yes, i'm sure this'll work

I'm sorry, but looking over his moderation history, there's more than enough instances to warrant a permanent ban. 2the9s has already been given temporary bans in the past, then allowed back. I don't see why we need to drag this out any more.

Tom said:

Other than the fact that it appears that a large amount of people of this site, or should I say community, do not agree. I understand that the moderators decision is final but with a massive amount of people that do not support a ban surely in the interests of the community there is a way to get over this

Tom said:

Perhaps because quite a few people miss him and don't even know why he was banned, and for their benefit I believe it was because he wished to discuss forum/org rules and regulations relating to his behaviour, on a thread rather than following the suggested route of discussing with the mod via orgnote. I didn't see said thread, this is what I remember from another thread discussing his banning.
As far as his past behaviour is concerned, so what? It hardly even needs to be mentioned that other 'permanently banned' orgers have subsequently been allowed back, and have been allowed to do so hiding behind a different name so nobody would recognise them. I don't see the hate for 9's on here, all I see is a number of people who miss him and would gladly have him back, myself included.

Having said all that, I know rules is rules, and we're all supposed to abide by them.

I've often heard it said on here words to the effect of "get over it, it's just a website". That should apply to the mods and their bans too. He fucked up, he was banned, he's served his time. It's quite clear that he is missed, so why not let him back? If he fucks up again banning him again is only a click away, right?

Personally, I don't believe there should be any such thing as a permanent ban, particularly as it seems to be possible to get around that anyway. I believe everyone on here, including the moaners, the haters, the hated, the banned, the cruel and insane, all have their place on here and make it what it is.

Tom said:

Tom

I wasn't around for most of this year and so don't know why he was banned. From what I read on another thread, it seems that it was basically a clash between Matt and 2the9's.

I don't know whether it's policy for Moderators to comment on bannings (I assume not, as it wasn't done in the past) but the minute that Matt asked for the discussion to take place in private, by Orgnote, it made Matt weaker imo ... the discussion (and reason for the banning) became less visible and the conclusion was therefore reached that 2the9s was banned unfairly. I think that is why people are asking for the decision to be reversed. Had we all been able to understand the reason for the banning, then I'm not sure this issue would've been discussed in the way it has been.

Now, I'm not asking for Matt or any other moderator to clarify things if they don't want to ... but from the posts I've seen on the subject (and I'm totally impartial on this ... I liked 2the9's but was never any great friend of his) it does seem like the ban was placed on him because of a clash of characters rather than anything he said on any subject being discussed here being wrong or offensive. Like I said, I don't know the facts ... but I thought you all might be interested in my comments, given that I have no particular axe to grind one way or the other.

AsylumUtopia said:

... seems we were typing along similar lines at the same time Asylum ... I agree with everything you said.

Reincarnate said:

Thats a good summary of the sentiment that appears to exist over his banning. I don't blame people for coming to that conclusion. However, we keep notes on each user, and their previous moderation history. I think any one of us other moderators could have just as easily decided to do the same thing. When I come across a flame by someone (for examlple), of course I'm gonna glance over the history of that person and see if they have a habbit of doing this. And if this turns out to be one of many repeat problems, then I would certainly consider banning them temporarily if not permanently.

I apologize for earlier posts where I'm basically saying "get over it". I didn't mean that in a malicious or snubbing way, I was just making light of all the fiasco thats been brewing over this.
[Edited 11/26/04 8:58am]

this is silly. just bring him back.

Tom said:

so in a nut shell are you saying that this is a permanent ban?

PEJ said:

Yes

9s is banned?

good lord, what did i miss?

Tom said:

Nothing I say as of this post will matter to you or the rest of the mods or Ben because it seems you have all made a unanimous decision but I wish you would re think this one out! Banning somebody like the otter was necessary and after he was banned many times and let back on he proved he couldn't control his behavior making it even obvious to the moderator back then that he truely does not deserve to come back here. He was malicious and rude and baiting was his main fortay that's a given, but if 2the9s is being banned for good because you think he is nuisance on the same level as the otter then I think the truth will speak for itself with in time. 2the9's does not bait people nor critisize peolpe unless it is a legitamite reason. He doesn't start threads to anger people but instead he starts threads that put a smile on a lot of faces including mine. He means well Tom and if that isn't acceptable I think the majority of the solid good hearted people that frequent this site will be disappointed that he is not allowed back. Is it worth banning him for good because he truely does not deserve it.


