OT: Why was Grimson banned?

[FirstTimer]

Grimson,

100% srs. What is the personal stuff between us. Actually curious.

 

[Novak]

Here's my suggestion:

Stack these slates up like plates and run them 3 cycles through the cryswasher on high/hot. Make sure they come out extra clean, *if* there's any old harbored crusties stuck to the slateplate you're gonna have to break out the Brillo pad and apply some elbow grease. And then let's unstack them and hand them back out.

I have forgiven Grimson for his transgressions towards me. Im not going to KMS, even if he still wants me to. I just want everyone to be better.

 

[HeHateMe]

Here's my suggestion:

Stack these slates up like plates and run them 3 cycles through the cryswasher on high/hot. Make sure they come out extra clean, *if* there's any old harbored crusties stuck to the slateplate you're gonna have to break out the Brillo pad and apply some elbow grease. And then let's unstack them and hand them back out.

I have forgiven Grimson for his transgressions towards me. Im not going to KMS, even if he still wants me to. I just want everyone to be better.

This does seem like something that needs to be clarified. If a poster serves a ban after a warning, do they come back with a clean slate or does another instance of something considered to be in violation of that prior warning result in an instant re-ban, however subjectively it is interpreted, regardless of similar behavior by other posters being deemed acceptable (whether by mods not seeing it, going unreported)? Would context of that instance be taken into consideration? Would unilateral action be acceptable given the prior warning and ban issued?

 

[Aesopian]

So we finally have a mod that will reason with us and actually respond to our issues and we do this to them? I hate y'all

 

[FirstTimer]

This does seem like something that needs to be clarified. If a poster serves a ban after a warning, do they come back with a clean slate or does another instance of something considered to be in violation of that prior warning result in an instant re-ban, however subjectively it is interpreted, regardless of similar behavior by other posters being deemed acceptable (whether by mods not seeing it, going unreported)? Would context of that instance be taken into consideration? Would unilateral action be acceptable given the prior warning and ban issued?

Depends on the issue.

Obviously posting racist/homophobic/over the top stuff will result in pretty much an instant re-ban for a longer length of time. At that point the mods would get together and decide the length and it'd be settled really quickly.

My stance would be if you're banned for say a week after being warned for personal insults, and you come back and slip up again you'd get banned pretty quickly again for a longer period(maybe two weeks to a month?), then a third strike is a perma-ban. It's not a clean slate persay but there wouldn't be zero tolerance after one ban leading to a permaban for the little stuff. Just my opinion on it in regards to the Bears forum.

I'm talking off the top of my head here as the mods discuss the bans. And any time someone has been banned or warned it's talked about in the Staff HQ. Nothing is being done in secret or unilaterally.

 

[HeHateMe]

Depends on the issue.

Obviously posting racist/homophobic/over the top stuff will result in pretty much an instant re-ban for a longer length of time. At that point the mods would get together and decide the length and it'd be settled really quickly.

My stance would be if you're banned for say a week after being warned for personal insults, and you come back and slip up again you'd get banned pretty quickly again for a longer period(maybe two weeks to a month?), then a third strike is a perma-ban. It's not a clean slate persay but there wouldn't be zero tolerance after one ban leading to a permaban for the little stuff. Just my opinion on it in regards to the Bears forum.

I'm talking off the top of my head here as the mods discuss the bans. And any time someone has been banned or warned it's talked about in the Staff HQ. Nothing is being done in secret or unilaterally.

I guess I'm also bringing this up to make it easier on you and the other bears mods. I foresee a lot of posters ramping up reporting posts if they receive a warning for something they see by community standards (i.e. common behaviors) to be accepted behaviors, given that they would want to see anyone participating in the same sort of behavior receive the same treatment. After a bears loss, you could see an incredible increase in reporting activity and now that there seems to be a precedent set, a dramatic increase in warnings/bans for angry drunk people being drunk on the forums...

 

[Aesopian]

Video evidence of all the times Grimson's has been banned.

