pedos allowed"). I brought it up again because of new information. I am unaware of what Voat is and am not talking for any outside discussion about this. Considering what happens here as well, off-site discussion of bans are not completely strange though.

Multiple people have already addressed and one usereven left out of loyalty. If you really consider this such a important case, tag the staff and if that does not work, PM them and invite them to make a statement in that thread (For transparency purposes). Constantly bringing up the case comes across (to me that is) as complaining and nagging. Its consistent negativity.

I only bring this up in threads that focus on moderation and bans, you make it sound like I shit up the whole forum with negativity because of that. It is solely contained to threads that appear to be the right place for that. That I am consistently negative of what I perceive as an unfair and needlessly harsh ban shouldn't be surprising, do you expect me to change my opinion several times and jump to positive valuations of the same fact in between?

Note that i have not said anything about his post or whatever and i personally think a statement is in order, if only that people stop bringing up this case and to settle it for once and for all. Also do note that i have nothing against Keene, i am just bringing up these posts to raise a point. Thats just my 2 cents about it however.

I do not intend to make this an infinite debate, but I felt there was sufficient reason to bring it up again, after more information on the ban was released.

I do not know what the parole system entails and I am unaware of any such system implemented on Resetera, so I cannot comment on that.

 

[Redneckerz]

It is a question I asked with the strong assumption that this is supposed to be the correct place.

Then the question is meaningless if you decide to post your case anyways without waiting for an answer on said question. You know what the appropiate thread is.

The information changed. Before, no specific posting was known to me that has caused the ban; the information I had was (1) a mod answer that it was due to the thread the posting is in (2) I also got from Kevin a transcript of the ban reason (it being "sorry, no pedos allowed").

Kevin himself does not want to deal with Gaf anymore either way so take that as you will in regards to how many you want to dedicate on this.

I only bring this up in threads that focus on moderation and bans, you make it sound like I shit up the whole forum with negativity because of that.

Because you literally only need one thread to argue your case and not post it in every single topic that deals with the topic of moderation. Because doing so comes across as nagging.

That I am consistently negative of what I perceive as an unfair and needlessly harsh ban shouldn't be surprising, do you expect me to change my opinion several times and jump to positive valuations of the same fact in between?

All this time you could have just tagged the staff for this (and in the right thread). Let me just tag the op for you Palliasso and DGrayson so they can take a look.

I do not know what the parole system entails and I am unaware of any such system implemented on Resetera, so I cannot comment on that.

What the Parole system does is that after a certain amount of time for permbans (usually a year), a permbanned user is allowed to make a parole request to the staff. This request is sent to a specialized email address solely dedicated for these things (On the Dutch site it was called negoiator, GAF could use parolehearings at NeoGAF.com or something like that.

When making a request, the permbanned user has to motivate why they think the permban needs to be overturned, and convince the staff that the user has changed. After that, such a request will be evaluated by staff (Or a specialized duo of staff that does these requests). When the motivation is successful, a permban can be overturned, with a warning to the user to value this chance appropiately.

When the motivation is unsuccesful, the appeal is rejected and the permban is extended by a year, before a user can make another parole request. All these requests will be logged, so that the staff can keep track of how many parole requests someone has made, just like a real prison. Making multiple requests will be meaningless as all they do is extend the ban with a day extra.

The advantage of this system is that its more humane and encourages transparency and it answers positively to the notion that people's views and behaviors change over time. This is also why such a parole request should only be possible after a year and not after 3 months or so. This gives those permed user under the NeoGAF 2.0 an opportunity to return even after a perm, provided they supply a proper motivation.

PS: you can write a mail to an ERA address to get your ban evaluated at. I only knew of this since last week since this was apparently silently added in. Perhaps ill make use of it aswell.

 

[Weiji]

Thank you for going this route.

In a world of shadow bans and gross autocratic behavior by social media in general I am glad that theres a place thats going more transparent instead of less.

 

[Yoshi]

Then the question is meaningless if you decide to post your case anyways without waiting for an answer on said question. You know what the appropiate thread is.

