| |
| |
Eric Sophie has lost posting privileges as a result of ToS violations.
-Suz
|
Thank you for this Suz (and Todd?). I realise that it must have been a hard
decision to make but I feel it was the right one under the circumstances.
Tim
To Eric,
When I first posted in response to you my only intention was to get you to admit
to your mistake, apologise and stop doing it. I never wanted you to lose your
posting privileges until after you acted with no remorse or respect for the many
people who took the time to explain to you why what you did was wrong. Between
threatening me, mocking other people who spoke out against what you did, showing
no remorse at all and generally behaving arrogantly and obnoxiously you have
lost all respect from me.
Even so, I hope that you can regain your posting privileges at some point after
you work out why you were banned and stop acting with little or no respect for
other people on Lugnet (at various strengths and for a long time). I think that
Lugnet probably means a lot to you and I really hope that you can realise it
means a lot to other people too and learn to show some respect for them. When
you show you can do this I will be the first person asking for you to be allowed
back on the site.
I really am sorry it had to come to this but after your behaviour I can’t fault
the banning even a tiny bit. It was not “evil oppression”, it was a direct
result of your behaviour.
Yours sincerely,
Tim
PS. I’m sure there are other people that see things the same way I have just
outlined and who would be happy to have you back when you are willing to start
behaving.
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Lugnet: WAKE UP!
|
| (...) Me for one. It was deserved but I sincerely hope this is a timeout, to be lifted when Eric apologises and indicates he understands that he needs to comply with the ToS, and will do so, and not a permanent loss. Further, and just as (...) (19 years ago, 2-Apr-06, to lugnet.people, FTX)
| | | Re: Warnings( was: WAKE UP!)
|
| (...) In my experience, mod/admin decisions should be made based on official warnings rather than peer recommendations, which may be biased or incomplete. For instance, having 5 people say "Don't do that" about something is not as effective as a (...) (19 years ago, 3-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | Re: Warnings
|
| (...) My expectation is that they're considered, but not as meaningful as admin warnings. If Howard was warned 50 times by other members, and once by an admin, but Harold was only ever warned once by an admin for the same violations; it seems that (...) (19 years ago, 3-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | Re: Warnings( was: WAKE UP!)
|
| (...) This is a difficult question to answer in specifics. I'm tempted to re-word your question from, "Should admins disregard.." to, "Should admins consider.." which makes it an easy: "Yes." LUGNET users' voices are always counting for something, (...) (19 years ago, 4-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
42 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
