PDA

View Full Version : Moderation: questions, discussion and completely pointless whinging



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8

antichrist
02-08-2006, 07:41 AM
In computer safe thread I took out my anger on Pinoys, is that racist? Remove if such - can I plea bargain?

MichaelBaron
02-08-2006, 12:28 PM
In computer safe thread I took out my anger on Pinoys, is that racist? Remove if such - can I plea bargain?

This is not the first time you are making a racist comment! By now, you seem to be have a substantial track-record:hmm:

MichaelBaron
02-08-2006, 03:50 PM
In computer safe thread I took out my anger on Pinoys, is that racist? Remove if such - can I plea bargain?


How many "temporary" bans does it take for a person to be banned from the forum permanently:hmm: ?

Basil
02-08-2006, 04:00 PM
How many "temporary" bans does it take for a person to be banned from the forum permanently:hmm: ?

I thnk KB and BG should work out an HD [dedicated] scale based on AO and AC indiscretions, OK, MB?

Kevin Bonham
02-08-2006, 04:28 PM
How many "temporary" bans does it take for a person to be banned from the forum permanently:hmm: ?

Depends on the offence. For spammers, zero. :D

Even Matthew Sweeney (PHAT) isn't banned permanently yet, though he's on his final chance at the end of his present suspension.

AC, when you post something rash you can still go back and edit it out if you are quick - might be a good idea in your case.

antichrist
03-08-2006, 12:41 PM
It does occur to me sometimes but also like to retain my spirited comments that I also appreciate in other posters, even if against myself. I wonder if RW will pick up all these personal pronouns, see thinking on my keyboard, but since HD shows he scored some home goals he has kept himself in check.

Garvinator
04-08-2006, 01:11 AM
I thought this was a feedback thread, not another racism debate thread. Take it back to non chess and can the mods delete all the latest crap postings please:(

Kevin Bonham
04-08-2006, 03:11 PM
I thought this was a feedback thread, not another racism debate thread. Take it back to non chess and can the mods delete all the latest crap postings please:(

Totally agreed - four posts deleted. Debate about personalities goes in non-chess not on this thread. antichrist is the one starting an exchange that is way off-topic yet again.

antichrist
04-08-2006, 06:26 PM
Luckily I had seen the light and transferred to BOH anyway.

I am on fire and mad these days with all that bombing going on - don't get in my way!

antichrist
18-08-2006, 06:35 PM
were some jokes wiped out out of JOKe thread non chess?

EGOR
22-08-2006, 04:23 PM
Can posts 120, 121, 122, 124, 129, & 131 from the ACF Broke thread be moved to another thread, perhaps in Non Chess, with a title like EGOR Vs. FG7 please.:)

Bill Gletsos
22-08-2006, 04:54 PM
Can posts 120, 121, 122, 124, 129, & 131 from the ACF Broke thread be moved to another thread, perhaps in Non Chess, with a title like EGOR Vs. FG7 please.:)Done.

Arrogant-One
23-08-2006, 01:31 PM
Arrogant-One has asked why his ban did not expire yesterday, four weeks after it was imposed. The board has autoban options including three weeks or one month so I auto-banned him for a month. I originally intended to lift this ban manually when his four weeks expired, but decided not to on account of him posting while banned (he signed up an account and made a post immediately after being banned.)

In only extending his ban by three days when normally posting while banned leads to a ban being doubled at least, I took into account that it was probably just a rash impetuous act immediately after being banned, and that if he persisted beyond that we have no firm proof of it (although we do have our suspicions ... )
Firstly Kevin, I don't see why this News Post was relevent or needed to be put up.

Secondly, what you say contradicts itself.

You state that you originally decided to lift my ban after four weeks when four weeks was up. The offence of using the hyrdra account DuMaurier2 had already been committed at this point, but it was still your original intention to lift my ban after four weeks already knowing this.

So your post about deciding not to afterall diminishes the credibility of the first part of your post where you state that you had the original intention of lifting the ban after 4 weeks.

If, however, for some reason you found out about DuMaurier2 logging on immediately after I was banned, say about 2 weeks after I did it, then your above post would make more sense and be more believable.

Bill Gletsos
23-08-2006, 02:02 PM
Firstly Kevin, I don't see why this News Post was relevent or needed to be put up.

Secondly, what you say contradicts itself.

You state that you originally decided to lift my ban after four weeks when four weeks was up. The offence of using the hyrdra account DuMaurier2 had already been committed at this point, but it was still your original intention to lift my ban after four weeks already knowing this.He makes no such statement. At the time he banned you he had no knowledge you would be stupid enough to almost immediately create a hydra and log back on. As such when he banned you his intention was to manually lift it after 4 weeks.

So your post about deciding not to afterall diminishes the credibility of the first part of your post where you state that you had the original intention of lifting the ban after 4 weeks.It dimisnishes nothing, although it does show that your break from the board hasnt improved your comprehension skills.

All Kevin is saying is at the time he banned you he intended to manually lift your ban after four weeks. However the fact you created a new hydra DuMaurier2 and logged on almost immediately after being banned meant he then changed his mind.

Kevin Bonham
23-08-2006, 04:46 PM
Firstly Kevin, I don't see why this News Post was relevent or needed to be put up.

Because having been emailed by you about the matter I realised I had been lax in my communication with the BB about what we had done about you posting while banned so I decided to rectify it.


Secondly, what you say contradicts itself.

You state that you originally decided to lift my ban after four weeks when four weeks was up.

The decisions to (i) initially ban you for four weeks and (ii) extend your ban to a month were made in case (i) at the time of your initial banning and in case (ii) within a few days of it. I was just very slow logging part (ii).

As such the rest of your post is misinformed and irrelevant.

Arrogant-One
23-08-2006, 04:52 PM
It dimisnishes nothing, although it does show that your break from the board hasnt improved your comprehension skills.
Comprehending you and Kevin isn't easy sometimes Bill. Never seems to make sense to us ordinary folk. :hmm:

Bill Gletsos
23-08-2006, 04:55 PM
Comprehending you and Kevin isn't easy sometimes Bill. Never seems to make sense to us ordinary folk. :hmm:The ordinary folk as you put it have no problem. The problem lies with the clueless and those that are comprehension challenged.

Arrogant-One
23-08-2006, 05:00 PM
The ordinary folk as you put it have no problem. The problem lies with the clueless and those that are comprehension challenged.
I'm starting to like you Bill. 1000 years may pass, but Bill Gletsos will never change.

Bill Gletsos
23-08-2006, 05:01 PM
I'm starting to like you Bill.Now that is indeed a troubling thought.

Arrogant-One
23-08-2006, 05:23 PM
Now that is indeed a troubling thought.
Trouble is my middle name Bill, but I'm glad you're working through old differences with me and starting afresh!

Steady on Mate!

Arrogant-One
27-08-2006, 12:58 PM
I deleted Arrogant-One's thread "Howard Duggan Ducks For Cover". It repeated claims that had previously been a subject of moderation. While AO's purpose in repeating the claims was to attack them, the person AO was defending preferred not to have the matter raised again.

Hi Kevin,

I only discovered that Belthasar didn't want the matter discussed further after the thread was put up. You might want to mention that in the News/Announcements Thread.

Kevin Bonham
27-08-2006, 01:17 PM
I only discovered that Belthasar didn't want the matter discussed further after the thread was put up. You might want to mention that in the News/Announcements Thread.

And I might not. That you should have asked him first is an absolute no-brainer.

Kevin Bonham
27-08-2006, 11:50 PM
Cat, I deleted your post here because it was mainly concerned with relations between the ACF and Matt's forum (this is an Australian Chess section topic) and as such is not relevant to feedback about this site.

Cat
28-08-2006, 06:37 AM
Cat, I deleted your post here because it was mainly concerned with relations between the ACF and Matt's forum (this is an Australian Chess section topic) and as such is not relevant to feedback about this site.

KB that was inappropriate. Australia is a free, liberal society and one should be able to express opinion without prejudice - that is the hallmark of decency. I suggest you restore the post and provide a proper answer.

bergil
28-08-2006, 08:40 AM
KB that was inappropriate. Australia is a free, liberal society and one should be able to express opinion without prejudice - that is the hallmark of decency. I suggest you restore the post and provide a proper answer.No it wasn't, if you had read his post :hmm: he suggests that you post it in Australian chess section of this board and it wouldn't (may not) be removed. :doh:

Arrogant-One
28-08-2006, 12:40 PM
KB that was inappropriate. Australia is a free, liberal society and one should be able to express opinion without prejudice - that is the hallmark of decency. I suggest you restore the post and provide a proper answer.
Not on this site Cat.

I notced that Matt Sweeney has recently been banned again, by Kevin Bonham (co-incidence central!). Perhaps his offence this time was as serious as sneezing in public or not smiling hard enough.

But the official reason is something like crude/vulgar abuse.

I know Matt, have spoken with him, and can atest to the fact that he is a nice, ordinary, down to earth guy. Chess in Australia is better for his presence.

Arrogant-One
28-08-2006, 12:52 PM
And I might not. That you should have asked him first is an absolute no-brainer.
Thats not necessarily the case Kevin.

I don't believe you announced the fact that the 'defamed' poster (if that word is applicable) wanted the matter brought to an end in the appropriate News/Announcements 'Moderation Rules and Decisions' thread.

As such it was NOT common knowledge that you had moderated on his behalf.

Out of curiosity, why did you do choose to moderate in this instance when no rules of the board were apparently broken by anyone?

If you were of the view that there was in fact defo, then why was no action taken against the offender?

In answering you will be mindful that certain BB personalities have suggested that the moderators/admins of this board use a double standard.

Kevin Bonham
28-08-2006, 12:53 PM
KB that was inappropriate. Australia is a free, liberal society and one should be able to express opinion without prejudice - that is the hallmark of decency. I suggest you restore the post and provide a proper answer.

Australia is indeed a relatively free and liberal society in which fortunately the owners of bulletin boards and their agents are still permitted to do as they please with material posted in the wrong thread. :wall: :wall: :wall:

I could move it to a new thread for you, but if you're not going to save me work why should I do the same for you? :hand:


I know Matt, have spoken with him, and can atest to the fact that he is a nice, ordinary, down to earth guy.

Ditto here but he is not the same when he goes online. Defending him on the grounds of what he is like offline is like saying that a serial road rage offender is meek and mild-mannered when not behind the wheel.

antichrist
28-08-2006, 01:49 PM
KB, I have just read that when the Nazis built their headquarters in the thirties anyone passing by was forced to salute (just as a Catholic procession with Voltaire or Paine was it witnessed someone having their tongue cut out) - would you be content with this salutation then you would get off everyone's backs. That is they could make a comment and not have to face an inquisition by you and BG who can't cop the slightest dissent.

I would happily donate the price of a few bricks for your momument that we tipped out hats to - just to ease everyone's pain, Lebos are quite humanitarian you know.

Kevin Bonham
28-08-2006, 04:39 PM
I would be content with you learning to use the quote function correctly. Maybe I will get a chance to show you how to do it in person someday.

