I guess this is my point. The problem is twofold. One, John is insulting. Two, the person being insulted gets so offended. If someone thinks he's such an ass-and there are those that do-why let him get to you? If you think he's a bully, then just ignore him entirely.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm mad at John because he's the reason I bought all six Dune books and have only had time to read the first.
Posts: 1735 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
John posted Ced's picture against his will in a clear attempt to hurt him in some way. That's not just a matter of being insulting - it's a privacy violation. You can't not ban someone who does that - you just can't. That might even be something they could get sued over.
To compound things, John has made a habit of insulting people in discussions, sometimes fostering a tone that might make people (especially newbies who don't know him) want to leave. That cannot have worked in his favor - it's not going to convince the moderators to give him a special exception.
So, in defense of the moderators, I think this makes complete sense now that I remember he posted that picture. I'm perplexed about why they didn't warn him first, but if they are having trouble emailing him, that might make sense. But... maybe they will give him a second chance, if he promises to be nicer.
posted
Well I'm going to have to chime in on behalf of John because I consider him a friend.
I missed all this picture stuff so I've got no clue there. I may have seen it years ago but I don't remember there being any text, so my memory is probably skewed.
John's a great guy and an asset to Hatrack. I have no opinion on the decision to ban him because I have no idea what the facts or accusations are, but if I have to sign up on GrenMe to see John anymore, I might have to add a new bookmark to my browser.
I only had one personal dealing with Ced back in the day and from that experience I can tell you that he really was quite the liar but I wouldn't be able to tell you which things he lies about, especially now. Plus, I don't really care.
The Lalo/Kat/Pooka thing is barely worth comment, really, except maybe to point out that Lalo and Pooka seem to get along fine without katharina stepping in to play mini-mod. Lalo was upset about Leto's banning, he complained, Pooka tried to rationalize it, then Lalo tried to rebut that rationalization because he feels the banning is too harsh or unwarranted. He adds a line "I suggest you read up on it" to cap off his legal jargon... yeah, that's offensive if you have a really sensitive stomach. It's not even a GOOD insult. It's just a line that I see on Hatrack once every three threads.
So for Kat to jump right in and say "I think you get away with this crap because you're so young" was, IMO, the out of place insult. It seemed overreactive, especially since pooka and Lalo weren't really even fighting.
What followed was Lalo trying to get kat to justify how condescending she was to HIM by showing exactly how he deserved it, and she, realizing that she had overreacted a tad, did not try to justify it and chose rather to continue making judgments and things just got uglier.
...
Leto has earned the name Jatraquero as much as any of us.
Posts: 4350 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you, JK. That was how I saw it. edit to add: And to Lalo I apologize about saying you have low self esteem. I obviously can't know any such thing.
posted
Hatrack is not like being in the Card's living room. It's like being in the living room of your house that you built on land donated by the Cards. Beyond Geoff, the Cards have nothing to do with the content or character of this side of the forum.
Private property does not mean that a person can be rude and not suffer the consequences of their actions. If the mod or the Cards or whoever want to just ban John and not offer a reason why, that's fine, they can do that, but I think they should know that I think this is incredibly rude and disrespectful to the forum.
I can't believe the level of spinelessness I've seen on this thread. Some of you who have called John friend have basically just rolled over and not said anything about his banning or have told other people to, in effect, just suck it up because this forum is 'private property'. I don't call John a friend, but I do think that the principle of politeness and respect for other people's feelings is worth standing up for. I think saying 'If you don't like it, just leave.' is so jaw droppingly, incredibly rude and disrespectful to how people feel, it boggles my mind that people are saying it without comment from other people.
To be clear, I'm not arguing against the banning. I am saying that I think a fundamental change needs to be made in how bannings are instituted where everyone is clear about why they occured. This should be done not because this forum is a democracy, but out of respect for the feelings of the posters on this forum.
quote:Funny how something hardly worth commenting on makes up half your post...
