Subject:
|
Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:03:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
711 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, James Brown writes:
> Just a note here - Frequently, mild obscenity is let slide by because
> whenever someone calls the abuser on it, it pretty much invariably turns
> into a huge fight. Slippery slope? Yup. Ethically lax of me (and others)
> to let it slide? You betcha. Worth the fight? Nope.
>
> However, there is a distinct difference in degree between saying "that's a
> dumb --- thing to do" and what Jesse posted.
No, there isn't. Both have exactly the same effect- obsceneties in a Lugnet
post, violating the ToS.
Like I said, I understand that (and understand why) Jessie is unpopular, but
banning him from Lugnet for something that other people have done and not been
banned for is hypocritical to the point of being offensive.
If Jessie is to be banned, then I would expect a similar treatment to be
extended to:
Matthew Gerber
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=30981
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=10821
Daniel Jassim
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=10693
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=11689
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=11544
Robert Brunskill
http://news.lugnet.com/technic/bionicle/?n=465
Jan-Albert van Ree
http://news.lugnet.com/market/buy-sell-trade/?n=10672
James Brown (hey, that's you!)
http://news.lugnet.com/market/shopping/?n=5826
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/fun/?n=5780
http://news.lugnet.com/loc/uk/?n=2026
http://news.lugnet.com/market/shopping/?n=927
http://news.lugnet.com/market/jambalaya/?n=502
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=2433
http://news.lugnet.com/build/?n=597
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/fun/?n=4948
Tom Stangl
http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=419
Tamyra Teed
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=4962
Mike Poindexter
http://news.lugnet.com/market/shopping/?n=2404
Jasper Janssen
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/fun/?n=3949
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=975
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=686
Mike Stanley
http://news.lugnet.com/loc/uk/?n=2104
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=2581
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=1815
John DiRienzo
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=9194
John Neal
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=8873
Ed Jones
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/fun/?n=2675
Tom McDonald
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/fun/?n=1892
"Darth Joules" (who needs to re-read the "real life name" portion of the ToS,
as well)
http://news.lugnet.com/castle/?n=10191
Ronan Webb
http://news.lugnet.com/loc/uk/?n=6966
Andrew Eade
http://news.lugnet.com/legoland/?n=208
http://news.lugnet.com/technic/bionicle/?n=957
Alexander Johnston
http://news.lugnet.com/trains/?n=12426
http://news.lugnet.com/starwars/?n=11535
Whew! There's more than I thought there would be, and I'm getting tired of
cutting and pasting. You can find plenty more by just doing a simple search on
"naughty words" in
Lugnet's search engine. In the interest of full disclosure, my name came up
once too:
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=8069
But given your talk above about it being "ethically lax" of you to "let it
slide" when someone posts, I was shocked to find that you are one of Lugnet's
biggest pottymouths. I find your habitual commisions of the same ToS violation
to be FAR MORE offensive than Jessie's.
Perhaps you should move out of your glass house before you decide to begin
casting stones.
eric
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
| (...) <snip list, including me> OK. (...) OK. I was completely unaware that the term I habitually use was considered offensive. Now that I've been made aware, I'm voluntarily banning myself. James (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
| Just a small FYI: (...) (URL)But given your talk above about it being "ethically lax" of you to "let it (...) Well, I don't. Witness what Stephen mentioned about his daughter. ((URL) I was outraged to hear this. I know 7 year olds who throw that (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
| (...) I have to say I agree with Eric on this one but beyond agreeing I will give my 2 cents. First of all I will admit some ignorance in terms of JAL's history because I stopped reading .space because of all the bickering. I will just say this, it (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
| (...) Just a note here - Frequently, mild obscenity is let slide by because whenever someone calls the abuser on it, it pretty much invariably turns into a huge fight. Slippery slope? Yup. Ethically lax of me (and others) to let it slide? You (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
30 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
|
|
|
|
