Don't like to see members being banned without reason given by the banner

[David G]

MattyP said in another thread which was closed for some odd reason "If Joe never abused his membership on the forum he would have been able to post this himself. Maybe joe should have thought about that BEFORE he abused the forums. Matt"

I have read other posts too about Joe being banned. Wondering exactly what Joe did which was so serious, as I do not recall his posts very well. It's odd that I don't recall a controversy here, assuming what he did was so serious.

Tried to review his old posts but they seem to have been deleted. Who banned him and why? Just wondering as I do not like to see members banned, especially without an explanation and knowing why it was done.

I am not defending him as I do not recall him or his posts in any detail. All I remember of him is some non-sensical type of posts and some posts asking for appraisals on some 2nd rate somewhat soft-core type of porno names - I think?

 

[fizz]

RealNames, I don't have Joe's posts in front of me, but what I do recall from reading them previously was that they contained racist remarks, which are uncalled for in any forum.

 

[fizz]

double post, sorry

 

[ShaunP]

Realnames

You are the first person I have seen come out in the defense of Joe, of the three boards I've seen him kicked off of.

...he is in need of psycological help.

 

I believe chatboard.com has Joe's numerous posts still on the board. It will give you an idea of how this...odd...fellow interacts with online communities.

Miles

 

he was warned many times about posting vulgar/sexual threads & posts which had very little to do with domains.

 

[uncle]

I wouldn't worry about that, RealNames. Look for his posts on other boards, and you'll know why he was banned.

 

[David G]

Originally posted by aactive Realnames. You are the first person I have seen come out in the defense of Joe, of the three boards I've seen him kicked off of. ...he is in need of psycological help.

Exactly where and how did I defend Joe? You did not read my post very well. I specifically said I was not too familiar with his posts and was NOT defending him, did I not?

Snoopy said he did "vulgar/sexual threads & posts" Perhaps that's why I was not familiar with him since I usually do not bother to read those type of threads by bypassing them if indicated by the subject line.

Also, rarely go to other boards so was not aware he was kicked off elsewhere, or why.

I still maintain a member should not be banned without an immidiate explanation from whoever banned him. Perhaps even a discussion beforehand with all members would be a good idea.

 

With respect, the *volunteer* mods have enough on their plates with their own activities and monitoring the forum without wasting keystrokes to placate the curiosity of others.

 

[David G]

Originally posted by safesys With respect, the *volunteer* mods have enough on their plates with their own activities and monitoring the forum without wasting keystrokes to placate the curiosity of others.

The time spent by the volunteer moderators is most appreciated. The excellent moderators here are why this forum is so successful whereas Afternic was so bad, what with a total lack of control.

However, with all due respect to you and the others, I don't see what the big deal is and why it would be so time consuming as a short post of a few sentences with an explanation, from the Mod who did the actual banning.

 

I can appreciate what you're saying realnames, and I think my previous post was overly harsh for which I apologize.

 

Technically, RealNames expressed the notion that there should be DUE PROCESS OF LAW. If someone is banned, the reason should be published. That is a reasonable proposition.

In the war on terror, it has been alleged in the media that some people, mostly foreign visitors, have been held in the US without access to counsel. I see this as a violation of due process of law. No matter what a person is accused of, the Federal government can not just make people disappear. That is what Latin American dictators have done. The American people have A RIGHT to know WHO the government incarcerates. Do not misunderstand me. I am not saying the gov has no right to detain people who may be involved in violent acts against the government and its people. Of course safety of the country is topmost. But if we allow people to simply be "disapppeared", the anyone might vanish with the reason never known. I commend RealNames on his good judgement here.