I was not entirely sure, but pretty sure that this is supposed to be the one right place for that going forward. The other thread is more concerned with bans that happened when bish & co were still running the place, as I understand it.

Kevin himself does not want to deal with Gaf anymore either way so take that as you will in regards to how many you want to dedicate on this.

He said to me he does, otherwise I would not continue talking about it.

Because you literally only need one thread to argue your case and not post it in every single topic that deals with the topic of moderation. Because doing so comes across as nagging.

I need only one thread and as I understood it, up until now it was the other thread (because there was no alternative), now it is this thread, where we may talk about bans that appeared over the last few months. This thread is not dealing with an arbitrary topic of moderation, but specifically transparency for ban reasons. Transparancy is useless if it cannot also be used to disucss the reasoning.

All this time you could have just tagged the staff for this (and in the right thread). Let me just tag the op for you @Palliasso and @DGrayson so they can take a look.

In such a thread I would not assume additional tagging is required and since the ban is not a dicision by any one member of the team, it would appear strange to me, to tag a single member of the team.

What the Parole system does is that after a certain amount of time for permbans (usually a year), a permbanned user is allowed to make a parole request to the staff. This request is sent to a specialized email address solely dedicated for these things (On the Dutch site it was called negoiator, GAF could use parolehearings at NeoGAF.com or something like that.

When making a request, the permbanned user has to motivate why they think the permban needs to be overturned, and convince the staff that the user has changed. After that, such a request will be evaluated by staff (Or a specialized duo of staff that does these requests). When the motivation is successful, a permban can be overturned, with a warning to the user to value this chance appropiately.

When the motivation is unsuccesful, the appeal is rejected and the permban is extended by a year, before a user can make another parole request. All these requests will be logged, so that the staff can keep track of how many parole requests someone has made, just like a real prison. Making multiple requests will be meaningless as all they do is extend the ban with a day extra.

The advantage of this system is that its more humane and encourages transparency and it answers positively to the notion that people's views and behaviors change over time. This is also why such a parole request should only be possible after a year and not after 3 months or so. This gives those permed user under the NeoGAF 2.0 an opportunity to return even after a perm, provided they supply a proper motivation.

I think such a parole system is a good thing, for all kinds of permanent bans. Though I am in principle also not a huge fan of permanent bans except for really severe infrictions. Especially in forums, it is very easy to misunderstand someone and therefore, permanent bans tend to be unfair. They are not necessarily, but they have a tendency to be.

PS: you can write a mail to an ERA address to get your ban evaluated at. I only knew of this since last week since this was apparently silently added in. Perhaps ill make use of it aswell.

I have also not heard of this, but I would assume any reasonable staff would be willing to consider removing a ban after such a long period of time (except for very severe infrictions). Considering your apprent opinion of Resetera, I am unclear why you would want to ask for a reevaluation of your ban there, though.

 

[Redneckerz]

I was not entirely sure, but pretty sure that this is supposed to be the one right place for that going forward. The other thread is more concerned with bans that happened when bish & co were still running the place, as I understand it.

It isnt obvious to you that that thread already filled in the role of unban requests? You already posted into it in the first place.

But hey, perhaps the staff should specifiy exactly what thread is the place to talk about these things - For all its intents and purposes, the linked thread fulfilled that role already.

He said to me he does, otherwise I would not continue talking about it.

Then Keene needs to take a trip down memory lane:

''It's a perma and I won't bother with Gaf again.''

Posted 6 days ago.

And before anyone starts: This is public information, not stuff from a PM because that would be doxxing.

I need only one thread and as I understood it, up until now it was the other thread (because there was no alternative), now it is this thread, where we may talk about bans that appeared over the last few months. This thread is not dealing with an arbitrary topic of moderation, but specifically transparency for ban reasons. Transparancy is useless if it cannot also be used to disucss the reasoning.

Oh come on. You could have easily posted that in the other thread. This is bordering on being obtuse.

In such a thread I would not assume additional tagging is required and since the ban is not a dicision by any one member of the team, it would appear strange to me, to tag a single member of the team.