Cat
28-08-2006, 08:43 PM
Australia is indeed a relatively free and liberal society in which fortunately the owners of bulletin boards and their agents are still permitted to do as they please with material posted in the wrong thread. :wall: :wall: :wall:



Leave my posts alone Bonham and put back the one you stole. I'll post where I want to, judging posts on their worthiness is not the role of the moderator. If now you're assuming that role, then state it clearly so that we can all understand what rules we're playing by. Are you a moderator, or a cyber-vigilante?

Basil
28-08-2006, 09:41 PM
David

Did you have an opinion on my modded avatar? If you haven't seen it, just let me know. I think you'll find the same arguments apply regarding free speech and expession. IMO, your argument will eventually fail.

I make no commentary as to whether that is a sad day or not.

Cheers
H

Bill Gletsos
28-08-2006, 09:45 PM
Leave my posts alone Bonham and put back the one you stole.No, learn to post in the correct forum.

I'll post where I want to,No, learn to post in the correct forum.

judging posts on their worthiness is not the role of the moderator.However judging if they are in the correct forum is. The choice of action is the mods. If you cannot be bothered posting to the correct forum there is no reason the mods should be bothered moving it as opposed to simply deleting it.

If now you're assuming that role, then state it clearly so that we can all understand what rules we're playing by. Are you a moderator, or a cyber-vigilante?You need to learn to post in the correct forum.

EGOR
29-08-2006, 08:32 AM
learn to post in the correct forum.
learn to post in the correct forum.
learn to post in the correct forum.
Bill, the record is jumping.:owned:

Bill Gletsos
29-08-2006, 02:10 PM
Bill, the record is jumping.:owned:No, just consider it repetitive reinforcement. Some posters seem to have comprehension difficlties and one way to assist them is to repeat the phrase to them. :hand:

antichrist
29-08-2006, 03:18 PM
I would be content with you learning to use the quote function correctly. Maybe I will get a chance to show you how to do it in person someday.

Only if I can sit on your lap while you are showing me. I will go on a diet so as not to ruin the fun.

antichrist
29-08-2006, 03:22 PM
What happened to yesterday's thread "Whore of Israel"?

Kevin Bonham
29-08-2006, 07:56 PM
Deleted because you have "Blood on Hands" and we don't want any more than one thread on the I-P thing in general unless someone comes up with something substantial and different enough to be worth another one.

Desmond
29-08-2006, 08:51 PM
I've deleted some posts in which a poster called another poster a liar. The poster being accused of lying had claimed to have PMd the accuser, who claimed not to have received the PM.

A conclusion of lying cannot be firmly drawn from such evidence because there are sometimes technical problems that cause PMs to go astray. For instance I have myself been unable to PM one particular member most of the time when I have tried to do so this week, but the cause of this problem is unknown.

It is also possible that a poster thinks they have sent a PM when they have not. In this case they are not lying, merely mistaken.

Please do not call other posters liars unless all logically possible explanations for their behaviour other than knowingly making a false statement have been exhausted.Hi Kevin,

You have got it backwards there. AO claimed that I sent certain information to him, which I most certainly did not. I then called him the "L" word. You have allowed AO's incorrect statement http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=118883&postcount=94 to remain, and have deleted my response to it. VERY UNFAIR!

Desmond
29-08-2006, 09:01 PM
Hi Kevin,

You have got it backwards there. AO claimed that I sent certain information to him, which I most certainly did not. I then called him the "L" word. You have allowed AO's incorrect statement http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=118883&postcount=94 to remain, and have deleted my response to it. VERY UNFAIR!
Further to this, even if I had sent the message to him, him posting the contents of said imaginary message would be in breach of the site rules, would it not?

Bill Gletsos
29-08-2006, 09:03 PM
Further to this, even if I had sent the message to him, him posting the contents of said imaginary message would be in breach of the site rules, would it not?Only if what he posted was a direct quote. He could post a paraphrase of it.

Kevin Bonham
29-08-2006, 09:44 PM
OK, AO wrote "Your PM mentioned something a bit odd though, so I've sent you a PM just now."

I thought that Boris was calling AO a liar for saying he (AO) had sent Boris a PM. As Boris says I had it the wrong way round and he was in fact calling AO a liar for saying Boris had sent AO a PM.

My mistake - however if you're going to call someone a liar it is a very good idea to specify exactly what the alleged lie is, as if you leave it open it's possible someone will get it wrong (as I did!)

I've deleted AO's post - if he wants it restored he needs to send me the PM Boris is supposed to have sent him. I'm keeping the liar calls off as when you're calling someone a liar you need to prove they intentionally made a false statement rather than just an unintentional mistake.

I'll correct the bit in the moderation decisions thread to point to this post.

antichrist
30-08-2006, 04:55 PM
Deleted because you have "Blood on Hands" and we don't want any more than one thread on the I-P thing in general unless someone comes up with something substantial and different enough to be worth another one.

Whore of Israel had a quite different main emphasis, it was more a comparison with the Whore of Babylon and the rise of empires, a brilliant thesis even if I must say so myself - can you rescue it please?

EGOR
30-08-2006, 04:58 PM
Whore of Israel had a quite different main emphasis, it was more a comparison with the Whore of Babylon and the rise of empires, a brilliant thesis even if I must say so myself - can you rescue it please?
No!:D

Bill Gletsos
30-08-2006, 05:07 PM
Whore of Israel had a quite different main emphasis, it was more a comparison with the Whore of Babylon and the rise of empires, a brilliant thesis even if I must say so myself - can you rescue it please?No and you can stop with your off topic rubber bullets comments in other threads as well.

antichrist
30-08-2006, 05:11 PM
No and you can stop with your off topic rubber bullets comments in other threads as well.

Being rubber do you think they might bounce back, rickochet and get me in the back? I am used to being stabbed on this BB a few times

Kevin Bonham
31-08-2006, 01:27 PM
Being rubber do you think they might bounce back, rickochet and get me in the back? I am used to being stabbed on this BB a few times

You're cruising for another one. You were lucky that another mod got to you mentioning Israel off-topic in a chess thread, and also to your re-posting of "Whore of Israel" in defiance of its original deletion, before I did.

In future if you repost a thread after it has been deleted by the mods I will suspend you. Remember that you are welcome to use this thread to ask what happened to a thread if unsure.

antichrist
31-08-2006, 05:30 PM
Just shows how you all take yourselves too seriously.

antichrist
02-09-2006, 02:11 PM
You're cruising for another one. You were lucky that another mod got to you mentioning Israel off-topic in a chess thread, and also to your re-posting of "Whore of Israel" in defiance of its original deletion, before I did.

In future if you repost a thread after it has been deleted by the mods I will suspend you. Remember that you are welcome to use this thread to ask what happened to a thread if unsure.

I deeply regret that you missed the opportunity to have me barred again. Would you like me to unilaterally plead guilty so that you can get those demons out of your head and still have the chance to bar me. I realise there is nothing more important in your life than to bar me and dominate discussion on this board, even when talking though your snout.

You can't even DOP a chess comp without driving competitors crazy with your over the top dominance.

Kevin Bonham
02-09-2006, 02:30 PM
I don't need you to plead guilty to anything - I know you're guilty, I just generally choose not to ban you where another mod has dealt with it. *false comments unrelated to moderation ignored*

antichrist
03-09-2006, 01:53 PM
I will post Whore of Israel in Blood on Hands, meaning that you have Whore of Israel's Blood on your hands for deleting it out of Whore of Israel, and as Whore of Israel is in Blood on Hands you also have Blood on Hands on your hands, but that doesn't necessarily make you a whore of Israel.

antichrist
05-09-2006, 05:33 PM
KB, as it appears for Whore of Israel to appear on Blood on Hands thread, can you rescue it and post there please, it will save me trying to remember the contents of such. And strictly speaking that is where you should have transferred it to when you had not warned me it could not have it's own thread but later advised me it belonged to BOH.

Otherwise you are acting like Israel, wrongly wiping something out - Lebanon's infrastructure - and then refusing to fix your heineous crime.

Kevin Bonham
06-09-2006, 11:54 AM
No, it is your responsibility to post things on the right thread and if you can't remember what was on a thread you posted in the wrong place then too bad. I do sometimes just move stuff but you have been told before not to keep starting still more I-P threads.

It is more like if you build a house well inside Israeli borders and then ask Israel to rebuild it for you after they demolish it. :)

antichrist
06-09-2006, 03:01 PM
No, it is your responsibility to post things on the right thread and if you can't remember what was on a thread you posted in the wrong place then too bad. I do sometimes just move stuff but you have been told before not to keep starting still more I-P threads.

It is more like if you build a house well inside Israeli borders and then ask Israel to rebuild it for you after they demolish it. :)

It would more likely be that I built a house in Arab terroritory, Israel moved their borders to grab it as they do, they converted it into a fortress to fire their arms from to take over more terroritory. And then call me a terrorist when I try to reclaim.

Kevin Bonham
07-09-2006, 01:20 PM
"Israel" has not engaged in any post-hoc border moving in this case.

antichrist
07-09-2006, 06:06 PM
Was Instant Karma post deleted? on & on & on from [Alex] debate

antichrist
07-09-2006, 06:11 PM
Originally Posted by antichrist
I lost 150 points thereabouts one comp by giving queen odds to juniors - give me 135 back and we will call square

Berqil:
How about a slap in the back of the head for being so stupid and call it even?
__________________

was my original post also deleted from Sept ratings thread? was relevant to PPs post

Kevin Bonham
08-09-2006, 01:41 PM
A bunch of your posts have been deleted by various mods/admins for off-topic trolling.

antichrist
08-09-2006, 01:59 PM
A bunch of your posts have been deleted by various mods/admins for off-topic trolling.

you should have least picked up my error, I may have received Instant Karma but that was the wrong song, should have been - now I have forgotten the ruddy name of the song that has: on and on and on. Can you help out?

I was making the point in that post where Berqil reakons I was a boofhead that if was under ELO I may have only lost 15 and not 150 points (according to PP) so was requesting my 135 points back - fair enough - fair suck of the sav!

bergil
08-09-2006, 03:10 PM
I was making the point in that post where Berqil reakons I was a boofhead that if was under ELO I may have only lost 15 and not 150 points (according to PP) so was requesting my 135 points back - fair enough - fair suck of the sav!

I lost 150 points thereabouts one comp by giving queen odds to juniors - give me 135 back and we will call square:naughty: I said for being so stupid not boofhead "How about a slap in the back of the head for being so stupid and call it even?" :P Now you can't say fairer than that can you? :owned: :lol:

antichrist
15-09-2006, 01:26 PM
KB, can I request a special dispensation (papal-like) to repost my schoolyard "you pulled my hair, she wears a g-string" circuit-breaker for [Alex] thread?

antichrist
15-09-2006, 01:33 PM
antichrist suspended for two days for posting Israel/Palestine rubbish on a thread not in the non-chess section (the [Alex] to Appeal thread).
__________________

Well I could not be accused of polluting it,

antichrist
17-09-2006, 02:42 PM
Mods, can I adopt as avatar the Anti-Christ with hangers-on painting ?

