Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Dec 7, 2009 2:57pm
Had to bring in threadshitting somehow, since I haven't had a chance to use that term since it got brought up a couple weeks back.
Dude's been more of an annoyance than anything else (especially if you're an Indian Creek football fan having to read his countless posts on how Creeks sucks and he's going to enroll his kids at Steuby so they can win), but really went over the line recently with race-baiting comments on at least two threads.
How should that be handled (other than the two threads being closed, which has happened)? Forum ban now? Forum ban if he does it again? Pure ban? And not just for him, but for others who make comments like that.
Dude's been more of an annoyance than anything else (especially if you're an Indian Creek football fan having to read his countless posts on how Creeks sucks and he's going to enroll his kids at Steuby so they can win), but really went over the line recently with race-baiting comments on at least two threads.
How should that be handled (other than the two threads being closed, which has happened)? Forum ban now? Forum ban if he does it again? Pure ban? And not just for him, but for others who make comments like that.
GoChiefs
Posts: 16,754
Dec 7, 2009 3:00pm
Another NCF..don't forget his threads on video games and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles!
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:02pm
Got this PM from that TOP guy:
This is the type of site you run? Ive been on an hour and have seen more racist stuff about my people than I have heard in 4 years of college in this state. Closing the topics is like sweeping all the stuff said under the carpet. They posted KKK pictures for christ sake.
This is the type of site you run? Ive been on an hour and have seen more racist stuff about my people than I have heard in 4 years of college in this state. Closing the topics is like sweeping all the stuff said under the carpet. They posted KKK pictures for christ sake.
Trueblue23
Posts: 7,463
Dec 7, 2009 3:03pm
Yea thats not good!
Anything even slightly racist should be gone immediatley.
Anything even slightly racist should be gone immediatley.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:04pm
Also, that TOP guy is also jpake1. Anyone know if that guy is really black?
GoChiefs
Posts: 16,754
Dec 7, 2009 3:05pm
Don't know either one of them..but yeah..anything about race isn't a good thing..of course.
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Dec 7, 2009 3:05pm
Sigh.....the KKK pic was posted by me to make fun of MANAZE. On the closed thread (before it was closed) I even explained that and said I'd remove it if he was offended.
wes_mantooth
Posts: 17,977
Dec 7, 2009 3:06pm
manaze needs to go. I know you don't want to ban people, but those stereotypes and bullshit his is pulling is not needed at all. He has been nothing but a fucking douchebag since he joined.
Fab1b
Posts: 12,949
Dec 7, 2009 3:06pm
MANAZE is a straight up ass!
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Dec 7, 2009 3:08pm
Don't know what jpake's skin color is. I do know that the first couple posts he made a TOP were in an over-the-top dialect and it's hard for me to take a person serious when they're typing in that style whether they talk in it or not.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:09pm
Ok, I did a little research and jpake1 is a white guy, meaning his posts as TOP were just as racist as those of MANAZE.
Trueblue23
Posts: 7,463
Dec 7, 2009 3:09pm
Manaze is the kind of dude that will jab and jab at you, but if you say anything remotely hostile back to him, you're the asshole.. much like NCF.
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Dec 7, 2009 3:14pm
Jebus, Justin! Do you have access to the FBI database or something? Or did you find that info in a more mundane way, like checking to see if he posted his picture in the pic-posting thread?
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:15pm
Facebook. I did a search on the email that TOP registered with.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:15pm
wes_mantooth
Posts: 17,977
Dec 7, 2009 3:15pm
he checked his penis in the "penis showing thread"Heretic wrote: Jebus, Justin! Do you have access to the FBI database or something? Or did you find that info in a more mundane way, like checking to see if he posted his picture in the pic-posting thread?
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:16pm
Quiet, you.wes_mantooth wrote: he checked his penis in the "penis showing thread"
wes_mantooth
Posts: 17,977
Dec 7, 2009 3:19pm
DAMNIT!!! I am just trying to contribute!!!justincredible wrote:Quiet, you.wes_mantooth wrote: he checked his penis in the "penis showing thread"
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:28pm
PM from Belly:
I find him highly annoying. And hard to understand.[/align]A very good topic closed “Black Woman vs White Woman” with read ingmaterial link to support the issue is now closed. Because of children trying to play I have my rights and being idiots. This goes back to the profanity issue ….give the kids enough adult rights and they destroy the idea of what is proper and what is not. While individuals are interested in communication and the sharing of idealist views of a topic like this, other dirty your site with their childish comments.
Justin I ask re-open the “Black woman vs. White Women” thread and those that spew the idiotic comments be banned for three days.. Set the example, enforce the rules and the site will be respected more and the boundaries/ rules will be clear for all to understand.
I understand your review to have open freedom of voice but limit / action are sometings required because at some point all you'll hear is the ones you don't what to listen to.
Bring back the Thread and set the rules ....use it as a test of respect and restrain see what happens ..... could be interesting to what happens.....who defends you'll word of rules and who reject the site rules and your athority as the owner of this site. That would be an interesting observation
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Dec 7, 2009 3:30pm
Don't listen to him. There are no such thing as "rights" on an internet forum.justincredible wrote: PM from Belly:
I find him highly annoying. And hard to understand.[/align]A very good topic closed “Black Woman vs White Woman” with read ingmaterial link to support the issue is now closed. Because of children trying to play I have my rights and being idiots. This goes back to the profanity issue ….give the kids enough adult rights and they destroy the idea of what is proper and what is not. While individuals are interested in communication and the sharing of idealist views of a topic like this, other dirty your site with their childish comments.