The staff can look into the ban and see who made the call and provide additional evaluation. I tag these people so that they are aware of this meta-conversation and can decide whether or not to respond publically or privately.

I have also not heard of this, but I would assume any reasonable staff would be willing to consider removing a ban after such a long period of time (except for very severe infrictions). Considering your apprent opinion of Resetera, I am unclear why you would want to ask for a reevaluation of your ban there, though.

If the possibility is there, why not use it.

I do not know what you expect to hear from me here, I explained to you why I think the other thread is less fitting now that both threads exist. I have no strong feelings about this though, so if the moderators want to move it elsewhere, so be it. It hopefully will not be all too important to me inthe future anyway, because with any luck there just won't be any bannings I perceive unfair (and take note of) anymore.

I like how you are essentially demanding that the staff provides you answers. Its a courtesy and not one they are going to do for every single ban (As has been said so here).

You see, he said that to me once as well, after I made the suggestion of the topic ban and consequently I did not say anything about that anymore right until now, where two things changed: (1) new information came up (2) Kevin has by now changed his opinion on not bothering with NeoGAF again.

...So... you are his spokesperson for the time being? He can contact GAF himself, you know?

Also im out of this meta-discussion. Apparently Keene was an important asset to the community considering the amount of users wanting to know why he was banned. I hope the staff will bring any answers.

 

[Yoshi]

It isnt obvious to you that that thread already filled in the role of unban requests? You already posted it into it in the first place.

I do not know what you expect to hear from me here, I explained to you why I think the other thread is less fitting now that both threads exist. I have no strong feelings about this though, so if the moderators want to move it elsewhere, so be it. It hopefully will not be all too important to me inthe future anyway, because with any luck there just won't be any bannings I perceive unfair (and take note of) anymore.

Then Keene needs to take a trip down memory lane:

You see, he said that to me once as well, after I made the suggestion of the topic ban and consequently I did not say anything about that anymore right until now, where two things changed: (1) new information came up (2) Kevin has by now changed his opinion on not bothering with NeoGAF again.

 

[God Enel]

Awesome new feature. Love it as long as you guys keeping it honest I don't see any bad coming out of it.

 

[Palliasso]

Is this an appropiate place for ban discussions then? I have two remarks regarding KevinKeene:
1. The ban message here wildly differs from the one he received, which was a pretty indecent "no pedos allowed".
2. The posting you are referring to does not seem to match the reasoning well, because he, as far as I understand this posting, does not talk about pedophilia in this posting, but generally says that crimes against children (not specifically sexual ones) are not worse or better than the equivalent crimes against adults.

Mind you, I do not agree with this, because the factor of helplessness is important to consider for children, but it is not something specific to sexual abuse of children. Interestingly, there are countries and cases where milder punishments are dealt out for violence against children in specific cases. E.g. in Germany until 1998 and still currently in Austria, deliberately killing your own child as a mother close to birth was / is met with a milder punishment than killing an adult.

I would like to suggest again that maybe Kevin's ban could be relaxed to a month of a full ban and then maybe a continued per-topic ban to ensure no uncomfortable situations arise again.

1. Our general rule of "don't use the forum to discuss bans" is really just a way to prevent non-related threads from derailing. For example, if a member posts regularly in a particular thread (such as a game's OT) and gets banned, we would prefer that thread doesn't then devolve into the "Why did X person get banned?" thread. Not only does it veer actual discussion off-topic, but often it could be some time before a moderator actually sees the messages and is able to respond with anything actionable. Threads like this one or the ban justice thread are specifically about site bans, so they would typically be acceptable places to ask questions or request additional context and we'll try to provide that where possible - but please understand that it won't always be possible. We are also working on some automated tools that will become part of the ban log page, more details on that soon.

2. As part of our ban review process, we will occasionally change the ban reason given to a member to provide clarity or additional context after the fact. This is one such instance.

3. While a particular post can be linked to a user's ban record now, it is rarely the case that a poster is permanently banned based solely on a single post. In this case, the linked post was simply the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" and was most relevant to the provided ban reason.