Rincewind
17-09-2006, 04:42 PM
Mods, can I adopt as avatar the Anti-Christ with hangers-on painting ?

I think you should concentrate on keeping your usual trolling rubbish out of the chess threads. Once you can manage to do that consistently we can discuss avatars.

antichrist
21-09-2006, 04:53 PM
is it okay to put a reference in chess thread to response in Off Topic bin?

You guys would have had Norman Gunston crucified or slit with that dangerous razor of his.

antichrist
21-09-2006, 04:57 PM
I think you should concentrate on keeping your usual trolling rubbish out of the chess threads. Once you can manage to do that consistently we can discuss avatars.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cat
Actually I really like this discription, Barry. It reminds me of Zeno's arrow, which occupies an infinite number of stationary positions and can never quite get to it's destination.

RW
Never quite reaching the destination is actually a modified version of Zeno's "Achilles and the tortoise" paradox. The arrow paradox was actually more about dividing time into discrete instantaneous points. But anyway there are three things to be said about Zeno's paradoxes in the context of this discussion.

Firstly, motion is patently possible (just as rating movement is patently possible). Secondly, if true, and a actually rating is not attainable then this is only possible by considering very small discrepancies. As ratings themselves are only publish as natural numbers, the rating and true strength could easily become the same for all practial purposes. Finally, were Zeno paradoxes to apply you would have to ignore stocastic effects which allow for overshooting and undershooting of a rating. With stocastic effects, at best a rating is always giggling around the true strength, sometimes over and sometime under and therefore paradoxes of Zeno's type would seem to be totally inapplicable.
__________________
A/C
Why wasn't these posters barred as I have been for off topic posting? Hyprocisy - that is why!

Bill Gletsos
21-09-2006, 05:02 PM
is it okay to put a reference in chess thread to response in Off Topic bin?No.
If people want to they will choose to read the off topic bin thread without requiring a reference from the orginating thread.

Kevin Bonham
21-09-2006, 05:03 PM
is it okay to put a reference in chess thread to response in Off Topic bin?

I misread your question, so to clarify:

* It is OK to refer to chess threads in posts made in Off Topic Bin (as you did today).
* It is not OK to respond to a thread in a chess post by posting a link to Off-Topic Bin.



Why wasn't these posters barred as I have been for off topic posting?

Given that some Month and Year ratings threads tend to drift naturally into more general discussion of ratings they are not off-topic. Discussing whether or not Zeno's "paradox" applies to ratings is clearly on-topic so far as the general issue of ratings is concerned.

antichrist
21-09-2006, 05:10 PM
No.
If people want to they will choose to read the off topic bin thread without requiring a reference from the orginating thread.

Not claiming that I could but someone else might (like you God - seeing you are conquering PP) come out with a beauty off topic comment but doesn't see the light of day - and we would all hate that, it may have been about Matt.

Is it true that the Dribbler stopped dribbling because you had bought up all the shares in those yellow triangle floor warning signs "dribbling - wet floor"?

Kevin Bonham
21-09-2006, 05:41 PM
Edited response to AC above as I initially misread his question.

Cat
24-09-2006, 10:07 AM
I suppose you'll ban me now Barry, for trying to post a reply to drug. Why don't you just but out if you don't want the thread diverted?

Rincewind
24-09-2006, 10:19 AM
I suppose you'll ban me now Barry, for trying to post a reply to drug. Why don't you just but out if you don't want the thread diverted?

Your reply remains and a link to it has even been posted in the original thread. You can't keep dragging threads off topic. You will also note that I didn't ban you even though you duplicated your post not once, but twice.

Cat
24-09-2006, 10:22 AM
Your reply remains and a link to it has even been posted in the original thread. You can't keep dragging threads off topic. You will also note that I didn't ban you even though you duplicated your post not once, but twice.

I just want you to leave it where I put it. Isn't that reasonable?

Rincewind
24-09-2006, 10:25 AM
I just want you to leave it where I put it. Isn't that reasonable?

No. It is a different thread and deserves to be treated as such.

antichrist
25-09-2006, 12:24 PM
Cat, you are naughtie naughtie - fancy fancy, at least a bit of consistency but not across all posters I don't think. You can't argue with God, just ask David Hicks.

antichrist
07-10-2006, 02:41 PM
User harry banned for pretending to be a junior when not. This is taken very seriously by the mods and admins because of the potential for child protection issues to arise when adults pretend to be juniors. Following a situation in which a poster known to be an adult used a fake-junior hydra some time back we decided this would henceforth result in an automatic ban.

On the board harry claimed:
* to be a junior
* to be currently at school
* to be in Victoria

I PMd harry, my reason for doing so being suspicion that the account might be a hydra of a banned user (whether it is or not is still not clear). Without mentioning that suspicion, I asked him why if he was in Victoria all his posts were coming from an ISP based in another state. His (generally nonsensical) response stated that he was not a junior, was not currently at school and was not in Victoria. Furthermore he refused to give his real name.

A/C
I reakon this guy has committed at least 5 deadly sins and no mercy should be shown to him whatsoever, luckily we have Inquisitors around like KB to keep such heretics in check.

antichrist
12-10-2006, 05:59 PM
who are the 3 new posters recently barred and why?

Basil
12-10-2006, 06:03 PM
who are the 3 new posters recently barred and why?
Dear Mr Christ

Your request for assistance is unclear. Your question can be taken two ways. Why are they barred or why are they who they are? I can answer the latter. For discussion on the former, you will have to talk with my associates downstream in 'processing' :)

Bill Gletsos
12-10-2006, 06:03 PM
who are the 3 new posters recently barred and why?Spammers.

antichrist
13-10-2006, 04:41 PM
Why did Matt bother posting in this board whilst he has his own board? Is this board Coka Cola and the RCC - the real thing, not pepsi and not Church of England - the pretenders

Garvinator
27-10-2006, 10:20 PM
:hmm: <<<<< wonders if Ben Dover might be a hydra of some sort :rolleyes:

bergil
27-10-2006, 10:28 PM
:hmm: <<<<< wonders if Ben Dover might be a hydra of some sort :rolleyes:Ya think? :P

eclectic
27-10-2006, 10:30 PM
:hmm: <<<<< wonders if Ben Dover might be a hydra of some sort :rolleyes:

Sounds like someone with a MCC connection. Macavity might fill us in on who it is.

ElevatorEscapee
27-10-2006, 10:32 PM
Now now Garvin, there are many fantasy creatures that inhabit this board... from Hobbits to Wizards to Mother Goose, Billy Goat Gruff and dare I say it, even trolls!

This board is as much an exploration of the fantastic imagination as it is a serious discussion area about chess. :)

eclectic
27-10-2006, 11:05 PM
Any book going on which of the two will be the first to look like a kebab?

Kevin Bonham
28-10-2006, 12:01 AM
:hmm: <<<<< wonders if Ben Dover might be a hydra of some sort :rolleyes:

Ben Dover and BJfan appear to be the same person. Aside from that, no idea.

ElevatorEscapee
29-10-2006, 01:57 PM
Ben Dover and BJfan appear to be the same person. Aside from that, no idea.

I hope that "BJfan" doesn't mean what I think it means! :eek:

Kevin Bonham
29-10-2006, 05:50 PM
I hope that "BJfan" doesn't mean what I think it means! :eek:

Wash your brain out with soap, EE. I hadn't thought of that. :eek:

ElevatorEscapee
29-10-2006, 05:59 PM
Wash your brain out with soap, EE. I hadn't thought of that. :eek:
What... You hadn't thought of Blackberry Juice fan? ;)

Alan Shore
29-10-2006, 10:12 PM
I hope that "BJfan" doesn't mean what I think it means! :eek:

I'm a fan of 'The Brian Jones' (pawn forking two pieces), I used to be so obsessed with it, if the opportunity arose I would voluntarily play it even if it wasn't the best move!

antichrist
30-10-2006, 01:28 PM
I thought Billy Joel fan??

antichrist
30-10-2006, 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
The voting system with a combo of voter scores and judging is actually quite a good one - it means that someone with talent can get a reasonable way in the competition before being voted off and have some opportunity to build a profile. However ultimately lack of profile must count against her as she is forced to compete solely against those stars who are actually decent dancers. Also the way the scoring is on improvement and not just quality makes it tough for her.

I wouldn't be surprised if she lasted another couple of eliminations but if she makes it into the last, say, three, I will be.

I'll be interested to see if this now translates to any other form of popular fame.

A/C
Seeing that you like it, would you like to mirror their voting system for banning people on this board, the mods get half the vote and the posters the other \
\

KB, still waiting for a reply? Have a vertebra(?)!

Kevin Bonham
30-10-2006, 10:17 PM
KB, still waiting for a reply? Have a vertebra(?)!

There wasn't any point in replying. It was quite a good cheap shot by you; to point out that it would actually make little difference because a consensus decision by the mods could only thus be voted down by unanimous poster opposition seemed a little bit cruel at the time.

antichrist
09-12-2006, 05:19 PM
KB
Blue Elephant banned. Hydra of banned user.

Arrogant-One's existing ban of a month has been extended by about six weeks for posting while banned. His ban now expires two months from today.

A/C
Talking about kicking a guy in the guys whilst they are down, how can you sleep at night?

eclectic
09-12-2006, 05:23 PM
KB
Blue Elephant banned. Hydra of banned user.

Arrogant-One's existing ban of a month has been extended by about six weeks for posting while banned. His ban now expires two months from today.

A/C
Talking about kicking a guy in the guys whilst they are down, how can you sleep at night?

Let's be thankful that no one has yet been banned for chronic misuse of the quoting system. :whistle: :rolleyes: :eek:

antichrist
09-12-2006, 05:28 PM
Let's be thankful that no one has yet been banned for chronic misuse of the quoting system. :whistle: :rolleyes: :eek:

But people have been banned for whinging about chronic misuse of the quoting system!

Kevin Bonham
09-12-2006, 05:37 PM
Talking about kicking a guy in the guys whilst they are down, how can you sleep at night?

I don't; I sleep in the daytime! :D

(only a mild exaggeration there)

firegoat7
30-12-2006, 01:22 PM
Originally Posted by starter elsewhere
I understand that the deal between CV and the Canterbury venue owners (the FREEMASONS) has hit a substantial sticking point and more than likely will not happen.
The UNITY team will take this in their stride and work out what is the next best strategy for chess in Victoria.
This could open the window of opportunity for individuals/Clubs/ Commercials who are interested in out-sourcing CV traditional events in 2007.



Anyone from VIC care to comment on this latest development.


__________________


Yep. Why are you dragging Starters quotes on the ACCF over to here. That sign is Matt Sweeney's site. This site has a ban on that site and I must ask...."Did you ask for Starters position Mr moderator"? :doh:

cheers Fg7

Bill Gletsos
30-12-2006, 01:49 PM
Yep. Why are you dragging Starters quotes on the ACCF over to here. That sign is Matt Sweeney's site. This site has a ban on that site and I must ask...."Did you ask for Starters position Mr moderator"? :doh:

cheers Fg7You are ranting nonsense as usual.
There is no restriction here on quoting material on ACCF. There is only a restriction on quoting banned posters here.
Starter is not banned here nor was what he posted a quote of a banned poster hence his post can be quoted here.
His post was on a publically available bulletin board. As such no permission is required to requote it here.

antichrist
30-12-2006, 03:43 PM
Bill, would you like me to drag them over instead just to get them off your back - I come with good work experience

Bill Gletsos
30-12-2006, 03:45 PM
Bill, would you like me to drag them over instead just to get them off your back - I come with good work experience:lol:
No thanks.

