recent bans / account terminations...

[namestrands]

seems fair enough... ok so who the hell are we now gonna sell our Trademark domains to?

 

[gingeman]

Thanks for the confirmation, I knew nothing of this picture etc, appears a clear cut case between that and the pm. Is it possible to view if a person has infractions on their profile?

 

[typist]

ok so who the hell are we now gonna sell our Trademark domains to?

yours truly

 

[namestrands]

thanks typist, I have another few to finally clear out. Hard to let go of such great earners but its time to clean up the portfolio.

 

[Deleted member 5660]

I just got back from a Houston business trip and have caught up on this.

Mocus has had many infractions and the latest two incidents are unacceptable.

Posting an adult picture of someone with a jellyjar jammed in their ass is unacceptable. Using a non existant relationship with me to bully a seller is also not acceptable.

He has also had a few infractions before.

here's mocus's thread that did him in.

http://www.dnforum.com/showthread.php?t=202509

-=DCG=-

I think all this nonsense about banning people and creating all these rules is ridiculous. So how did the sucessful people get started in this business? By following a bunch of rules? How about those people who registered .nets when they were specifically for network providers such as ISP's? How about the people in the '90's who said there should only be allowed one domain per organization? If we went around implementing all kinds of rules back then how do you think the domain business would be now?

We all have ignore buttons if we don't like someone's posts.

 

[jasdon11]

Posting an adult picture of someone with a jellyjar jammed in their ass is unacceptable. Using a non existant relationship with me to bully a seller is also not acceptable.

-=DCG=-

How the guy swallowed it in the first place is beyond me....;-)

 

[PRED]

How the guy swallowed it in the first place is beyond me....;-)

It's not that , i always have the foresight to tie a bit of string around the 'rim' of the jamjar (note jamjar, not jellyjar) before insertion.It allows for easier extrication! :lol:
That way it avoids a trip to casualty (er) lol :lol:
Pred

 

[The Pain]

I think all this nonsense about banning people and creating all these rules is ridiculous. So how did the sucessful people get started in this business? By following a bunch of rules? How about those people who registered .nets when they were specifically for network providers such as ISP's? How about the people in the '90's who said there should only be allowed one domain per organization? If we went around implementing all kinds of rules back then how do you think the domain business would be now?

We all have ignore buttons if we don't like someone's posts.

I can assure you that all the people that I know that are successful in this business did not do it my acting like Mocus. If you are defending his actions, it says a lot about you.

The Pain

 

[Deleted member 5660]

I can assure you that all the people that I know that are successful in this business did not do it my acting like Mocus. If you are defending his actions, it says a lot about you.

The Pain

I have no idea what he did or who he is and I don't care ... other than if he has a domain for sale I may now miss it.

 

[PRED]

How the guy swallowed it in the first place is beyond me....;-)

LOL :lol:
You've just killed me again ! :lol:
I thought you meant how did his ass swallow it! LOL
i've just realised you meant how did he swallow it & it come out the other end whole! ound: ound: ound:
Pred

 

[Deleted member 5660]

Let's see ... Posting certain types of pictures is unacceptable? But posting graphic descriptions of the pictures that are unacceptable is alright? Is that the rule? I am confused.

I think we needs some mods in here to clarify all this because I won't be able to sleep tonight knowing these posts exist.

 

[jasdon11]

It's not that , i always have the foresight to tie a bit of string around the 'rim' of the jamjar (note jamjar, not jellyjar) before insertion.It allows for easier extrication! :lol:
That way it avoids a trip to casualty (er) lol :lol:
Pred

LOL

What's your preference ? Bon Maman, Robertsons, or supermarket own label ?

 

[Bill Roy]

Hey Consumers, what was this about 'sleep', we domainers don't sleep, that is for wimps like the 'SAS' and 'Green Beret', not for us hardened intellectuals trying to develop the future of the internet! :smilewinkgrin: :lol: :lol:

 

[Rockefeller]

A few more reasons are probably that Mocus has commented in several sales threads, was very immature, and has spammed me through PM on multiple occasions asking to buy his names.

 

[GT Web]

Thanks for the clarification.

Most of you know the disagreements Mocus had with me over the last year were very public and very personal. He never showed me any respect and while he may have been a reliable domainer, he sure had some attitude problems.

 

[namestrands]

he was a little unorthodox, but he had a cheeky charm about him. I think there are more eligible people to get banned than mocus.

I am of the belief that we need an elected jury, as the mods dont appear to have the time to monitor all the situations.

Elect 12 members and if they decide by a majority to ban a member for infractions then the member gets banned, its a tough call for a single moderator to make that decision and I think it would be fair if the member had a chance to defend.

Flipside GT, I totally get where you are coming from and his comments were out of order.

 

[Deleted member 5660]

Elect 12 members and if they decide by a majority to ban a member for infractions then the member gets banned

We can try this system:

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/salem/SALEM.HTM

 

[namestrands]

lol.. not quite. but it would be fairer.

 

[PRED]

he was a little unorthodox, but he had a cheeky charm about him. I think there are more eligible people to get banned than mocus.

I am of the belief that we need an elected jury, as the mods dont appear to have the time to monitor all the situations.

Elect 12 members and if they decide by a majority to ban a member for infractions then the member gets banned, its a tough call for a single moderator to make that decision and I think it would be fair if the member had a chance to defend.

Flipside GT, I totally get where you are coming from and his comments were out of order.

it's a good idea in principle, but what if one of the '12's head is in the block for something serious? it may bring a biased outcome.
i don't think any mod gets to ban any member, it has to go to dcg to approve as he's the bossman.
the current system is okay, but on serious matters , like fraud etc, nightmare members, they can be slow to act, even when pm'ed by many.
however to be fair dcg probably has a fair few other things on too in his life & has to be the one to give the gladiator thumbs up or down to be fair.
you could say it's in the lap of the 'gods' ? :lol:
Pred :smilewinkgrin:

 

[GiantDomains]

This thread is starting to turn into whether a ban was right or not. Those threads are not allowed. Mods and admins work hard to look at all the facts and make the right decisions. Some facts you do not see. Some facts we cannot even show you. Please respect the decisions of the forum. Thread closed.