As for KevinKeene specifically, part of the decision to remove Kevin from the site stemmed from the fact that he's only been a member since February and had already accumulated 8 previous temporary bans.

 

[Yoshi]

I am answering twice because Redneckerz' posting has changed.

Oh come on. You could have easily posted that in the other thread. This is bordering on being obtuse.

Well I could have, but I thought it would be inappropiate to post in the other thread now that this one is here, what is so hard to understand about this?

The staff can look into the ban and see who made the call and provide additional evaluation. I tag these people so that they are aware of this meta-conversation and can decide whether or not to respond publically or privately.

I have no issues with that, I was under the impression that this thread is supposed to be the place to discuss bannings perceived as inappropriate and thus no additional highlighting was in order (and if there was, I would have the issue of not knowing who to tag).

If the possibility is there, why not use it.

Because if you do not want to be part of the community it is just effort on your and their side for nothing.

I like how you are essentially demanding that the staff provides you answers. Its a courtesy and not one they are going to do for every single ban (As has been said so here).

I have no idea where you get this from. I have noted why I think the posting associated with the ban reason is not fitting, it appears to be right on topic here and there is no demand for now or the future, just the request to reconsider if permanence is needed.

...So... you are his spokesperson for the time being? He can contact GAF himself, you know?

I am not his spokesperson, no. But I do not invest time into arguing about a ban when removing the ban wouldn't change anything at all. Whether he can contact GAF I do not know, as he is banned, it could be difficult. I do not know how it works here, but in Resetera I cannot even open the FAQ site or log out, so writing to the staff is not an easy task there, I assume that's similar here.

 

[Redneckerz]

Since the staff has answered i reckon i should address this.

Well I could have, but I thought it would be inappropiate to post in the other thread now that this one is here, what is so hard to understand about this?

Because you literally asked the question and instantly went on to argue the case anyways without waiting for a staff answer? What is so hard to understand about this?

As you can tell the tagging has helped. In general you can tag a few household names that you often see online like Bill, Grayson, and so on.

Because if you do not want to be part of the community it is just effort on your and their side for nothing.

I just said i was considering it.

I am not his spokesperson, no. But I do not invest time into arguing about a ban when removing the ban wouldn't change anything at all. Whether he can contact GAF I do not know, as he is banned, it could be difficult. I do not know how it works here, but in Resetera I cannot even open the FAQ site or log out, so writing to the staff is not an easy task there, I assume that's similar here.

There is the email in the OP he could try (But rather don't, see the mod post).

I just wanted to highlight this here:

As for KevinKeene specifically, part of the decision to remove Kevin from the site stemmed from the fact that he's only been a member since February and had already accumulated 8 previous temporary bans.

^^ Yeah, this was what i was hinting at with my first post here. I already deliberately left out a bye bye thread from June as i felt one example was enough.

Thanks for dropping by, Palliasso.

 

[Yoshi]

1. Our general rule of "don't use the forum to discuss bans" is really just a way to prevent non-related threads from derailing. For example, if a member posts regularly in a particular thread (such as a game's OT) and gets banned, we would prefer that thread doesn't then devolve into the "Why did X person get banned?" thread. Not only does it veer actual discussion off-topic, but often it could be some time before a moderator actually sees the messages and is able to respond with anything actionable. Threads like this one or the ban justice thread are specifically about site bans, so they would typically be acceptable places to ask questions or request additional context and we'll try to provide that where possible - but please understand that it won't always be possible. We are also working on some automated tools that will become part of the ban log page, more details on that soon.

I apprecitate this, it is a reasonable policy.

2. As part of our ban review process, we will occasionally change the ban reason given to a member to provide clarity or additional context after the fact. This is one such instance.

The change is certainly one for the better and it is good to improve maybe hastily written ban messages to improve clarity.

3. While a particular post can be linked to a user's ban record now, it is rarely the case that a poster is permanently banned based solely on a single post. In this case, the linked post was simply the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" and was most relevant to the provided ban reason.