Kevin Bonham
30-12-2006, 04:02 PM
Bill is correct.

firegoat can read the rules for himself and he will find no reference to ACCF quoting being banned.

It was banned but the ban has been lifted.

Of course posters quoting from ACCF need to be extra extra careful that they do not quote any banned poster (including indirectly) or post on any banned poster's behalf, and that material they quote is within this site's rules.

If a banned poster posts a quote concerning himself on ACCF and someone else then posts the quote here it is pretty likely they will be ruled to have posted it on the banned poster's behalf. However it depends on the context in which they post it.

Furthermore quoting material from ACCF just to flame or troll it or start cross-forum fights is likely to be frowned on by several posters here and isn't a very good idea in general. Posters are advised (although this is not a moderation directive) to limit quoting to matters of public interest (or perhaps any corrections of matters of fact they might wish to make on the public interest.)

Linking to the board service on which ACCF resides is blocked due to past spamming from that service by the owner of ACCF. There is no reason to believe that spam would not resume so the bar remains in place.

I'd like to personally inform all chesschatters that on no account should they consider any statement made about me on ACCF to be true by virtue of my failure to counter it anywhere, or for any other reason except for independent and reliable proof. A lot of drivel has been spouted there as expected but I have no interest in refuting it here. :D

antichrist
30-12-2006, 04:13 PM
Now listen Kb, I got through about 3 paras of your twaddle above and pulled the plug. Can't you explain in about 3 sentences at most.

Now can you begin again please.

antichrist
01-01-2007, 09:32 AM
http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=5611&page=4

KB, at above thread admin is leading other posters astray in being severely off topic - reminds me of dictators, one rule for them and another for the masses.

Kevin Bonham
01-01-2007, 03:54 PM
Thread has naturally drifted off-topic with no apparent interest from posters in sticking to the original topic so nothing doing.

antichrist
02-01-2007, 02:02 PM
HD:

Hi Mish.........


Both your friends Sampson and Pyke had BB casualties yesterday; one with a permanent ban and one with apology to me over some hypocisy. They were itching for a reason and your "leaving" the game provided them with one. Both of them were on this in seconds - I'm not sure why you offered to wake James up - that was just silly wasn't it? - so with all that going on I thought it best I sign off. I__________________


Who is Pyke and where is his ban, we want juicy gossip please?

Kevin Bonham
02-01-2007, 04:05 PM
Who is Pyke and where is his ban, we want juicy gossip please?

I took Howard to be referring to Arrogant-One's ban (AO being a friend of Belthasar) and firegoat's apology (I assume firegoat is a friend of macavity) as the "casualties" he mentioned.

antichrist
02-01-2007, 05:23 PM
Kevin, I put up a post in Scandal thread about a losing player's mother suddenly withdrawing him from the games and it has disappeared just like the player. Tell them not to come the raw prawn.

Basil
02-01-2007, 05:24 PM
I took Howard to be referring to Arrogant-One's ban (AO being a friend of Belthasar)
Yup. Laurel and Hardy.


and firegoat's apology (I assume firegoat is a friend of macavity) as the "casualties" he mentioned.
Yup 1 & 2 at MCC. Mac got very busy when fg was banned over the "long walk, short pier" incident, and got very busy with my discussion with Mish.

He's at his most vocal when he senses one of his people in trouble. Otherwise he's a model of silence when they're tripping over their shoelaces.

antichrist
02-01-2007, 05:28 PM
Yup. Laurel and Hardy.


Yup 1 & 2 at MCC. Mac got very busy when fg was banned over the "long walk, short pier" incident, and got very busy with my discussion with Mish.

He's at his most vocal when he senses one of his people in trouble. Otherwise he's a model of silence when they're tripping over their shoelaces.

Now it is all falling into place. I wondered why FG was batting on Mac's side about religion on Xmas day. I even quoted Voltaire at him about last priest and last king. These anarchists are ruddy hypocrites.

firegoat7
02-01-2007, 09:11 PM
Now it is all falling into place. I wondered why FG was batting on Mac's side about religion on Xmas day. I even quoted Voltaire at him about last priest and last king. These anarchists are ruddy hypocrites.

Don't be bloody silly. It is hardly hypocritical to say that people shouldn't be persecuted over a belief system, even if you don't share it. Diversity is a good thing ain't it? Not all Christians are nice or stupid, just as, all Lebanese are not muslim or christian. ;)

cheers Fg7

firegoat7
02-01-2007, 09:20 PM
This thread sucks.

It is a collection of cuts and pastes that misrepresent reality. Your classic case of cybernet postmodernist ethics, i.e none. This thread is designed to tell a story that has no linear connection with reality. Whoever put this piece of crap together should be disgusted with themselves. It is simply unethical.

cheers Fg7

antichrist
07-01-2007, 02:39 PM
KB:

I deleted some posts which quoted and discussed shouts by the now-banned poster "Wonder-Boy".

The nature of the shouts and the IP address indicates that this is yet another hydra of the permanently banned user Arrogant-One.

This user has frequently signed up new accounts to circumvent his bans.

Please do not quote mysterious new users who get involved in CAQ issues as they are most likely further hydras of this banned user.

A/C
do you mean I been sucked in twice by this trickster, before as De Maurier XXXX at ACCF - he must have been very dangerous as a chessplayer.

antichrist
07-01-2007, 06:15 PM
AO and I collaborated on this one, he lobs a controversial one and I spread the disease

antichrist
09-01-2007, 10:44 AM
New addition to site rules:

* The shoutbox often provides the first impression new users receive of the Chess Chat community. Posters should therefore be respectful of other conversations and avoid even low level vulgarity. Excessive trolling may result in loss of shouting rights.

A/C
Is this going to be known as the "Anti-Christ" rule?

And I reakon it is all because of the competition on the other side. Is their moderation better than ours??

antichrist
09-01-2007, 10:53 AM
KB, can I bring over the guts of what AO said in his recent sarcastic spray? It is the first time he has said something worthwhile.

antichrist
09-01-2007, 10:57 AM
We should charge Starter perving rights, he is turning into a peeping Tom.

As you did not rule this one out as troll it is going in shout box

Kevin Bonham
09-01-2007, 01:57 PM
KB, can I bring over the guts of what AO said in his recent sarcastic spray? It is the first time he has said something worthwhile.

He is banned so you cannot quote him in any way.

antichrist
09-01-2007, 06:44 PM
He is banned so you cannot quote him in any way.

what about in emergencies, like if there was a tsunami coming?

antichrist
10-01-2007, 11:39 AM
FRom decisions box:

Alex-One banned. Hydra of banned user. This one seems too obvious, you don't someone else impersonated him to get him into trouble, like an agent provodateur?

I reakon you should provide us all with fridge magnets listing all of AO's aliases so we all on the ball.


I am still waiting for an apology from Mac and GG for saying that I said Hacche was a pedofile etc. in the Shoutbox a few nights ago. GG had jumped on the bandwagon in saying that should have been barred for it.

Desmond
10-01-2007, 03:51 PM
I reakon you should provide us all with fridge magnets listing all of AO's aliases so we all on the ball.How big is your fridge?

Garvinator
10-01-2007, 06:04 PM
How big is your fridge?
and we should be both alert and alarmed.

antichrist
10-01-2007, 06:53 PM
and we should be both alert and alarmed.

GG, I would have much preferred you took notice of Post 819:


I am still waiting for an apology from Mac and GG for saying that I said [name deleted] was a pedofile etc. in the Shoutbox a few nights ago. GG had jumped on the bandwagon in saying that should have been barred for it.
__________________________________________________ ____

It is not too late.

antichrist
10-01-2007, 07:44 PM
KB, if a genuine gem comes up I will get it out somewhere - or my name is not AC

Kevin Bonham
10-01-2007, 08:27 PM
I am still waiting for an apology from Mac and GG for saying that I said [name deleted] was a pedofile etc. in the Shoutbox a few nights ago. GG had jumped on the bandwagon in saying that should have been barred for it.
__________________________________________________ ____

It is not too late.

macavity clearly misunderstood what you were saying (you are not the clearest writer in the world). My view is that macavity should retract the comment. I am not sure he should apologise as when I first read the comment I thought that was what you were saying too - but I considered it carefully and realised your comment was innocent.

Bereaved
11-01-2007, 10:40 PM
I won't apologize to someone who has named themselves after the devil

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

antichrist
11-01-2007, 11:01 PM
The owner and moderators of this board would seem to deem his nom de plume here to be acceptable otherwise they would have requested he change it long ago.

How can they dispute something that is in the Bible, how can you have an Antichrist if you don't have a Christ, so I actually validate their belief.

Kevin Bonham
12-01-2007, 03:25 AM
I won't apologize to someone who has named themselves after the devil

Is this a serious position and reason for not apologising, or just flippancy? If it's serious, I disagree (as a poster) on two grounds:

1. Accuracy. As, I believe, discussed previously here, the sense in which AC uses the term "antichrist" is much the same as that used by Nietzsche in his short book of the same name. The German title of that book, Der Antikrist, translates both as "The Anti-Christ" and "The Anti-Christian". The book has nothing to do with the devil but rather is an attack on institutionalised Christian morality. Indeed Jesus himself is depicted quite favourably in the book for the most part even though Nietzsche was diametrically opposed to Jesus in many essential ways.

2. Fairness. It was not a religious dispute and what you think of AC's religious views should have nothing to do with the issue of whether your comments about him were fair, and if so, whether you should apologise.

Note: I'm not saying you should apologise; in fact in my view you should simply retract the comment.

Garvinator
12-01-2007, 07:22 AM
GG, I would have much preferred you took notice of Post 819:


I am still waiting for an apology from Mac and GG for saying that I said [name deleted] was a pedofile etc. in the Shoutbox a few nights ago. GG had jumped on the bandwagon in saying that should have been barred for it.
__________________________________________________ ____

It is not too late.
I will assume that I am the GG referred to in this post. I dont recall saying anything about what antichrist is claiming and I now call on him to prove his allegation as it is a serious one. If he cant back up his allegation, then he should be suspended for a long time for claiming that I was saying that he called someone a paedophile.

antichrist
12-01-2007, 09:50 AM
As mentioned when Mac was having a go at me (incorrectly) you jumped on the bandwagon saying that why am I not barred or something similar. In the context it appeared that you were agreeing with Mac's post.

Garvinator
12-01-2007, 02:24 PM
As mentioned when Mac was having a go at me (incorrectly) you jumped on the bandwagon saying that why am I not barred or something similar. In the context it appeared that you were agreeing with Mac's post.
Is this the best you can do, some vague reply? You have made a serious charge, that I supported someone who claimed that you called someone else a paedophile.