What comes around goes around and if you think this is the answer to what the org needs to do to quiet this place down then you guys are on the right track!

Tom said:

Has 2the9s been informed?

Dont you think it would have been common courtesy to inform him before this decision was posted for public consumption?

What is banning him permanently going to achieve? A permanent ban is the last resort for a troublesome Orger, 2the9s has been moderated in the past, yes, but the majority of his contribution to the Org was fun, friendly light hearted, I dont need to go on about why he is popular, because we all know he has contributed to this community positively for a very long time.


[Edited 11/26/04 15:44pm]
[Edited 11/26/04 15:48pm]

2the9s permanently banned?

I would appreciate an explanation of why he was permanantly banned. It's half out anyway. People, myself included, are filling in the gaps, perhaps incorrectly. I think it would be to all our benefit if you could explain the rationale behind the ban so others do not find themselves in a similar position.

If there's good reason for it, I see no reason not to share. After all, we are trying to improve the site, aren't we?

Lleena said:

My thoughts exactly. This seems to be getting more and more unreasonable, to the point of bigotry against the Org.er in question.



F.A.O. Tom

I understand and appreciate that Ben is a very busy guy (with work and the new born) and I also understand that he has trustingly placed certain responsibilities onto the Mods to undertake what is a difficult job, but can a request be made for him to personally review the particulsars of this case? Or has the decision of a "permanent ban" come from the main man himself?

Thanks.

i can't believe this.

senik said:

Before this gets out of hand, and to answer the above 3 replies...

It's already common knowlegde on here of 2the9's banning. There has been numerous posts, not to mention this thread, as well as the orgnotes I've received.

My reply of "yes" wasn't meant to be harsh, I started to type out a longer reply, then I felt like I was rambling on, being as a simple question was asked, so I just erased it all and typed "yes"

Anytime someone is banned, or whatever, they are orgnoted about it. Anyone is welcome to contact the moderator directly, and explain why they disagree with it. And if its not resolved there, ask Ben about it.

doctormcmeekle said:

Tom ... thanks for commenting on my earlier post - I appreciate the points you're making. I have to say, however, that I still don't see what 2the9's did wrong in this instance.

Tom said:

It's already out of hand.....

But my question is why?

Tom said:

how does one get an orgnote if they are banned Tom?

Poor Tom's taking the flack for all of this ... where's Matt?

not fair, not fair at all.....

Tom said:

tom, i hope im not overstepping here but I do want to clarify something...when someone is banned they recieve an orgnote (that they "do" recieve) explaining the nature of the ban..its signed by the moderator who took the action and references an email to ben if they feel the banning was unjust...

at this point the only two people who can unban 9's right now are matt (the moderator who took the action) or ben (well, you get that)...

also, we moderators all have our own opinions on this (and all other) matters and all have an oppurtunity to voice our view...some do, others dont....and while we all support the decision that was made please dont think that all moderators support (or condone...or even have an opinion at all on) that decision...

so, yes the ban is permenant but 9's (like anyone else) still has the chance to appeal to the moderator who took action (or ben).

PEJ said:

my mistake. Orgnotes are sent for most everything we do, like featuring threads, snipping flames, etc. The email address that is set up for that org account, would likely recieve the notification of being banned.

one final thing..

moderators does not have an obligation to communicate with the bannie.....if thats the route they wish to take then the case should be appealed directly to ben.

and maybe the rules of banning need to be posted so that people would understand the proper course and/or action to take..

would that help matters folks?

you got rid of the negatives now bring back the positives plain and simple!!!




is there at least one moderator that appreciates and understands what a great person 2the9s is and how he contributes to this site? it seems some personal opinions are ruining the good time many of us have had here on the org! Lets all smile and make things better!

Reincarnate said:

That puts me in a weird spot, lol, I can't start cutting and pasting details from someone's moderator notes on here. That's way out of line. If the person that banned him or Ben himself, decide to go into more detail about it, that's really up to them.

This is crazy. I think the moderators should follow the rules.

I think that, for the most part, you all do a fine job, however, I will say that I miss the days of Ian moderating. Ian was usually consistent in his deleting posts, locking threads and deactivation. Basically, he gave a "time out" to us little orgers before we were allowed back. (Well, except for me, I don't even know if I should be allowed back since I was banned indefinitely...)