As for KevinKeene specifically, part of the decision to remove Kevin from the site stemmed from the fact that he's only been a member since February and had already accumulated 8 previous temporary bans.

8 bans over half a year is a lot and this is a point I can understand (I assume the self-requested ones are not included in this? As far as I am aware there have been a few). Since he did not appear to have a pemanence warning before and the controversial nature of the specific ban reason, would you be willing to consider changing this dicision to a non permanent one but with certain rules attached (e.g.: a longer than usual temporary ban, no talking about topics such as pedophilia, any additional ban acquired over the next half year or such would be permanent) or is any discussion on that point fruitless? I do not want to drag this out needlessly.

 

[WinterIsComing]

Great job guys, this place keeps getting better and better.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

I still cant tell if Papa was banned for saying “cunt” or not. Aussies want to know.

"Bad" words get you banned? Ugh.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

I apprecitate this, it is a reasonable policy.
The change is certainly one for the better and it is good to improve maybe hastily written ban messages to improve clarity.

8 bans over half a year is a lot and this is a point I can understand (I assume the self-requested ones are not included in this? As far as I am aware there have been a few). Since he did not appear to have a pemanence warning before and the controversial nature of the specific ban reason, would you be willing to consider changing this dicision to a non permanent one but with certain rules attached (e.g.: a longer than usual temporary ban, no talking about topics such as pedophilia, any additional ban acquired over the next half year or such would be permanent) or is any discussion on that point fruitless? I do not want to drag this out needlessly.

Goodness gracious, man, why not argue that ten bans over the span of six months as a "standard" so that you have a nice even number.

Extrapolate that over twelve months, and we're talking 16-20 bans before a perma.

Was he a personal friend?

 

[Yoshi]

Goodness gracious, man, why not argue that ten bans over the span of six months as a "standard" so that you have a nice even number.

Extrapolate that over twelve months, and we're talking 16-20 bans before a perma.

Was he a personal friend?

I do not know him personally, but we have worked together for almost ten years as hobby journalists.

 

[Sub_Level]

Based as fuck tbh

 

[CatLady]

@EvilLore and the awesome mod team this is an outstanding feature on a discussion forum that just keeps getting better.

I'm not a former member and I only ever visited this site a couple of times prior to 3 or 4 months ago due to all the horrible things I heard about it being a den of insane SJWs and crazed Sony fanatics along with horribly biased mods.

When I first starting lurking a few months ago I found it to be nothing like what I'd heard. In fact I would say this is by far the best discussion forum I've seen and iit just keeps getting better.

Thank you for all the hard work the team is putting into this site.

 

[Redneckerz]

I do not know him personally, but we have worked together for almost ten years as hobby journalists.

I guess that explains the postings, then. You might not want to call it that way but personal connections play a part. Hopefully Palliasso responds to your question.

 

[Yoshi]

I guess that explains the postings, then. You might not want to call it that way but personal connections play a part. Hopefully Palliasso responds to your question.

This goes both ways; since I know for so long I may miss him more when he is banned here, but on the other hand I am pretty used to his way of writing and have a good feeling when he is sincerely arguing for a fair treatment of someone or is arguing out of ulterior motives (which were implied by the earlier ban message*).

*I might add that I wrote ban massage first, but I guess that is a story best told by you in your bidaily Tales from Resetera.

 

[CatLady]

I forgot to add one other thing that makes this forum great: the members.

I'm very slightly to the right libertarian. I frequently disagree with posters on either side of the aisle here. But with very few exceptions I find their posts respectful, intelligent and sometimes they even bring me around to their point of view with excellent arguments.

This is a very rare thing in the current world of internet hysteria, hyperbole and name calling.

 

[Breakage]

This is a really cool feature.
NeoGAF just keeps getting better.

 

[Redneckerz]

This goes both ways; since I know for so long I may miss him more when he is banned here, but on the other hand I am pretty used to his way of writing and have a good feeling when he is sincerely arguing for a fair treatment of someone or is arguing out of ulterior motives (which were implied by the earlier ban message*).

