Thanks for the response, Matt.

Again, I apologize for my grumpy demeanor. 'Twas having a bad time and it reflected in my post. It could have been said a little better.. buuut, it wasn't.



In any case... hopefully this will get resolved soon.

AzureStarr said:

co-sign. all the moderation participation on this thread has been wonderful. I definitely understand more about how the moderation on this site works. thanks to all.

CinisterCee said:

The tractor is cute I do think that 9s will be allowed back at some point. As Azure said, many people have been banned and have been allowed to come back. It just happens that way.

JasmineFire said:

I'll echo that.
[Edited 12/3/04 2:59am]

Carrie Lee posted a picture of herself peeing?

How did I miss that one?

TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said:

Yeah,where is EWM? I miss him too.

Just to be fair and balanced I'll say one honestly good thing about 9s: He has the capacity to dream up shit like "edible dominoes" very quickly and in large volumes. Just speaking about creative capacity--that's pretty impressive. Too soft-core for my tastes, but he definitely has the gift. On any board you need your "rock stars" that can do this to encourage people to read and post.

teller said:

Yeah ice sorta has that ability and can build some interesting conversation that gets emotions hopping but he's not really a rock star..... he's more of a punk..... nice to see you actually give props to 9s ..... thought you said you don't care

I didn't look at this thread cuz I thought this would all be resolved but I missed a lot of quaid bull snippings... a lot of energy wasted 9s could have been let back within minutes...

at least gemini13 showed up avoiding the drama and keeping the peace I would hope... but she was snipped too. cmon girl step away from the drama
[Edited 12/3/04 6:54am]

DavidEye said:

I also think that EWM should be allowed back - i enjoyed his posts and the "dialogue" they caused, seriously - and underneath his posts, he seemed like a totally decent guy. I don't want to stray off topic (Bring back 9s!! ) but I can't see why an internet website like this would need to "ban" anyone at all, period. Call me an extreme libertarian, but i'm kinda in favour of allowing disagreement, even if it becomes heated. If people say outrageous things, they'll usually get slapped back pretty fucking firm and quickly by others.

PEJ said:

Don't get me wrong--I still think he's a total wanker.

I have a theory that the sooner y'all relax and move on, the easier it will be for Ben to allow him back without it looking as though he's back just because people threw a screaming fit. If you've got any sense at all, you can see why the powers that be wouldn't want to respond to that kind of pressure.

Maybe we should change the titles from "moderators" to "babysitters", I swear.

TheFrog said:

Agree

tackam said:

I guess your theories here would probably be the closest thing to facts..... but make no mistake you know without us pathetic fools here throwing screaming fits you and the few that would be left would get bored of each other quick.. I could have sworn I read you said you were a 2the9s fan .... what'd you expect us to say , nothing.. it's been a month already and this is in the RIGHT FORUM, correct..?

tackam said:

Haven't you ever heard of speaking up for what you feel is right?

First amendment rights. Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the ORG for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief.

That is what each and all of us is doing..

We truly thank Matt for being a decent person about this..





.
[Edited 12/3/04 11:13am]

sag10 said:

Sooner or later, the moderators could permanently ban any one of us. There is absolutely no consistency to any of their decisions.

2the9's shouldn't have been banned.

...and why was a link to a video of somebody being decapitated allowed to stay up, under the banner of "free speech" but we can't talk about the QuaidBowl incident?

Someone asked me to post this...

Lleena said:

It was me but it wasn't about this thread Lleena

BinaryJustin said:

interesting question..create another thread for us to discuss...if you want....

sosgemini said:

:tinhat:

sosgemini said:

No thanks, it was a rhetorical question. I don't really expect, nor want an answer.

.
[Edited 12/3/04 15:18pm]

BinaryJustin said:

:takesofftinhat:





.
[Edited 12/3/04 15:05pm]

doctormcmeekle said:

That cracked me up, maybe I'm easily amused tonight

PEJ said:

"Few that would be left". . .you imply that throwing screaming fits gets results. In my years here, I have not known that to be the case.

I AM a fan. I think it's fine to say what you think. But what are you more interested in, moving on (including getting to the point where 9s is back), or complaining about it? I think those are conflicting goals. I think 9s would be back by now if people had not overreacted like they did.

Sure, right forum, clearly. Not saying you're breaking rules (or, at least not any more than this whole thread does), just saying I think it's counterproductive.

sag10 said:

I'm sitting here honestly trying to figure out to what degree you are kidding here.

In case you're serious: The. Org. Ain't. A. Democracy. It's a theocracy, Ben is god, and the mods are his earthly representatives. "Ain't no room to disagree. . ."

I respect the mods leaving this thread in place, but the reality is, IMHO, it's counterproductive.

Lleena said:

Someone ELSE asked me to post this...



Idiot.

PEJ said:

I agree totally. It IS the passionate people that make this site entertaining and worth coming here. We have lost too many already imho.

I hope that both 2the9s and EWM are allowed to come back. I may not agree with much that EWM says but I think he adds something to the place too.

bkw said:

so let me ask this..at which point do we excuse people being rude and treating others rudely and creating an uninviting enviroment for other visitors of this site because of that passion? help us better understand when the line has been crossed....


[that last statement is not pointed at any orger currently here or previously banned..but i would really like you all to think about that question..maybe i will create a thread on the subject in a couple days..-sos]
[Edited 12/3/04 20:57pm]

sosgemini said:

I said the passionate people not the lunatics!

It is hard to answer that question without specifics about behavior. It all depends on the nature of that passion, if it is the rampantly homophobic, sexist or racist then I think that it is easy to draw the line after appropriate warnings. You are unlikely to get too many arguments on those ones.

I guess you are referring to peole not doing what they are told and not always obeying the rules? Well, fragrant abuse of the rules obviously requires some action. To be honest, most of the time you guys do a pretty good job of this. It is these people, who occaisonly cross the line but not in an offensive way, that should not be permenantly banned inho. A week ban here and there usually keeps them in check or other action such as a removal of other priveledges for a limited period.

I might also add that i dont think that orgers should be banned just because they require some effort from moderators. The passionate people will always require more moderation than others. I think it is a cop out to ban someone just because they take a bit of effort.....
[Edited 12/3/04 21:28pm]