Kevin Bonham
12-01-2007, 02:58 PM
macavity made the now contentious shout suggesting that I "get rid of A/C's slander in General Chess ..." and a few posts later Garvin wrote " macavity: just save time and remove ac". I assume this is the only basis for antichrist's comment.

antichrist
12-01-2007, 09:52 PM
macavity made the now contentious shout suggesting that I "get rid of A/C's slander in General Chess ..." and a few posts later Garvin wrote " macavity: just save time and remove ac". I assume this is the only basis for antichrist's comment.

well we can assume that somebody would not be barred without a reason and the call for barring appeared after Mac's post, so naturally that is what one would attribute the barring to.

GG's often call for barring and to block this or that makes him sound like a typical Qld redneck.

ER
18-01-2007, 04:02 PM
GG's often call for barring and to block this or that makes him sound like a typical Qld redneck.

GG seems to me as being a nice person who contributes a lot of possitive postings. Can we please be more careful and avoid racist (and in my opinion unacceptable for the standards of this forum) clich&#233;s such as the above?
Cheers and good luck!

Kevin Bonham
18-01-2007, 04:08 PM
Statist and subculturalist, not racist!

I think the comparison is inaccurate anyway. I don't think the typical "redneck" would be a pro-heavy-moderation type.

antichrist
18-01-2007, 04:08 PM
Well, he ain't heavy he's my brother Knight, even Kb said that if GG had his way 93.5% of theads would be barred.

What response do you expect when he is always calling for people and threads to be barred. AR called him a Jihadist.

I have never called for people that I disagree with to be barred, though I did go along with Matt's due to the constant language and years of fighting.

Kevin Bonham
18-01-2007, 04:11 PM
Well, he ain't heavy he's my brother Knight, even Kb said that if GG had his way 93.5% of theads would be barred.

Incorrect. The figure I gave was 93% without the .5. It makes all the difference, you know. :lol:

Basil
18-01-2007, 04:16 PM
I would refer all parties to Duggan's Rule ;)

http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=5612

ER
18-01-2007, 04:22 PM
Statist and subculturalist, not racist!

I think the comparison is inaccurate anyway. I don't think the typical "redneck" would be a pro-heavy-moderation type.

it's the "typical" that makes the difference mate!

ER
18-01-2007, 04:27 PM
What response do you expect when he is always calling for people and threads to be barred. AR called him a Jihadist.



A hardliner maybe? a disciplinarian?

antichrist
18-01-2007, 04:32 PM
A hardliner maybe? a disciplinarian?

A drama queen with facist tendencies who wants to control everyone to make himself seem taller.

Let a thousand flowers bloom - not in the Qld backyard

ER
18-01-2007, 04:37 PM
I am yet to see a "fascist" queen of any sort. They are usually royalist!

antichrist
18-01-2007, 04:40 PM
I am yet to see a "fascist" queen of any sort. They are usually royalist!

Hitler was a drama queen, wanted to make himself look bigger by being big-mouthed, just as GG is when calling for barrings.

ER
18-01-2007, 05:06 PM
I went through to his last 10 posts or so, there s harldy any barring demands

Basil
18-01-2007, 05:19 PM
A drama queen with facist tendencies who wants to control everyone to make himself seem taller.
AC. You're wrong there, mate. No further correspondence will be entered into. Although I'm sure the mail will keep arriving :owned:

antichrist
18-01-2007, 10:42 PM
AC. You're wrong there, mate. No further correspondence will be entered into. Although I'm sure the mail will keep arriving :owned:


firegoat7 suspended for one day for quoting a banned user.
__________________


But even the Devil is quoted in the Bible

antichrist
04-02-2007, 09:07 AM
Kevin Bonham
"Authorative Figure"




KB from Mods decisions thread:
antichrist suspended for a week. This is not for any one particular post but because within the last few weeks he has had to be modded literally dozens of times and is creating an unreasonable workload for the moderators and admins. The main problems have been:

* persistent off-topic threadjacking and trolling, especially promoting his own threads on threads irrelevant to them

* dodgy and offensive comments connected with sexuality, ethnicity, gender etc
__________________

From Shoutbox

04-02-2007 10:02 AM chessaddict
hey what you do anyhow seems silly this banning stuff lol

:03 AM antichrist
I did nothing at all for that ban, but I did upset the 2 mods and the 1 admint. KB about waving his knickers at Shaun (he did a Dame Kiri), Bill re not following Ethics of his own assoc, and RW I picked on his princess again - that says it all

antichrist
04-02-2007, 09:13 AM
http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=142668#post142668

mods, can this thread be moved to Aussie chess section please

Kevin Bonham
04-02-2007, 06:06 PM
http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=142668#post142668

mods, can this thread be moved to Aussie chess section please

Thread has too much silly stuff in it and is a pointlessly tribalist topic anyway so not worth moving in my view.


I did nothing at all for that ban, but I did upset the 2 mods and the 1 admint

This is such a whopper you should register it as a world fishing record. :hand:

antichrist
03-03-2007, 08:30 PM
Why wasn't Howard barred for threatening the RUSKIE's neck with a parachute cord? and without howard and yours truly on this board you may as well dig the grave

Basil
03-03-2007, 08:35 PM
A reasonable point AC. Certainly borderline.

1. I was about to delete it. KB got in first. I think that's an important point. The issue being an immediate acceptance of the error.
2. I'm not sure a parachute cord is life threatening. My hope was for an eye-popping, tongue dribbling experience!

It's not a comment I would make again without clarification.

antichrist
03-03-2007, 08:38 PM
Don't apologise Howard, wasn't it only last week when there was a parachute mishap and the chic survived but the oriental died, Ruskies are not orientals so you and he were safe

antichrist
03-03-2007, 08:42 PM
Now listen KB, I have been barred for 4 out of the last 5 weeks so give me a break and a bit of leeway, I am constipated with all evil spirits wanting to come out

Basil
03-03-2007, 08:44 PM
AC, you've had more leeway than ... ummm .... something that's had lots of leeway! You are a first rate troll and you know it. It is true we love you for it and that's why your sentences are so short :P


Why wasn't Howard barred for threatening the RUSKIE's neck with a parachute cord?
and besides, I thought I was talking to a slug ;)

Bill Gletsos
03-03-2007, 08:48 PM
Now listen KB, I have been barred for 4 out of the last 5 weeks so give me a break and a bit of leeway, I am constipated with all evil spirits wanting to come outThen I suggest you be very careful with your behaviour else you receive an unwanted laxative or enema.

antichrist
03-03-2007, 08:55 PM
Then I suggest you be very careful with your behaviour else you receive an unwanted laxative or enema.

I had a mate who was addicted to enemas, he reakons the nuns used to force them up him when bording with them as a youngster.

WhiteElephant
05-03-2007, 01:08 PM
Dear Mods,

I am finding that the conspiracy-type threads in Non-Chess are covering the same ground (not to mention are not particularly interesting to the uninitiated). Is there any chance that the following threads could be merged:
Theories and Conspiracies
Conspiracy Thepries Relating to ChessChat
Real Democracy
The Media and The Information War
The Globalist Agenda

Thank you for your consideration.

bergil
05-03-2007, 01:53 PM
Dear Mods,

I am finding that the conspiracy-type threads in Non-Chess are covering the same ground (not to mention are not particularly interesting to the uninitiated). Is there any chance that the following threads could be merged:
Theories and Conspiracies
Conspiracy Thepries Relating to ChessChat
Real Democracy
The Media and The Information War
The Globalist Agenda

Thank you for your consideration.
What he said :clap:

Kevin Bonham
05-03-2007, 02:46 PM
I specifically split the rubbish in Conspiracy Theories Relating To Chess Chat because it is meta-banter about the forum and things happening on it and as such is clearly distinct from the remaining conspiracy theory threads. I think it is very important to try to split this kind of meta-chatter about posters and the forum off, and since it's in non-chess, if it bores you, don't read it.

Real Democracy is a thread about psephelogical observations relating to family of origin and electoral success. That it was started by Axiom who has started many of the other threads does not necessarily mean it has to cover the same ground, although that may depend on how discussion follows from there. As established it is obviously distinct in subject matter from the others.

Concerning the remaining three, I agree with you that they cover extremely similar ground and have merged them.

Note that where prolonged discussion of a specific issue breaks out in that thread it may be split off. But I see it more likely that it will become an amalgam like "Does God Exist?", at least while Axiom continues flitting between such a wide range of issues.

Axiom
05-03-2007, 02:56 PM
I specifically split the material in Conspiracy Theories Relating To Chess Chat because it is meta-debate about the forum and as such is clearly distinct from the remaining conspiracy theory threads. I think it is very important to try to split this kind of meta-chatter about posters and the forum off, and since it's in non-chess, if it bores you, don't read it.

Real Democracy is a thread about psephelogical observations relating to family of origin and electoral success. That it was started by Axiom who has started many of the other threads does not necessarily mean it has to cover the same ground, although that may depend on how discussion follows from there. As established it is obviously distinct in subject matter from the others.

Concerning the remaining three, I agree with you that they cover extremely similar ground and have merged them.
i can see that globalisation,media and real democracy threads could be combined.........but surely my theories&conspiracies is quite distinct,especially now with its covering of false flag terror........KB- Would be grateful if you could reconsider the perceived overlaps here.

Kevin Bonham
05-03-2007, 03:00 PM
i can see that globalisation,media and real democracy threads could be combined.........but surely my theories&conspiracies is quite distinct,especially now with its covering of false flag terror........KB- Would be grateful if you could reconsider the perceived overlaps here.

Theories and Conspiracies started with a post about 9/11 that covered very similar ground to that that you were also covering on other threads. I'll consider splitting the "false flag" stuff if other posters start taking it up and a specific discussion around that point develops.

Axiom
05-03-2007, 03:07 PM
Theories and Conspiracies started with a post about 9/11 that covered very similar ground to that that you were also covering on other threads. I'll consider splitting the "false flag" stuff if other posters start taking it up and a specific discussion around that point develops.
Surely KB there is more of a link b/w realdemocracy thread and globalisation thread than with theoryconssp thread and globalisation thread

part of the democ thread covers -payed off by corp globalists!

and theoryconsp now onto false flag, much more unrelated than the above combination.
......and 9/11 was mentioned there in the vain of conspiracy ,rather than the jump to its part in globalist agenda.

As the originator of these threads i ask you whether ,from your perpective ,it makes much difference which 3 are merged and which is kept seperate? (or keep real domacracy and th-consp threads both seperate?)

Kevin Bonham
05-03-2007, 03:36 PM
part of the democ thread covers -payed off by corp globalists!

Which part? All I see is a quote of a Reuters article about influence of family on election prospects.


and theoryconsp now onto false flag, much more unrelated than the above combination.

The problem here is that you jump around from issue to issue and these issues are connected mainly by their position in the general body of conspiracy theory style thought rather than by subject matter. Topicality gets rather slippery in such cases so I'm not inclined to go splitting issues off from that except where debates about particular topics spring up from discussion with other posters.


