Banning Clarification

Rules 1 and 2 deal with age of consent and the P-word.

Rule 3 deals with the very murky - almost undefinable concept of internet Fair Use - (heard any sampled music lately?)

Rule 4 seems to be the murky catch all dealing with posting issues of privacy. Certainly 'outing' an otherwise private poster is protected. When this rule is stretched to cover any discussion or scrutiny of information freely loosed by an individual of a private nature into this place? If it is self published, whatever it might be, it is no longer private! This goes to being responsible to one's self.

Rule 5 deals with threats of harm - rather clear.

Rule 6, 7 and 8 deal with promotions/advertising to off site enterprises

Rule 9 deals with specific "disruptive behavior" - (bump any threads lately, Roryn?)

Rule 10 and 11 deal with submissions of stories and audio in the forums.

Rule 12 is procedural - post in the proper forum. THE GB is the catchall for "everything else"

Rule 13 goes to YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES - YOU ARE WHAT YOU POST.

So?

Many of the recent BANNINGS are in violation of none of these. And in fact, seem to go against what specifically these RULES say the ADMINS will not do!
 
AJ got banhammered for having a bad morning where he referred to multiple people (including me) as P-words despite multiple warnings.

These guys really should take their meds.


OK, I might have missed that one.

I don't know why Laurel put in a rule against calling someone a Paraguayan, but I try to respect it.
 
AJ got banhammered for having a bad morning where he referred to multiple people (including me) as P-words despite multiple warnings.

These guys really should take their meds.

Must have been one of his vodka for breakfast days.
 
AJ got banhammered for having a bad morning where he referred to multiple people (including me) as P-words despite multiple warnings.

These guys really should take their meds.
Speaking of which.
Your attack alt 4estTrump was banned for breaking the rules in dominatrixjanes' Transgenders thread.
 
The "right to repost someone's old avs" could get problematic.

What is to prevent someone of low moral character (*coughConager*cough) from posting someone's picture he found somewhere on the internet and then claiming "oh noe, so and so used that as an avatar back in 2006! Everybody knows that!" It then becomes a he-said-she-said shitfest, and the low moral character numpty wallows in the attention.

Another scenario: those occasional "show us your chest/tits/nips/dick/balls/earlobes" threads where someone flashes their naughty bits for a good 5 minutes and a splendid time is had by all fortunate enough to view them (and 3 days of angst by the "Dammit I missed it!" crew). Does someone who was quick enough to right-click-save the pic then have the "right" to repost it as they see fit?

YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU POST. It's in the FUCKING RULES!

Right Clicks.... Hahahaha! Toothpaste and squeezed tubes! Why someone posts whatever they post - whether they edit it later or not - it is no longer private. Out is Out.
 
YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU POST. It's in the FUCKING RULES!

Right Clicks.... Hahahaha! Toothpaste and squeezed tubes! Why someone posts whatever they post - whether they edit it later or not - it is no longer private. Out is Out.

Creepy cleaver rationalizations.:rolleyes:
 
Was 4est banned for suggesting suicide? I've done that tons of times. I used to follow Poppy round with a noose in the good ole days. This is what I mean by changes. Now I'm boring myself, fuck me. I'll go find some cockpasta gifs.

If he was banned for that, then I'm fucked. :(
 
OK, I might have missed that one.

I don't know why Laurel put in a rule against calling someone a Paraguayan, but I try to respect it.

That was 100% on Ishmael.

He got it in his head that anyone who disagreed with him was a Paraguayan, and routinely trotted it out in his responses to his political detractors.

It was trite and it was tiresome, but I guess enough people took issue with it that management decided to crack down.
 
REPORTED - Reason: Threatened

Bannings were a biggie at one point.
You invest emotionally in this forum then - poof!

But now they are no longer that important as I see it, because Laurel is allowing people to come back. They're simply entertaining drama.

The only one who Laurel seems to have had it for lately, was Busy. I guess he'll just have to tone down some of his trademark comments.
 
Bannings were a biggie at one point.
You invest emotionally in this forum then - poof!

But now they are no longer that important as I see it, because Laurel is allowing people to come back. They're simply entertaining drama.

The only one who Laurel seems to have had it for lately, was Busy. I guess he'll just have to tone down some of his trademark comments.

Shut up, Beco!
 
The most intriguing part for me is that the pattern of bannings has changed.

Is there a different forum admin. who deals with sorting through the litany of GB complaints? (I hardly believe that Laurel could juggle such a monumental task by herself + her other roles).

Or have butters and Spidey lost their mojo?
 
Back
Top