Speaking of gun control..

nikki4982 · Post by **nikki4982** » 4/3/2006, 7:06 pm

Apologizing AFTER getting all huffy and calling people names does not count in this situation. You should not have to be told in... however many posts we've made trying to explain to you that how you're acting is not cool... before saying a simple "I'm sorry, it wasn't meant to be offensive."

nikki4982 · Post by **nikki4982** » 4/3/2006, 7:08 pm

And you can try to avoid me all you want, but you've come to the board and made members unhappy. I'm currently the only admin online. I am not going away.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 4/3/2006, 7:09 pm

nikki4982, starvingeyes will not try and avoid you. he is simply done being nice to you.

Axtech · Post by **Axtech** » 4/3/2006, 7:10 pm

Your post count is 1984.

ooooh the irony!

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 4/3/2006, 7:10 pm

how appopriate given the context of the discussion in which we are currently mired.

Axtech · Post by **Axtech** » 4/3/2006, 7:11 pm

Yes, that is where the irony comes from. :lol:

Axtech · Post by **Axtech** » 4/3/2006, 7:12 pm

Your post count seems to have moved on, though.

Shall we follow suit?

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 4/3/2006, 7:19 pm

if there is one thing i can never do, it's move on. i crave resolution.

nikki4982 · Post by **nikki4982** » 4/3/2006, 7:21 pm

Considering your brother left, I don't see that happening.

And now, I'm going to bed.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 4/3/2006, 7:26 pm

he'll be back.

nikki it's you that i want a piece of so bad, it's a terrible shame you're going to bed. But i'll post my parting shots anyway and maybe tommorow you'll log on and see them

I understand that you and rob and god knows who else either own this board or have been appointed by the owner to enforce rules that the owner and his admins agree with. I don't have an issue with any of that. What i find offensive about your behavior is your refusal to have the reasoning behind your rules and your actions debated in public.

I have never shyed away from public scrutiny of what i believe in, because I know that i have the conviction to defend my ideas to the very end. I will always have the last word, I will always hang on until everybody else has gone and I will only stop when I have been proven wrong.

You said that you're not going away, well neither am I. If you need proof of that you only need to review the threads in this very forum from years ago when Chris, Corey, Reno, Jim and I were locked in constat battles over the state, the war in Iraq and a bunch of other great topics.

Nowhere else on the internet have I ever had debates as compelling as those ones and the reason was that agree or disagree with those guys, I always had to admit they had balls. They kept coming back. For this reason I will always respect those guys and think fondly of those debates.

I wonder if you're made of the same stuff that they are. You think starvingeyes should be controlled, well I'm asking why. Do you have the conviction to answer?

Axtech · Post by **Axtech** » 4/3/2006, 7:40 pm

It's not a matter of him being controlled. It started out quite simply, actually. He made comments that people found offensive, and we asked him to stop. He got extremely defensive, which led to a series of lengthy PMs back and forth on the subject. We have given our reasoning over and again. Chris doesn't like the reasoning and doesn't agree with it, but that doesn't mean that we haven't explained ourselves fully and extensively. And I'm not about to go through it all again with you.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 4/3/2006, 7:51 pm

i asked you to defend your position, which you refused to do. how is that me getting defensive? you accused me of trying to offend which i maintain i was not doing. as such i attempted to explain my thought process when making the thread.

anyways i guess you've just answered doug's question, so i suppose there isn't much point in asking this one but:

since you openly and readily admit that you ALLOWED a moderator to edit my posts to insert text that was INTENTIONALLY OFFENSIVE to me, REPEATEDLY, how on EARTH can you muster the nerve to tell me that i am offending people and should tone it down??

as an aside i will add that i have just today recieved a PM informing me that this is not an isolated incident. as i now recognize that it is an openly accepted fact that the moderating team here is intentionally abusive, unfair and biased i am prepared now to leave the site as clearly open debate is no longer tolerated here. however before i go, i'd like to hear your response to all of this.

i know it's probably a bit of a stretch in hoping you'll give me one, but hey, you don't get if you don't ask right?

Axtech · Post by **Axtech** » 4/3/2006, 7:53 pm

I never refused to defend my position. Go back and read the volly of PMs.