As the originator of these threads i ask you whether ,from your perpective ,it makes much difference which 3 are merged and which is kept seperate? (or keep real domacracy and th-consp threads both seperate?)

I just got a complaint (above) about threads covering much the same sort of ground. I considered it and reckoned that three of them did so I merged them. If you want me to retitle the merged thread I am happy to do so.

Axiom
05-03-2007, 04:05 PM
Which part? All I see is a quote of a Reuters article about influence of family on election prospects.



The problem here is that you jump around from issue to issue and these issues are connected mainly by their position in the general body of conspiracy theory style thought rather than by subject matter. Topicality gets rather slippery in such cases so I'm not inclined to go splitting issues off from that except where debates about particular topics spring up from discussion with other posters.



I just got a complaint (above) about threads covering much the same sort of ground. I considered it and reckoned that three of them did so I merged them. If you want me to retitle the merged thread I am happy to do so. yes, the jumping around is part of the complex issues attempted to tackle,requiring broad and diverse disciplines in order to firstly establish some dots,....i errred in trying to join them at the same time.
ok, i'll think of a new encompassing title, shortly.

Basil
05-03-2007, 04:07 PM
yes, the jumping around is part of the complex issues attempted to tackle,requiring broad and diverse disciplines in order to firstly establish some dots,....i errred in trying to join them at the same time.
ok, i'll think of a new encompassing title, shortly.

I disagree. I think you are failing to establish facts. The base ones DO NOT need to be codependent on each other to be factual.

Axiom
05-03-2007, 04:25 PM
I would like to request that my 3 in 1 merged thread be re-titled "THE INFORMATION WAR:Investigating- Media,Corruption,Lies & Globalism"

(hope its not too long, just best i can think of atm)

perhaps just "THE INFORMATION WAR" ?

antichrist
06-03-2007, 12:51 AM
Dear Mods,

I am finding that the conspiracy-type threads in Non-Chess are covering the same ground (not to mention are not particularly interesting to the uninitiated). Is there any chance that the following threads could be merged:
Theories and Conspiracies
Conspiracy Thepries Relating to ChessChat
Real Democracy
The Media and The Information War
The Globalist Agenda

Thank you for your consideration.

There are conspiracies on chesschat only they are behind the scenes - and they involve something scandaleous, only I can't devulge due to 155.5% chance of me being barred for doing so.

bergil
06-03-2007, 05:36 AM
There are conspiracies on chesschat only they are behind the scenes - and they involve something scandaleous, only I can't devulge due to 155.5% chance of me being barred for doing so.
C'mon on tell us? :pray:

Kevin Bonham
06-03-2007, 07:23 AM
155.5% chance of me being barred for doing so.

Many would say that is lower than you deserve.

antichrist
12-03-2007, 09:41 PM
in consise and non-convulated language where I am allowed to troll and not suffer the butchers hook?

Kevin Bonham
12-03-2007, 09:51 PM
in consise and non-convulated language where I am allowed to troll and not suffer the butchers hook?

ACCF. :hand:

There is slightly more tolerance for trolling in non-chess.

Bill Gletsos
12-03-2007, 10:00 PM
ACCF. :hand:Excellent recommendation. :clap: :clap:

Basil
12-03-2007, 10:17 PM
Worthy of BOTH a 'Classic Post' AND and HCD payout!

Axiom
12-03-2007, 10:40 PM
yeah a/c ! take a 'butcher's hook' at the ACCF ;)

antichrist
13-03-2007, 06:05 PM
Worthy of BOTH a 'Classic Post' AND and HCD payout!

Come on Howard, admit you enjoy the illegal fruits of my trolling

Basil
13-03-2007, 06:23 PM
Come on Howard, admit you enjoy the illegal fruits of my trolling

Oh I do ... and I enjoy the ripostes as well ;)

Only outright reject to the below the belt stuff (not one of your specialties I'm ppleased to note)

antichrist
13-03-2007, 06:30 PM
Kevin Bonham
Thread locked due to persistent trolling. Will be reopened on PM request from any poster having something sensible to contribute. antichrist need not apply.__________________

Before I say anything is it okay to troll in the feedback thead?

Bill Gletsos
13-03-2007, 06:36 PM
Kevin Bonham
Thread locked due to persistent trolling. Will be reopened on PM request from any poster having something sensible to contribute. antichrist need not apply.__________________

Before I say anything is it okay to troll in the feedback thead?Not if you expect to be able to post after doing so. :hand:

antichrist
13-03-2007, 06:40 PM
what many consider trolls I don't, example that Victorian club thread that I was barred for. I was only telling what I thought was the actual situation. It could have been discussed sensibly.

antichrist
13-03-2007, 07:04 PM
Can I troll in my own threads?

antichrist
14-03-2007, 08:24 PM
When a thread is already gone off topic can I also be off topic or are their different rules for myself? http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=146668#post146668

Kevin Bonham
14-03-2007, 08:48 PM
Frankly I doubt that anyone will give a rat's about that thread going "off-topic". I don't think it even has one.

It's not in non-chess yet but don't be surprised if it ends up there given how much of it is whinging about the BB, which routinely gets moved to non-chess

antichrist
14-03-2007, 09:16 PM
Can we have an official decision re trolling to spammers - I may be able to draw them out

antichrist
14-03-2007, 09:28 PM
KB, you have got to protect me from RW in this thread, you permitted it and encouraged me.

antichrist
15-03-2007, 03:09 PM
I have been warned not to duplicate, what context is this meant? We all duplicate whenever we quote someone???

Bill Gletsos
15-03-2007, 05:06 PM
A/C I suggest you watch yourself as your last threes post could be considered spamming/trolling.

Kevin Bonham
15-03-2007, 07:24 PM
I have been warned not to duplicate, what context is this meant? We all duplicate whenever we quote someone???

It means stop posting essentially the same message in multiple threads.

Pretty obvious I would have thought. Are you pretending to be stupider than you are, or are you really stupider than you are? :lol:

Basil
15-03-2007, 07:25 PM
The former.

antichrist
16-03-2007, 05:59 PM
It means stop posting essentially the same message in multiple threads.

Pretty obvious I would have thought. Are you pretending to be stupider than you are, or are you really stupider than you are? :lol:

Well Starter accused me of duplicating in ACCF when I dragged a few of Matt's choice posts from here to there (in Open Slather thread).

I thought maybe I was being warned over here that ACCF gems were being given the heave ho and me with it.

I asked Bill for some old UCJ classics of Matt's for me to carrier-pigeon over to ACCF but he would not have a bar of it.

-----------------------------------------

And can I ask for a clarification who does the banning around here, admin or mods? Thanks

I am really beginning to feel "that I can't always get what I want but when I try sometimes I still get ruddy nothing".

Kevin Bonham
16-03-2007, 06:20 PM
And can I ask for a clarification who does the banning around here, admin or mods? Thanks

Either. Usually there is consultation between at least some of the admin/mod group before someone is suspended.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 05:02 PM
i have agreed to bg's sb directive, and will be monitoring the situation thusly.

Basil
17-03-2007, 05:08 PM
My feedback:
Ax, you have made similar commitments before.
KB & BG, what are you waiting for? A body? A rolled gold invitation?

Axiom
17-03-2007, 05:17 PM
My feedback:
Ax, you have made similar commitments before.
KB & BG, what are you waiting for? A body? A rolled gold invitation?
hd- see my sb 4:29 for the precise agreement.i thought bg made it very clear.

Kevin Bonham
17-03-2007, 06:26 PM
Axiom, you were asking about the difference between links to *******s and 442's youtube links. The difference is that some of the material on the *******s site could be quite reasonably considered offensive in the provocative way in which it's presented ("Gulags in America" is an example of that). Also, the shoutbox isn't really the appropriate place for prolonged political discourses unrelated to chess. So no more PR for *******s in the shoutbox please.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 06:47 PM
Axiom, you were asking about the difference between links to *******s and 442's youtube links. The difference is that some of the material on the *******s site could be quite reasonably considered offensive in the provocative way in which it's presented ("Gulags in America" is an example of that).. if likening the building of mass detention (fema)camps, the disintegration of constitutional rights, and the use of torture in secret foriegn prisons ,is made in reference to gulags, then surely it is more than valid........and nothing to be squemish and offended by..........also the rise of a soviet style socialist police state in the usa is beyond question, lending even more credibility to such a comparison.

Also, the shoutbox isn't really the appropriate place for prolonged political discourses unrelated to chess. So no more PR for *******s in the shoutbox please.
this was not only settled in the sb re my 4:29 but also reiterated in my above post !

Kevin Bonham
17-03-2007, 06:53 PM
if likening the building of mass detention (fema)camps, the disintegration of constitutional rights, and the use of torture in secret foriegn prisons ,is made in reference to gulags, then surely it is more than valid

Unfortunately the section draws comparisons between gulags and rather more prosaic plans then those.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 06:59 PM
Unfortunately the section draws comparisons between gulags and rather more prosaic plans then those. more prosaic than secret kidnap/arrests and torture chambers??

Kevin Bonham
17-03-2007, 07:23 PM
more prosaic than secret kidnap/arrests and torture chambers??

Yes. :hand:

Have you actually checked all the contents of that section?

Axiom
17-03-2007, 07:41 PM
Yes. :hand:

Have you actually checked all the contents of that section?
yes, so what specifically is it there that you find so objectionable?........that uk or usa citizens may be inturned to gulags or concentration camps?....are you saying this type of human behaviour will not occur again? cannot occur in these countries? can only occur in those commie police states of eastern europe and china etc?......who could be offended by confronting the facts of tyranny,dictatorship, and police state usa?.......i hope you recall this dialogue ,when ppl start disappearing from the streets,secretly imprisoned and tortured........oh,sorry that already is happening/ed, see german and italy cases.

do you find this possibility, especially given recent human history ie.last 100yrs, cannot happen again, ....again, especially considering recent cases???

Axiom
17-03-2007, 08:19 PM
[irrelevant to moderation, edited - mod]

im still puzzled re above gulag coversation, if its the term "concentration camps" that is the part that you consider offensive,........i would say that aushwitz survivors would applaud anyone warning of the possibility of it happening again anywhere!.....remember "it couldnt happen" then!

Bill Gletsos
17-03-2007, 08:26 PM
I find you bringing all this crap to the feedback thread offensive as now you have simply gone from the shoutbox to here.
As I said previously you already have enough threads to discuss this on.

This isnt one of them.

Basil
17-03-2007, 08:33 PM
Just give me the damn gun, Bill. I don't appear to be as squeamish as you are ;)

I find Ax's semantic justifications and bare-faced dodgings of your previous and very clear warnings offensive! I mean what were all those promises last week? He's taking the piss, surely?

Axiom
17-03-2007, 08:39 PM
I find you bringing all this crap to the feedback thread offensive as now you have simply gone from the shoutbox to here.
As I said previously you already have enough threads to discuss this on.

This isnt one of them.
bg,are you saying i cannot respond to kb's 907 and 909 ??? KB in the sb ,advised me that this was the place to discuss any concerns re gagging orders!