Justin I ask re-open the “Black woman vs. White Women” thread and those that spew the idiotic comments be banned for three days.. Set the example, enforce the rules and the site will be respected more and the boundaries/ rules will be clear for all to understand.
I understand your review to have open freedom of voice but limit / action are sometings required because at some point all you'll hear is the ones you don't what to listen to.
Bring back the Thread and set the rules ....use it as a test of respect and restrain see what happens ..... could be interesting to what happens.....who defends you'll word of rules and who reject the site rules and your athority as the owner of this site. That would be an interesting observation
wes_mantooth
Posts: 17,977
Dec 7, 2009 3:33pm
yes he is.justincredible wrote: PM from Belly:
I find him highly annoying. And hard to understand.[/align]A very good topic closed “Black Woman vs White Woman” with read ingmaterial link to support the issue is now closed. Because of children trying to play I have my rights and being idiots. This goes back to the profanity issue ….give the kids enough adult rights and they destroy the idea of what is proper and what is not. While individuals are interested in communication and the sharing of idealist views of a topic like this, other dirty your site with their childish comments.
Justin I ask re-open the “Black woman vs. White Women” thread and those that spew the idiotic comments be banned for three days.. Set the example, enforce the rules and the site will be respected more and the boundaries/ rules will be clear for all to understand.
I understand your review to have open freedom of voice but limit / action are sometings required because at some point all you'll hear is the ones you don't what to listen to.
Bring back the Thread and set the rules ....use it as a test of respect and restrain see what happens ..... could be interesting to what happens.....who defends you'll word of rules and who reject the site rules and your athority as the owner of this site. That would be an interesting observation
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Dec 7, 2009 3:39pm
Since I struggled through reading that post by Belly, I feel compelled to respond in someway to justify the time I spent.
1. The topic itself could have been interesting. I wasn't overly interested in it, but I could see people being interested.
2. It also is a "hot-button" topic, as are most involving race. All it takes is one person making an uncool comment and the whole thing will immediately go downhill.
3. In a way, Belly's third paragraph was the most true, but in a different way than he thinks. He wants you to allow a potentially highly combustable topic to stand and set rules and ban people for three days, which is like saying, "You can talk about anything, but if you cross this subjective line in the sand, you're gone" (aka: old huddle). My idea of "limit/action" (as he phrased it) is that if a thread about of potentially highly combustable topic immediately combusts like this one did to where you have MAYBE 5-10 intelligent posts in a 50-60 post thread with the rest being race-baiting and flaming.....that probably means there isn't much to be gained by keeping the thread open, whether he likes the topic or not.
1. The topic itself could have been interesting. I wasn't overly interested in it, but I could see people being interested.
2. It also is a "hot-button" topic, as are most involving race. All it takes is one person making an uncool comment and the whole thing will immediately go downhill.
3. In a way, Belly's third paragraph was the most true, but in a different way than he thinks. He wants you to allow a potentially highly combustable topic to stand and set rules and ban people for three days, which is like saying, "You can talk about anything, but if you cross this subjective line in the sand, you're gone" (aka: old huddle). My idea of "limit/action" (as he phrased it) is that if a thread about of potentially highly combustable topic immediately combusts like this one did to where you have MAYBE 5-10 intelligent posts in a 50-60 post thread with the rest being race-baiting and flaming.....that probably means there isn't much to be gained by keeping the thread open, whether he likes the topic or not.
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Dec 7, 2009 3:41pm
I tested that out by closing a topic for 24 hours. 30 minutes after being open back up, same problems.Heretic wrote:
3. In a way, Belly's third paragraph was the most true, but in a different way than he thinks. He wants you to allow a potentially highly combustable topic to stand and set rules and ban people for three days, which is like saying, "You can talk about anything, but if you cross this subjective line in the sand, you're gone" (aka: old huddle). My idea of "limit/action" (as he phrased it) is that if a thread about of potentially highly combustable topic immediately combusts like this one did to where you have MAYBE 5-10 intelligent posts in a 50-60 post thread with the rest being race-baiting and flaming.....that probably means there isn't much to be gained by keeping the thread open, whether he likes the topic or not.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 7, 2009 3:42pm
And then you jizzed in your pants.LJ wrote:I tested that out by closing a topic for 24 hours. 30 minutes after being open back up, same problems.Heretic wrote:
3. In a way, Belly's third paragraph was the most true, but in a different way than he thinks. He wants you to allow a potentially highly combustable topic to stand and set rules and ban people for three days, which is like saying, "You can talk about anything, but if you cross this subjective line in the sand, you're gone" (aka: old huddle). My idea of "limit/action" (as he phrased it) is that if a thread about of potentially highly combustable topic immediately combusts like this one did to where you have MAYBE 5-10 intelligent posts in a 50-60 post thread with the rest being race-baiting and flaming.....that probably means there isn't much to be gained by keeping the thread open, whether he likes the topic or not.
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Dec 7, 2009 3:48pm
Duhjustincredible wrote:And then you jizzed in your pants.LJ wrote:I tested that out by closing a topic for 24 hours. 30 minutes after being open back up, same problems.Heretic wrote:
3. In a way, Belly's third paragraph was the most true, but in a different way than he thinks. He wants you to allow a potentially highly combustable topic to stand and set rules and ban people for three days, which is like saying, "You can talk about anything, but if you cross this subjective line in the sand, you're gone" (aka: old huddle). My idea of "limit/action" (as he phrased it) is that if a thread about of potentially highly combustable topic immediately combusts like this one did to where you have MAYBE 5-10 intelligent posts in a 50-60 post thread with the rest being race-baiting and flaming.....that probably means there isn't much to be gained by keeping the thread open, whether he likes the topic or not.