[video=youtube_share;TGMC1SecAeA]https://youtu.be/TGMC1SecAeA[/video]

 

[FirstTimer]

I guess I'm also bringing this up to make it easier on you and the other bears mods. I foresee a lot of posters ramping up reporting posts if they receive a warning for something they see by community standards (i.e. common behaviors) to be accepted behaviors, given that they would want to see anyone participating in the same sort of behavior receive the same treatment. After a bears loss, you could see an incredible increase in reporting activity and now that there seems to be a precedent set, a dramatic increase in warnings/bans for angry drunk people being drunk on the forums...

I'm not really that worried about it. There were only like 4-5 posters at issue this past Sunday. It's part of the gig. I appreciate it but it's not like this is some difficult job or anything or even when shit went crazy Sunday it took hours to clean up. It was maybe 30-45 minutes worth of stuff. Most people here "get it" and aren't a problem. The problem children tend to weed themselves out pretty quickly.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Depends on the issue.

Obviously posting racist/homophobic/over the top stuff will result in pretty much an instant re-ban for a longer length of time. At that point the mods would get together and decide the length and it'd be settled really quickly.

My stance would be if you're banned for say a week after being warned for personal insults, and you come back and slip up again you'd get banned pretty quickly again for a longer period(maybe two weeks to a month?), then a third strike is a perma-ban. It's not a clean slate persay but there wouldn't be zero tolerance after one ban leading to a permaban for the little stuff. Just my opinion on it in regards to the Bears forum.

I'm talking off the top of my head here as the mods discuss the bans. And any time someone has been banned or warned it's talked about in the Staff HQ. Nothing is being done in secret or unilaterally.

But if the insult is calling someone fat or worse it's two weeks instead of one, right?

 

[FirstTimer]

But if the insult is calling someone fat or worse it's two weeks instead of one, right?

I thought it was permanent?

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

I thought it was permanent?

I cant read arbitrary unwritten rules. So I'm not sure. Haven't been able to get a straight answer from anyone.

 

[FirstTimer]

I cant read arbitrary unwritten rules. So I'm not sure. Haven't been able to get a straight answer from anyone.

You've said your ban by me was two weeks, you've also said permanent. Which was it?

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

You've said your ban by me was two weeks, you've also said permanent. Which was it?

I was banned for two weeks which was overturned the following day with the removal of all Chicago team related forums.

So that's a great question, which is it?

 

[HeHateMe]

You've said your ban by me was two weeks, you've also said permanent. Which was it?

TBF, I think that it was assumed that it would be a permanent ban from the sports forums when you said it was likely to be in perpetuity. Not taking sides here, just being objective.

 

[FirstTimer]

I was banned for two weeks which was overturned the following day with the removal of all Chicago team related forums.

So that's a great question, which is it?

I banned you for two weeks. That was were my hammer ended.

You posted in the Bulls forum at 7:47CST this morning. Pick a story.

 

[FirstTimer]

TBF, I think that it was assumed that it would be a permanent ban from the sports forums when you said it was likely to be in perpetuity. Not taking sides here, just being objective.

I never said that. Shit's getting made up. I never said anything was going to be in perpetuity. LOL. I said I banned him for two weeks. My original ban was him coming back with access to all forums after two weeks. Mods got together, made a different choice.

We're all good with it.

 

[HeHateMe]

I never said that. Shit's getting made up. I never said anything was going to be in perpetuity. LOL. I said I banned him for two weeks. My original ban was him coming back with access to all forums after two weeks. Mods got together, made a different choice.

We're all good with it.

http://www.chicitysports.com/forum/...-quot-in-the-Bears-Forum-Reported-Posts/page4

Sorry, i'm not trying to be disrespectful here, just citing why I made that claim...

 

[FirstTimer]

http://www.chicitysports.com/forum/...-quot-in-the-Bears-Forum-Reported-Posts/page4

Sorry, i'm not trying to be disrespectful here, just citing why I made that claim...

Where did I say anything was in perpetuity?

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

I banned you for two weeks. That was were my hammer ended.

You posted in the Bulls forum at 7:47CST this morning. Pick a story.

What story? That's literally what happened, ask your boss. I just received the other team boards back today with the exception of the Bears Board.

So which is it?

 

[HeHateMe]

Where did I say anything was in perpetuity?

you said it was likely. Sorry if i made it seem like you literally said what I asked in my question to you there, that's why I posted the link to the exchange (can't quote posts because you locked it)