Bill Gletsos
17-03-2007, 08:40 PM
Just give me the damn gun, Bill. I don't appear to be as squeamish as you are ;)

I find Ax's semantic justifications and bare-faced dodgings of your previous and very clear warnings offensive! I mean what were all those promises last week? He's taking the piss, surely?He is just lucky Kevin told him if he had a moderation issue to raise it here.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 08:41 PM
Just give me the damn gun, Bill. I don't appear to be as squeamish as you are ;)

I find Ax's semantic justifications and bare-faced dodgings of your previous and very clear warnings offensive! I mean what were all those promises last week? He's taking the piss, surely?
i know you're taking the piss ! :lol:

Bill Gletsos
17-03-2007, 08:42 PM
bg,are you saying i cannot respond to kb's 907 and 909 ??? KB in the sb ,advised me that this was the place to discuss any concerns re gagging orders!Yes and you responded to him in #912 and asked him a question.
Then instead of waiting for a response you went and tried to divert his question by referring to your amazon link.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 08:44 PM
He is just lucky Kevin told him if he had a moderation issue to raise it here.apology, accepted ;)

Axiom
17-03-2007, 08:45 PM
Yes and you responded to him in #912 and asked him a question.
Then instead of waiting for a response you went and tried to divert his question by referring to your amazon link.INCORRECT, I WAS MERELY EXPANDING, QUITE CLEARLY, ON MY ORIGINAL RESPONSE, using the link to further question kb, on what ,in context, could possibly be offensive re. his original claim?. my link evidence was merely used to support my position in my dialogue with KB.

Bill Gletsos
17-03-2007, 08:48 PM
INCORRECT, I WAS MERELY EXPANDING, QUITE CLEARLY, ON MY ORIGINAL RESPONSENo. Given no one here had actually pointed to your amazon link then the first part of your post #913 was totally irrelevant.

Lastly lose the caps.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 08:55 PM
No. Given no one here had actually pointed to your amazon link then the first part of your post #913 was totally irrelevant.

Lastly lose the caps.
no, i pointed to the link,to support my argument with kb..........i can walk you through it ,if you want!

(caps unintentional)

Bill Gletsos
17-03-2007, 08:58 PM
no, i pointed to the link,to support my argument with kbIf that is the case then why not just have added it to post #912 instead of making an entirely new post.

..........i can walk you through it ,if you want!I can walk you out the dorr if you want.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 09:02 PM
If that is the case then why not just have added it to post #912 instead of making an entirely new post.. i didnt know that was a rule!...but now i do.


I can walk you out the dorr if you want. you CAN but MAY you? ;)

Bill Gletsos
17-03-2007, 09:26 PM
i didnt know that was a rule!...but now i do.I never said it was a rule, I just asked why you didnt do it. However in hindsight given your propensity to talk to yourself in the shoutbox, I guess I need not have bothered.

you CAN but MAY you? ;)Both.

Axiom
17-03-2007, 09:40 PM
I never said it was a rule, I just asked why you didnt do it. However in hindsight given your propensity to talk to yourself in the shoutbox, I guess I need not have bothered.
Both.Well,im glad thats all cleared up, and we know where each stands........and,seriously, if you have any interest in politics/world events/media etc ......well, you know where i'd request you go!

Kevin Bonham
18-03-2007, 03:27 PM
yes, so what specifically is it there that you find so objectionable?........that uk or usa citizens may be inturned to gulags or concentration camps?...

There is no evidence that they would be either "gulags" or "concentration camps" in all such cases discussed. *******s has taken harmless articles suggesting that London might be mass evacuated in the event of a major chemical terrorist attack and, by placing such links under the "gulags" heading, likened that to the punitive incarceration of citizens with no evidence to back this comparison in the slightest. It doesn't help here that some of the other examples in the same section concern matters genuinely relevant to civil liberties, such as detention camps for offenders.

Such matters could be reasonably found offensive by readers because of:
* Groundless comparisons to distressing periods of history (this often offends particular cultural groups or people connected to them)
* Needless alarmism.

Axiom
18-03-2007, 04:01 PM
There is no evidence that they would be either "gulags" or "concentration camps" in all such cases discussed. *******s has taken harmless articles suggesting that London might be mass evacuated in the event of a major chemical terrorist attack and, by placing such links under the "gulags" heading, likened that to the punitive incarceration of citizens with no evidence to back this comparison in the slightest. It doesn't help here that some of the other examples in the same section concern matters genuinely relevant to civil liberties, such as detention camps for offenders.

Such matters could be reasonably found offensive by readers because of:
* Groundless comparisons to distressing periods of history (this often offends particular cultural groups or people connected to them)
* Needless alarmism.
but kb, punitive incarceration of citizens has happened! see germany suing usa for illegally detaining civillian ,later to be released ,not charged!,...similar case in italy too,see also the fema camps used for the displaced post hurricane katrina,and the way govt then dealt with a 'catastrophe'........im sure you have read of the admitted 'secret' torture centres in various places in europe.The evidence might not be sited on that particular page, fair enough, but if you study the whole site ,and follow up research, you will see many dots ,crying out to be joined.

so not * groundless and not *needless alarmism...................i bet many in europe in the 1940s and eastern europe in the 50s-80s wished there was a lot more raising of the alarm!

kb- i do feel you are being a little alarmist and over critical yourself by finding a small unripe cherry ,to base a grand critique on.

Kevin Bonham
18-03-2007, 04:23 PM
but kb, punitive incarceration of citizens has happened! see germany suing usa for illegally detaining civillian ,later to be released ,not charged!,...similar case in italy too,see also the fema camps used for the displaced post hurricane katrina,and the way govt then dealt with a 'catastrophe'........im sure you have read of the admitted 'secret' torture centres in various places in europe.The evidence might not be sited on that particular page, fair enough, but if you study the whole site ,and follow up research, you will see many dots ,crying out to be joined.

For the purposes of moderation I don't have the time to go scouring the site looking for dots to allegedly be joined like the above, and I can't assume that someone who might click on the link and be offended by what they see will do so either. This discussion is probably moot anyway since you seem to have agreed not to promote *******s in the shoutbox but I just wanted to make my reasons for supporting that restriction clear.


kb- i do feel you are being a little alarmist and over critical yourself by finding a small unripe cherry ,to base a grand critique on.

For the purposes of this thread I am not attempting a grand critique. I am simply indicating why the site is potentially offensive to readers.

Axiom
18-03-2007, 05:26 PM
For the purposes of moderation I don't have the time to go scouring the site looking for dots to allegedly be joined like the above, and I can't assume that someone who might click on the link and be offended by what they see will do so either. This discussion is probably moot anyway since you seem to have agreed not to promote *******s in the shoutbox but I just wanted to make my reasons for supporting that restriction clear.



For the purposes of this thread I am not attempting a grand critique. I am simply indicating why the site is potentially offensive to readers.
ok, i think we've both said our peace,and understand each other,and appear to have brought this to a natural conclusion. Thankyou for taking the time to answer my questions and discuss the matter.

Axiom
19-03-2007, 11:42 PM
It would seem that there is attempt to curtail my mere conversations in the SB....Please refer to last hour ,when in obvious dialogue with a questioning W.E and a trolling HD..................I have made every effort to remain within the rules set by BG, but as you can see in the SB history ,he moves the goal posts. I am not sure what to conclude from this seemingly perjorative agenda, and would heartily welcome another mod's view, a 2nd opinion ,if you will,...as i have no intention whatsoever of transgressing,...but it does help to know a)the rule ,and b)rather helpful knowing the supporting rationale for the rule(s)

Thankyou,
Axiom

Axiom
19-03-2007, 11:53 PM
SB Gagged? why? didnt you read my above post?

Basil
19-03-2007, 11:58 PM
Ax, there's been too much water under the bridge. In such instances, it's impossible to dissect all the whys and wherefores.

A couple of weeks ago, Bill asked you to zipit in the SB. Period. You agreed. It is you who has fallen foul of that commitment made on more than one occasion. Time to own responsibility.

No good now trying to tie a couple of recent scraps together to fumble some sort of defence in the face of what has been a very patient modding of your otherwise excellent character. You can find the motivations for my recent trolling of you over this topic in the same chapter.

Kevin Bonham
19-03-2007, 11:58 PM
It would seem that there is attempt to curtail my mere conversations in the SB....Please refer to last hour ,when in obvious dialogue with a questioning W.E and a trolling HD..................I have made every effort to remain within the rules set by BG, but as you can see in the SB history ,he moves the goal posts. I am not sure what to conclude from this seemingly perjorative agenda, and would heartily welcome another mod's view, a 2nd opinion ,if you will,...as i have no intention whatsoever of transgressing,...but it does help to know a)the rule ,and b)rather helpful knowing the supporting rationale for the rule(s)

Thankyou,
Axiom

I suggest:

(i) cut substantial discussion of or linking to *******s and related topics. The shoutbox is not a place for political spruiking. Maybe if you get into a discussion there with someone who is answering one shout to one of yours (or so) like you and I do sometimes then that's OK, but to just keep pouring out political stuff line by line even when no-one is responding or responses are rare will annoy a lot of readers while acheiving nothing.

(ii) avoid monologues in which you make great long strings (esp. >10) of shouts in a row. This goes for all users unless, for instance, they are providing commentary on a chess event that might interest posters even if those posters aren't responding.

Axiom
19-03-2007, 11:58 PM
Now dont tell me its because i cleaned so many clocks, that i put the new clock manufacturers out of business? cmon guys.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:01 AM
I suggest:

(i) cut substantial discussion of or linking to *******s and related topics. The shoutbox is not a place for political spruiking. Maybe if you get into a discussion there with someone who is answering one shout to one of yours (or so) like you and I do sometimes then that's OK, but to just keep pouring out political stuff line by line even when no-one is responding or responses are rare will annoy a lot of readers while acheiving nothing.

(ii) avoid monologues in which you make great long strings (esp. >10) of shouts in a row. This goes for all users unless, for instance, they are providing commentary on a chess event that might interest posters even if those posters aren't responding.
ALL WELL AND GOOD, AND EXACTLY WHAT I AGREED TO LAST NIGHT, BUT TONIGHT - I MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT TRANSGRESS THE AGREED UPON RULES...........I AM WILLING TO FOLLOW THE NEW RULES!, BUT SURELY ITS NECESSARY TO KNOW THEM FIRST.

Basil
20-03-2007, 12:04 AM
ALL WELL AND GOOD, AND EXACTLY WHAT I AGREED TO LAST NIGHT, BUT TONIGHT
Refer my previous. You are selectively following the ultimatums you wish to follow. If Bill had pulled the trigger to start with, we wouldn't be in this fix!

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:08 AM
Refer my previous. You are selectively following the ultimatums you wish to follow. If Bill had pulled the trigger to start with, we wouldn't be in this fix!
???? IM VERY SELECTIVELY FOLLOWING THE ULTIMATUMS GIVEN TO ME!
how can i follow such when goal posts change, and no clear directives issued?? What am i , a bloody mind reader??