Since I've returned, lame-assed threads have been locked or removed, while other lame-assed threads, of similar content, have remained. It's almost like you can't have an opinion here anymore otherwise your comment will be snipped, deleted, the thread will be locked or you'll be banned. You can't disagree with someone here anymore unless it's all flowers and roses and fucking little smiley faces at the end of your post to soften your point. How is it that people can blatantly bait others and their threads remain, while others will voice their opinions in return they are "scolded" or banned.

Fuck, CarrieLee can't even post a picture of herself peeing without it being removed?! I didn't see said picture, but JEEEESUUUUS people. Apparently it had a star over the "important" parts. How is posting that any different than many of the other images that have remained?! Each and every one of us pee. So, she posted an image of herself doing it. Should she have posted a link instead? And, if it wasn't "safe for work", then perhaps the moderator that decided to delete her post should have NOTED her and asked her to remove the image and link to it instead, and put "NSFW" in the subject of her thread. Ace can post an image of his ass (sorry Ace, nice ass by the way... and I see nothing wrong with you posting it), but CarrieLee's is removed, yet his image remains. How is that consistent with the rules that you moderators put into place? If you say that there is NO NUDITY, then for fucks sake, be consistent in your actions of all images. I posted a picture of Tara Reid's boobs and it wasn't deleted, snipped, nor did I receive an orgnote about it. The whole, "Us moderators don't know unless you use that "report to moderator" button is a bunch of crap. Moderators post on threads that have nudity and do nothing about them the majority of the time!

As far as 9s... complete trouble that guy is. He creates humorous posts and voices his opinion about something. He argued with a moderator in the open. He's had strikes against him in the past. Well, fuck. Dora and myself have had MANY strikes against us in the past few years that we've posted on here, yet we're both allowed to post. She's been banned and I have, too... yet, here we both are. I didn't see the thread, I haven't spoken to 9s about it, I've only read what's been on the threads here, but, my god... come on, Matt. I think you're a great guy, but it really appears as though you jumped too quickly because you didn't like what was being said and, hey, you're a mod, so... banned you are 9s.

Moderators aren't supposed to talk about any of this in public, or so it's been said, yet, many of us, myself included, have heard of 9s and his bannishment from the org (that's silly), from YOU ALL. You're giving us bits and pieces and here we all are trying to put the puzzle together.

Personally, I think you all should get together and re-read your rules and follow them. Be consistent or revise the rules. Don't act upon things according to your feelings about this orger or that. It's a fucked up way of doing things.

I think that IceNine, Aaron, whomever else was a "trouble maker" should be able to return. It's a website. Yes, there are real feelings here as you get to know people on a more intimate level, through converstaions and meeting, but why not give people a "time out", like used to be the idea, and after they've simmered down, give them another shot? To ban someone for good is just crazy to me. People are going to be who they are and their personality is going to come through on a website in their words and we have to deal with them. We can't just ban people from everyday life, so why should we here? We're not all going to agree or get along, but that's what makes things interesting in life. Lately, it seems that if we're not all on one level here, all peaches and cream, then we don't belong. People are fucking assholes and people are too flowery and people are too out there... you can't change that. It's silly to want to and why would you want to? The org would be (and is becoming) a very boring place without the mix of people here.

Debates can be heated, tempers can flair, people may even use the "report to moderator" feature... but, what's so wrong with a time out? It worked in the past... I dunno.

I guess, and I know this is posted on the wrong thead... it should be posted on the thread regarding moderation, but, how many strikes are we allowed against us until we are banned for good? Does the severity of the act to "gain" a strike count as something or is it strictly a "three strikes and your out" game? Perhaps it would be beneficial to us orgers to know on a month to month basis where we stand in our past behaviour? I mean.. how are we to know how many strikes are against us (either issued by a mod or issued by the "report to moderator feature) if we're not told how many we have and how many it takes to result in a permanent ban. Many of us have been on Prince.org for many years. You say that a lot of 9s' past history here was taken into play in his being banned. The longer you're on here, and being an active member of this "community" the more history you're going to have here. Does the slate ever get wiped clean? Do we get a fresh slate each year or do they all just add up until we hit that number that results in our being banned?

question...

are heels firmly dug in? i don't imagine anyone wants to look like they will back down now...

but i think it is clear that he is missed and people on here feel that he should be allowed back