Unfortunately I had to give my contextual impression of the events in order to justify my opinion. I apologize for the resulting length of the post. Please don't report me to the mods.
Posts: 4350 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
I disagree. It is like being in their living room, but they are usually not present. They peek in every now and then, or when they hear an out cry from the room.
You say
quote:Hatrack is not like being in the Card's living room. It's like being in the living room of your house that you built on land donated by the Cards. Beyond Geoff, the Cards have nothing to do with the content or character of this side of the forum.
Just becuase they, the mod or the Cards, do not post that much does not mean that they have nothing to do with the content. The articles Card writes are fuel for discussions. His books are topics, maybe more on the other side then here, but they still exist on this side.
And the big one, THEY PICK UP THE TAB.
You want to know why they don't explain it? Becuase if they did, everyone who did not agree with them would argue with them. Some people argue that they can not make decisions becuase they are not involved. Others would argue that they should not be involved. They can not win. They can only do what they feel is for the best.
posted
I'm more inclined to believe that there was no explanation because it occured at like 1 in the morning (I'm guessing from the time stamps on this thread).
I'd imagine moderator comment is forthcoming and we're just a little too impatient. They may not even have made a final decision on the matter.
Posts: 4350 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
Until and unless he does, I will see him at GreNME.
Posting the picture of Ced repeatedly was a violation of the TOS.
The Card's pick up the tab, and this place is their property. I don't think they owe me an explanation, and in any case, I think the reasoning in this case is pretty clear. If it were at GreNME, I know that John feels no compunction about taking administrative action, and there's no reason he should.
If the moderators change their mind, or if John is later allowed to return and chooses to do so, it will make me happy.
I am neither spineless nor a bad friend. I simply don't agree with you, Storm.
-o-
Regarding Lalo, JK summed up my feelings pretty well.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also don't feel that we are "owed" an explanation of what happened, but I do think that, unless the information involved was too private to share, it would be courteous of them to provide one.
Posts: 4350 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It wasn't because of pooka only. Lalo does get away with an incredible amount of crap. So does pooka, come to think of it. I'm not defending you because you're you. Lalo's incredibly rude and even his defenders excuse it away as just being part of his posting style.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kat, this is more like the time where you got all huffy in Belle's queen-of-the-world thread; you choose to be insulted all the time. And even if you can't see it that way, you should at least be able to tell that being a hall-monitor for Lalo's "posting style" is not exactly your charge.
Posts: 4350 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
John Keats, you have your own grudge and agenda to work out. Take it to e-mail.
---
I agree. It's not. But except for a small, select few, his friends let him run around peeing on the carpet. It's NOT my place to tell him when he's being rude. Whose is it then? Will you do it? You're doing him any favors in letting it slide.
posted
I wasn't going to bring up your posting style, kat, but you edit stuff a lot after other people have replied and don't give details. I also don't believe in emailing folks on the side. It just raises tensions. I also don't have AIM. I do get emails from folks from time to time and none of them have been heavy, so I'm not complaining to anyone who has emailed me. I just think that if you can't say something in the view of everyone, it shouldn't be said.
Edit to add: Ha! I totally wrote this before you wrote that.
posted
kat, I'm grateful you tried to defend me but I got dogpiled because of it. If we are in the Card's living room, I don't believe in going to the girls room to chat. (what I would consider email). I consider you a friend, but that means if you're wrong I don't praise you anyway in order to preserve my "coalition". So tell me, here, what bothers you so much.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll tell you what bothers me: after all this time, Lalo, Caleb, and kat STILL can't get over their childish feud.
It's silly, guys. Drop it. Every single time you pull each other's hair, I lose a little respect for you.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have you read the whole thread? Now T was a misunderstanding. He thought I had seen the picture and was just baiting Lalo. But I hadn't. But if 3 people not praising you is a dogpile, I've been dogpiled.