Kevin Bonham
20-03-2007, 12:15 AM
ALL WELL AND GOOD, AND EXACTLY WHAT I AGREED TO LAST NIGHT, BUT TONIGHT - I MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT TRANSGRESS THE AGREED UPON RULES...........I AM WILLING TO FOLLOW THE NEW RULES!, BUT SURELY ITS NECESSARY TO KNOW THEM FIRST.

You were clearly advised by Bill to " Just give it a rest in the shoutbox going on about conspiracies, Alex Jones, monalogues and any other such dribble" but continued to post comments referring to that sort of material (eg the 30 quotes reference etc).

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:16 AM
i request that in all due decency that my sb privelages be restored, and a clear-across the board set of rules be issued to me, in order, that i may follow them............unless of course you can provide evidence that i indeed did transgress the original agreed upon rules from last night.....thankyou, and im sure you will appreciate both the logic and fairness of my position.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:18 AM
You were clearly advised by Bill to " Just give it a rest in the shoutbox going on about conspiracies, Alex Jones, monalogues and any other such dribble" but continued to post comments referring to that sort of material (eg the 30 quotes reference etc).
I was responding to a direct question from W.E, being as careful as i could to not name the link nor the name, but merely said "30 quotes"...........cmon clear your head!

Kevin Bonham
20-03-2007, 12:19 AM
The issue is that you transgressed a warning from a moderator that Bill gave you in the shoutbox tonight. If you disagree with an instruction from a moderator then you should take that up on the feedback thread or with the site owner, not by openly defying it. Plenty of other users have also been penalised for this kind of thing.

Garvinator
20-03-2007, 12:21 AM
Axiom,

The issue has nothing to do with politics.

I have had a complete gutful of your spamming of the shoutbox. Those wishing to use the shoutbox for general messages or simple chit chat can't easily use the shoutbox because of your continual spamming.

You have a thread dedicated to your issues in non-chess. I had thought that setting up multiple threads/comments and then continuing them on in another environment is against site rules.

You have a thread on your issue, stay there. If not, then you are spamming in the shoutbox and I would support your suspension for however long you get.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:23 AM
Unfortunately it is not the form i took, but the reference to CONTENT,that seems to have so sorely upset certain ppl,that i fear it is this ,that has brought about this curious but sad burst of pure irrationalism.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:25 AM
Axiom,

The issue has nothing to do with politics.

I have had a complete gutful of your spamming of the shoutbox. Those wishing to use the shoutbox for general messages or simple chit chat can't easily use the shoutbox because of your continual spamming.

You have a thread dedicated to your issues in non-chess. I had thought that setting up multiple threads/comments and then continuing them on in another environment is against site rules.

You have a thread on your issue, stay there. If not, then you are spamming in the shoutbox and I would support your suspension for however long you get.
GG- HAVE YOU READ TONIGHTS SB?..IF SO YOU WILL SEE I WAS MERELY RESPONDING TACTFULLY TO QUESTIONS ASKED OF ME......not a single spam! read it!

Garvinator
20-03-2007, 12:29 AM
GG- HAVE YOU READ TONIGHTS SB?..IF SO YOU WILL SEE I WAS MERELY RESPONDING TACTFULLY TO QUESTIONS ASKED OF ME......not a single spam! read it!
stop yelling at me and other posters, it is just plain rude.

Bill Gletsos
20-03-2007, 12:29 AM
You were clearly advised by Bill to " Just give it a rest in the shoutbox going on about conspiracies, Alex Jones, monalogues and any other such dribble" but continued to post comments referring to that sort of material (eg the 30 quotes reference etc).Even then I took no action.

It was only after he started debating WE that I gave him a cease and desist directive in the shoutbox at 12:33-12:34am
Although he abided by it with his shout of 12:44am, his shout at 12.46am was clearly in breach of my directive.

edit: Our friends in QLD can deduct 1 hour from the above times. ;)

Bill Gletsos
20-03-2007, 12:31 AM
stop yelling at me and other posters, it is just plain rude.I warned him about that the other night too in post #922.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:32 AM
unless i know where the goalposts are ,how can i kick goals?.........after 2 yrs ,my reputation for supporting and advocating this site should be without question, but a sudden gagging with some vague indirect warning,like "no more of that crap" is hardly a proper way to treat a member of high standing..........am i too read bg's mind to decipher what it is he considers 'crap'? cmon ......give me the rules(the same for everyone i presume) ,reverse the gag order, and see how i will continue to respect and obey the rules of this site.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:36 AM
i request that in all due decency that my sb privelages be restored, and a clear-across the board set of rules be issued to me, in order, that i may follow them............unless of course you can provide evidence that i indeed did transgress the original agreed upon rules from last night.....thankyou, and im sure you will appreciate both the logic and fairness of my position

WhiteElephant
20-03-2007, 12:36 AM
As the person involved in this, I want to state that it was not my intention to ask Axiom to continue with his spamming.

I was asking Axiom why he had suddenly started talking in this manner. However instead of an informative answer, I got more spam in reply, with statements such as THINK & READ, etc.

Just one more comment - Axiom, do you realise that you are coming off as extremely derogatory to people who are not interested in reading your material? Maybe that is why it is getting up people's noses.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:37 AM
GEEZ....Clock cleaning is hard work!............The most common problem i find is either sticks and mud or bits of tinfoil in the workings.

Kevin Bonham
20-03-2007, 12:38 AM
It's very hard for us to spell out exact rules for the shoutbox but Bill did give you a clear instruction to cease "going on about conspiracies" and you continued to post pro-conspiracy-theory type comments. I don't see what was vague about that warning.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:41 AM
As the person involved in this, I want to state that it was not my intention to ask Axiom to continue with his spamming.

I was asking Axiom why he had suddenly started talking in this manner. However instead of an informative answer, I got more spam in reply, with statements such as THINK & READ, etc.

Just one more comment - Axiom, do you realise that you are coming off as extremely derogatory to people who are not interested in reading your material? Maybe that is why it is getting up people's noses.
indeed, its not a pleasant business, the waking of a zombie

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:42 AM
It's very hard for us to spell out exact rules for the shoutbox but Bill did give you a clear instruction to cease "going on about conspiracies" and you continued to post pro-conspiracy-theory type comments. I don't see what was vague about that warning.
what conspiracy??? i made no mention of such, just answered WE, re read its clear as day.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 12:45 AM
i did not transgress agreed upon rules from last night , simple,.........if you can show i have, fine, ...but i know i didnt, and im sure youre starting to realise i didnt,.......dont compound the blunder any further.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 01:07 AM
it should be noted that BG ,has not attempted to defend his clearly and obviously indefensible position.
my 12:46 shout was in no way a breach of agreed rules at the time., unless you count some vague meaningless directive?!

ANY OF BORIS'S IMPARTIAL OBSERVERS PRESENT? :)

Bill Gletsos
20-03-2007, 01:24 AM
unless i know where the goalposts are ,how can i kick goals?.........after 2 yrs ,my reputation for supporting and advocating this site should be without question, but a sudden gagging with some vague indirect warning,like "no more of that crap" is hardly a proper way to treat a member of high standing..........am i too read bg's mind to decipher what it is he considers 'crap'? cmon ......give me the rules(the same for everyone i presume) ,reverse the gag order, and see how i will continue to respect and obey the rules of this site.Wrong.

I was quite explict and did not use the word crap in either of my warnings to you tonight.

At 11.42pm you said "uh oh , i feel a monologue coming on,......help!!!!! "

In response to that I helped you out at 11.55Pm when I banned you for 1 minute.
You then made a subsequent 7 shouts one of which about Axion Jones was nothing more than meaning you wanted to be the Australian Alex Jones.
It had been made quite clear to you previously to refrain from mentioning *******s or Alex Jones in the shoutbox.
Therefore I again warned you to give it a rest or I would help you out again.

I then pointed out that of the last 53 shouts 39 were yours.
Again at 12:19am I told you to:
"Just give it a rest in the shoutbox going on about conspiracies, Alex Jones, monalogues and any other such dribble "

After this you entered into a discussion with WE which clearly contravened my shout of 12:19am.

Even then I didnt take any action against you except to issue you with a clear cease and desist shout at 12:33am.

At that time I told you:
"Axiom cease and desist or face a ban, no ands ifs or buts
I dont care if someone raises it here in the shoutbox
You just ignore them and tell them to take it up in your threads"

Although you followed it at 12.44am you quite clearly contravened that directive at 12:46am.

Kevin Bonham
20-03-2007, 01:35 AM
i did not transgress agreed upon rules from last night , simple,.........if you can show i have, fine, ...but i know i didnt, and im sure youre starting to realise i didnt,.......dont compound the blunder any further.

Whatever went on last night is irrelevant to the problem tonight. The point is that Bill asked you not to discuss conspiracy theories in the shoutbox, but you continued referring to them.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 01:54 AM
Whatever went on last night is irrelevant to the problem tonight. The point is that Bill asked you not to discuss conspiracy theories in the shoutbox, but you continued referring to them.
no he did not!, and no i didnt refer to them,unless answering WE by tactifully referring him to 30 quotes!, how else was i to answer him?.........so again he a)did not ask me to stop discussing conspiracy theories( he said "that crap")and b)i did not at any time discuss any conspiracy theory, my only oblique reference being "30 quotes" in answer to a direct question.



it should not be too difficult for either bg or yourself to simply reprint here the transgressing dialogue.

Axiom
20-03-2007, 01:57 AM
Wrong.

I was quite explict and did not use the word crap in either of my warnings to you tonight.

At 11.42pm you said "uh oh , i feel a monologue coming on,......help!!!!! "

In response to that I helped you out at 11.55Pm when I banned you for 1 minute.
You then made a subsequent 7 shouts one of which about Axion Jones was nothing more than meaning you wanted to be the Australian Alex Jones.
It had been made quite clear to you previously to refrain from mentioning *******s or Alex Jones in the shoutbox.
Therefore I again warned you to give it a rest or I would help you out again.

I then pointed out that of the last 53 shouts 39 were yours.
Again at 12:19am I told you to:
"Just give it a rest in the shoutbox going on about conspiracies, Alex Jones, monalogues and any other such dribble "

After this you entered into a discussion with WE which clearly contravened my shout of 12:19am.

Even then I didnt take any action against you except to issue you with a clear cease and desist shout at 12:33am.

At that time I told you:
"Axiom cease and desist or face a ban, no ands ifs or buts
I dont care if someone raises it here in the shoutbox
You just ignore them and tell them to take it up in your threads"

Although you followed it at 12.44am you quite clearly contravened that directive at 12:46am.correct up to ,my 12:46 contravening directive.this is simply false, but i welcome your dissection and proof of this.

antichrist
20-03-2007, 08:15 AM
I can't force myself to read all of this, just as can't read all of info wars - but you must admit mods, GG & HD that poor Axiom leaves me for dead in the presistence stakes - he even makes me look a saintly A/C.

At least a lot of BOH was my original stuff. No one else could come up with it or own it.

Axiom, bring in your relos that will save you.

(I just remember I have been warned against for trolling in the FB thread so mods you can kill two birds with one stone - test troll please ignore))