*I might add that I wrote ban massage first, but I guess that is a story best told by you in your bidaily Tales from Resetera.

Just because you are used to his way of writing does not mean everybody else is. Frankly, i am quite stunned that after hearing he had 8 tempbans so far (which should tell you something), you still are asking if for this permban, it could be changed.

Speaking in general, but sometimes a user does not get a hint properly.

As for the bolded, i have no idea what you mean by this beyond the obvious reference.

 

[camelCase]

He was being a bit of a condescending cunny for a few pages in the white privilege thread starting somewhere around here:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/jord...hite-privilege.1464114/page-14#post-253369197

EviLore insinuated on page 16 that he could be on drugs or otherwise unstable. I kinda agreed that his posts came across that way but I guess the consternation that led to him chucking a tanty and requesting a permaban was around some kind of “punching down”.

Nice, appreciate the explanation as well

 

[Transhuman]

You should ban me for a 2 or 3 days to make sure it's working properly, asshole.

 

[ar0s]

I forgot to add one other thing that makes this forum great: the members.

I'm very slightly to the right libertarian. I frequently disagree with posters on either side of the aisle here. But with very few exceptions I find their posts respectful, intelligent and sometimes they even bring me around to their point of view with excellent arguments.

This is a very rare thing in the current world of internet hysteria, hyperbole and name calling.

Welcome to the forum, we're delighted to have you.

 

[AgentP]

"Be a better poster. "

That should help him/her improve!

 

[Nobody_Important]

"Be a better poster. "

That should help him/her improve!

If you look at his post history you would understand believe me.

 

[Redneckerz]

Since ive gotten some requests on people who want to reappeal their ERA ban, i should point to the following.
​

Since the feedback thread was made hidden, the original post was here: https://archive.fo/7JCrY, reply 109.

As said by Rowlf:

If you've received a ban that you think is unfair or unjustified, you may reach us at contact@resetera.com to plead your case.

 

[Papa]

If you look at his post history you would understand believe me.

Like you can talk

 

[Dontero]

time to uncork insanity that was old gaf.

 

[God Enel]

I think this is kind of big news so why isn't this thread pinned at the top?

It's such a good and important feature so..

 

[camelCase]

Man don’t be such a cunt.

It’s like you have a stick up your fanny (by the way that’s a very British word, not North American.) USA would say ass.

There are many women who are very offended by the C word in both Canada and the USA though. It’s possibly the N word for Women.

Even in pillow talk it can be a deal breaker. Saying I’m gonna pound your pussy is fine, saying I’m gonna split your cunt.... Date over.

I get we all aren’t from the same place, or even same hemisphere, but we have to kind of figure out what is and isn’t ok as a species for all and go from there because this bickering over words has gone too far now, and even people that know what words mean, don’t know how to use them anymore.

Yeah I agree. But they should learn to get over it. I call my guy friends that all the time and if it's in ear shot of a girl it's a full stop as well. I hate that words become taboo like that, there's no reason for it. The only defensible... reprehension at this word would be to call a girl it with malice. Like you are a ____. Using it to refer to the body part, I also don't get that, because it's like calling your foot a slur. It's getting offended where absolutely none was intended and feeling righteously indignant about it, IMO that shit has no place in good company.

 

[Kadayi]

Glad to see the feature implemented. Good stuff.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Holy shit I missed Deplorable's posts

Straight outta 4chan

 

[LegendOfKage]

Holy shit I missed Deplorable's posts

Straight outta 4chan

From the ban description, I have to wonder if that was someone actually liberal, who was trying to prove a point that genuine white supremacy would be allowed by this forum, or a genuine white supremacist who heard that this forum was okay with actual Nazi supporters now.

Either way, nope.

 

[royox]

PMing administration to look for gotcha moments to score social media points? Pathetic. Duplicitous. Cowardly. Go back to your home base for such behavior.

Savage.

 

[Alec]

This is great. Was equal parts sad and happy that I couldn't go back far enough to see my own bans.

 

[Captain Zyrain]

Wow I completely missed this, fantastic idea. Transparency is key!