View Full Version : Reply to questions from Axiom

Kevin Bonham
18-12-2008, 08:18 PM
Currently suspended user Axiom has posted some questions elsewhere that I tentatively agreed to answer/debunk. I now do so:

Q.1 Who was my complainant ?

Based on comments from the other place, this question is based on the completely false assumption that specific bans applied to Axiom were the result of a complaint by a specific member. They were not - although of course we take into account the various comments both for and against that have been made by various users on the board and in the shoutbox in the past.

Q.2 Why can't i raise the following topics in the sb, like - microchips,aspartame ,eugenics,cfr,bilderberg group, fake corp media news,chemtrails , false flags, gm foods, one world govt agenda etc ?

There is a blanket ban on Axiom discussing conspiracy theory type topics (which covers most of the previous but not necessarily all, depending on context) in the shoutbox for two reasons:

(i) Axiom's persistent soliloquising about them was often annoying to several members and interfered with the shoutbox's goal to provide a place for conversations. He is not the only user who posts monologues in the shoutbox but he is the only one who posts frequent monologues/rants about contentious political subjects, which is different to someone who just monologues with pleasantries or fluff.

(ii) quite often the political stridency/extremity of Axiom's offerings is inappropriate for the shoutbox. It is better that discussion of these sorts of topics be confined to the politics section in non-chess, especially as it isn't possible to do justice to them in the shoutbox anyway.

Q.3 Why cannot i have the same freedom of speech as others ?

Axiom is a unique case (as far as this forum goes) who creates unique moderation issues. He is the only one here who has a very long track record of cramming the shoutbox with contentious topics of discussion that (a) are better suited to the non-chess section and (b) are usually of no active interest to any other poster. He also has very long track records of violating certain rules (see below), of starting too many threads of overlapping content and no interest to other posters, of posting re his political obsessions on threads only he thinks they are relevant to, and of posting long copy-and-pastes that usually breach copyright.

Despite this he is not generally hostile and defamatory to other posters a la firegoat, Sweeney, Arrogant-One etc so we would prefer to avoid banning him permanently, but there is a clear case for special treatment given the above record and if he is going to refuse to accept that, then when he defies it we will suspend him. Indeed, if we really treated him exactly the same way as anyone else we would have banned him permanently long ago.

Axiom has said that if the special conditions on him are lifted he will cease soapboxing in this manner but I would prefer to see that he is capable of behaving himself in the shoutbox even without discussing these sorts of topics first.

(and dont bother answering with "well you keep breaking the rules" as that has already been dealt with and obsolete as i call for the rules to be scrapped as irrational,inconsistent and pejorative.)

Axiom's habit of breaking the rules certainly doesn't help his situation any. In particular:

(i) He frequently defies moderation directives even though it has been made clear that what he should do in these cases is to object to the directive in the feedback section and see if he can convince us to change it, but not violate it.

(ii) He frequently signs up hydra accounts and posts using them while banned.

His view that the way he is moderated is unfair does not justify such actions and furthermore they erode any sympathy he might have had from me.

Q.4 Why cant i mention the popular *** in the sb ?

That one I can't answer as that restriction was placed by Bill, but it probably has a lot to do with the *** not actually existing and Axiom's reluctance to acknowledge this fact.

I can say that some posts complaining about the *** being passed off as fact appeared from posters of Russian background at certain times and for these reasons it is best that the *** is clearly indicated as fiction (as we are now doing in the headings of *** threads.)

Kevin Bonham
19-12-2008, 03:31 PM
Axiom re-asks Q1:

Q.1 Who were the complainant(s) leading to my initial bans ?
Could you please name them ?

Axiom's first bans were a one week suspension from the shoutbox on 20-03-2007 and a full ban on 17-04-2007 both for ignoring moderation warnings. These both related to discussing conspiracy theories in the shoutbox.

The next was on on 17-08-2007 for repeatedly calling another poster's comment a lie despite explanations of why this wasn't permitted.

None of these bans were in response to a specific complaint but all were actions taken in response to breaches of moderator directions (and in the third case, a breach of site rules.)

As for the conspiracy-theory ban that Axiom was first banned for defying, this resulted from a decision by the mods that Axiom had been dominating the shoutbox with aggro political stuff and links to political websites too much. We took into account that other posters were clearly sick of it too and saying so in the shoutbox, but I did not receive any formalised PM complaints/emails leading up to our decision. Bill received some; we will not name the complainants as the complaints were made in confidence. We also have not kept any list of which posters had or had not said they had had enough but it was clear to us at the time that many posters had had a gutful of the soapboxing and monologues.

19-12-2008, 03:52 PM
yes it would be quite nice if my incorrectly spelt handle and real name were removed from AO's presumption of the right to answer of behalf of the mods here in his reply over there

a bit rich given he apparently wanted references to his real name here removed or starred because people researching his CV when he applied for positions were finding such references thus compromising such applications

if the original complainant wishes to work out how many informal complaints were made via the shoutbox or bulletin board proper then perhaps the said complainant might wish to behave better get unbanned and do a lot of trawling over the holiday period

or else get that stupid f/s/tool carrier pigeon to do the work for him