So why do you think I get away with a lot?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: For my own personal reasons, almost none of which have to do with John, I support Kristine and Kathryn.
ok, m2, stop bragging or i'm telling.
While I'm certain the vast majority don't care what I think, I continue to think none the less. Having been banned once myself, my heart goes out to anyone who's been greeted with that screen of unwelcome when they come here to see what all their friends are up to. At least I knew what I did. I hope the mods will clarify that to John. I also hope this isn't permanent.
posted
Kasie, the mods cancel log-ins for the account. If they then notice a new account logging in from a similar IP, they generally ban IT, too.
And, yes, this is not impossible to get around. But it would be very silly to do. (Luckily, Hatrack hasn't had too many people -- besides Kevin -- who've been that silly.)
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Pfft. Pansies aren't even IN the animal kingdom, much less the same species as dogs, kat. Jon Boy would so totally give you a swirlie for such a mixing of metaphors. Unless you were talking about this sort of thing.
--
I like John, he's one of the few Hatrackers I converse with over AIM with any frequency (like once every couple of months). Despite that, in fact, because of that, I know that he'll accept this and move on, if he must. He doesn't need any outside defense, as anyone who has read a post of his knows. I think the photo would have gotten any of us banned, and while I'd run a forum a bit differently, in general, the ground rules, especially to us oldbies, are pretty clear for this forum and have been for quite a while.
posted
Um... Tom... not sure how I qualify as having pulled anyone's hair here. I'm just trying to help people settle down. Lalo is often abrasive and kat is often oversensitive. Is that not obvious here?
Just because katharina says I have a grudge and an agenda doesn't make it true. And of course I'm happy to enjoy as much respect as you are willing to afford me, Tom.
Posts: 4350 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I'm just trying to help people settle down. Lalo is often abrasive and kat is often oversensitive. Is that not obvious here?"
No, not really. My gut feeling, Caleb, is that you wouldn't've posted at all if someone other than kat had criticized Eddie -- if, say, Dag or somebody had done so.
I believe that you were sincerely wanting to smooth things over, but I think your history with kat and Eddie makes the three of you especially sensitive to the things each of you says to the other.
I'd like to propose a moratorium, therefore, on any of you defending OR criticizing the other ones. There are PLENTY of people on Hatrack who'll be happy to fill in those roles when it's really necessary; you won't need to worry that your concerns won't be addressed. And I think it'd go a long way towards eliminating potential furballs.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good grief, people. I got on hatrack, opened this thread and the first thing I thought was "Oh my gosh, it's World War Three".
Can't you guys just apologise for offending each other and get over it?
(And personally I think that if the mods made a descision, it needs to be followed. Everyone DID have to sign an agreement when they joined this forum.)
Posts: 4174 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
You know, I may not have said anything if anyone else had criticized Eddie. But then if it had been anyone else it wouldn't have gone on for three pages of ugliness and I wouldn't have felt obligated to offer some perspective.
Seriously, you mischaracterize how respectful I've been to kat since coming back to Hatrack. If you haven't noticed I keep my head high above all this cyber-drama.
As for your moratorium, I think it's better to just assume that adults can behave like adults when it is necessary and tailor our expectations with that in mind.
posted
Apologies, but I didn't accuse you of making rude or ugly comments. "Three pages of ugliness" was my description of the bickering among all parties involved, not a judgment on you. I didn't mean it to seem that way either.
Posts: 4350 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
I think that's the source of some of the outrage. I've heard no defending of the actual picture that prompted it, but the general outrage seems to come from a feeling that the mods picked Ced over John.
posted
I was there with Stargate. He said it's no big deal, he has time to work on his own site now. Hey guys, there's always GreNME. The internet is a big, big place.
Posts: 377 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Having been banned once myself, my heart goes out to anyone who's been greeted with that screen of unwelcome when they come here to see what all their friends are up to.
You've been banned, too. I am sitting at the fun table.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