I didn't "allow" anyone to do anything. Another person did that under his own discretion, which is why I'm waiting to let him defend himself. I had nothing to do with it.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 4/3/2006, 7:53 pm

He's back now so i'll let him answer.

But I will say that asking him to stop making light of gender issues does sound a lot like controlling him, doesn't it?

Post by **faninor** » 4/3/2006, 7:54 pm

mosaik wrote:I understand that you and rob and god knows who else either own this board or have been appointed by the owner to enforce rules that the owner and his admins agree with. I don't have an issue with any of that. What i find offensive about your behavior is your refusal to have the reasoning behind your rules and your actions debated in public.

As far as I know we allow our rules and actions to be debated by members.

If we delete posts or lock threads because their content isn't civil, and a person who was being offensive in the locked or deleted posts creates a new thread that I believe will become a continuation of the original locked or deleted posts, I will delete it immediately because 1. they weren't behaving nicely in the original thread and 2. now they may be pissed because we tried to shut them up. If I feel that the new thread won't go out of hand or if it is started by someone who wasn't very involved with the original then I won't delete it and would probably try to answer any questions they brought up about the moderators actions if I know anything about the incident.

I don't feel that this is a problem. If the moderators block a person from posting about a certain topic by deleting a post or locking a thread, it is only consistent for this to continue until that person is willing to speak calmly and rationally.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 4/3/2006, 7:55 pm

nikki4982 wrote:Apologizing AFTER getting all huffy and calling people names does not count in this situation. You should not have to be told in... however many posts we've made trying to explain to you that how you're acting is not cool... before saying a simple "I'm sorry, it wasn't meant to be offensive."

this is all completely fabricated totally false bullshit. every fucking word. if you READ THE THREADS in question you will see i apologized almost IMMEDIATELY after being told that i was offending people and have repeated that apology after nearly every post mentioning that somebody was offended. later i will compile all of my apologies so you can see the vastness of their number.

you're completely out of your fucking mind, do you know that? 100% batshit crazy. you are a dangerous human being and i desperately hope that you are never placed in a situation wherein you hold any meaningful authority over other human beings.

i think the fact that you are so drunk with power and self righteous zeal over this mod position on a tiny back of the web OLP board speaks volumes about your personality. i can only imagine what a person like you would be like if you were say, the manager of mcdonalds.

i fear for anybody that may work under you in their lives.

Axtech · Post by **Axtech** » 4/3/2006, 7:57 pm

mosaik wrote:He's back now so i'll let him answer.

But I will say that asking him to stop making light of gender issues does sound a lot like controlling him, doesn't it?

Granted, but it's also a matter of protecting the freedoms of everyone else on the board to not be subjected to reading offensive material - something that has always been enforced on this board, and something to which everyone agreed when they registered.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 4/3/2006, 8:00 pm

you are an administrator. i do believe that this is the only site in the whole of the internet that an admin would be allowed to do something as incredibly abusive as edit a members posts for the sole purpose of offending that member. on any other website that person would've been removed immediately. on this one, the only person involved in that incident who was punished was ME. does nobody police the admins here?

justify your hypocrisy. you said nothing and attempted to do nothing about that action, yet you are all over me for making a few contraversial posts which unintentionally upset some members of the board. you continue to hold this position despite the fact that i have repeatedly apologized.

and you did refuse to defend your position, TWICE. both times you stopped responding to my PMs. read the last two i sent you on both discussions again. they are filled with rebuttals to your arguments and new ones for you to consider.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 4/3/2006, 8:00 pm

Axtech wrote:
mosaik wrote:He's back now so i'll let him answer.

But I will say that asking him to stop making light of gender issues does sound a lot like controlling him, doesn't it?

Granted, but it's also a matter of protecting the freedoms of everyone else on the board to not be subjected to reading offensive material - something that has always been enforced on this board, and something to which everyone agreed when they registered.

bullshit total lie rob. you SELECTIVELY enforce this rule. admit that at least.

Axtech · Post by **Axtech** » 4/3/2006, 8:02 pm

No, I'm a moderator. It was an administrator who edited your post.

I stopped replying to your PMs because you keep bringing up irrelevant points and I don't have time to argue with you over something I've already explained.