Many know that I have had quite heated discussions with Undecided and therefore it may seem weird that I make this thread, but... He got banned because of this sentence (as it is showed in scibanning thread http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=38046) -> Since when that is considered insulting worth a ban? Maybe that other dude really was acting like a "dick"? It certainly looked like he was trolling. But that's from my subjective perspective. I think that scibans have gotten out of hand and people are being banned for the silliest of things. what do other members think? -> Is that sentence (one word actually) worth a ban? p.s. sciforums seem to be turning into some sugarpuff bubble
all seem so touchy at the slightest insult (which I didn't even notice as an insult) like 4 year old kindergarten inmates
It's hard not to insult people sometimes. I don't think Undecided is a major violator, he's usually civilized enough. Temporary ban seems reasonable.
Undiceded banned? Well, I can understand the banning of Gendanken to some extend, but Undecided always struck me as a reasonable member who does not use insults to a great extend. At least I have never read an overly indecent posts from him. So this is just because he said that someone behaved like a "dick"? That seems a bit drastically to me. But it is only for three days... still, it still seems unjust. Of course it is a violation of the rules (somewhat) but I have seen worse things that were not punished. I have the impression that some people get rather timid around here, but that is only my impression. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Well, if he called the other dude a dick . . . I guess that's borderline. Maybe he had other instances of breaking the rules. I went to the SciForum Bannings thread. Why is it that ya can ban someone if they request it? Can't they just stop posting? Why is it permanent? And what if they change their mind later, will ya let them back into SciForums? Oh, and what's "sock puppet"?
Of course not! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! So, be careful. And with that, I welcome thee.
Undecided is usually a non-insulting poster. He was, however, banned under an earlier alias for insulting, and has been warned several times under the new. And yes, we are taking a little tougher stance on the insults. And whitewolf, you can shit on the lawn all you wish - just don't write insults with it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Peace.
IMO the policing of good etiquette here at sciforums, although motivated by good intentions, is reaching a point of diminishing returns. A free flow of ideas within a diverse and relatively intelligent spectrum of posters was primarily what has held my interest for 1 1/2 years here. I doubt that a tougher stance on the insults will significantly elevate the discourse from this point. Anywhere humans interact informally, occasional spats and barbs come and go. Because Undecided has displayed reasonably consistent self-control and consideration of others I think silencing him in this case is mean and contemptible in the very same sense as connoted by the popular phrase "acting like a dick". I'm extremely fond of sciforums, but overzealous policing in the interest of civility can detract from frank and fertile discussion, and has done so in this case (if I correctly understand the reason for this suspension). I hope that undecided returns to our discussions after being ordered to "sit in the corner" for 3 days. When it gets particularly hard to "draw the line", I think it's sometimes more efficient in a position of authority to just stop drawing.
I'm willing to hear your thoughts... how does "...if you didn’t act like a dick" contribute to a frank and fertile discussion? :m: Peac e.
It was certainly frank, if not very fertile. Maybe a little fetid. It wouldn't have unduly offended me, if I were the object of the barb. I know I "act like a dick" sometimes, and sometimes unknowingly, and would prefer not to. There's value in knowing when I've put someone off, even if they let me know in vulgar terms. If a similar "frank and fertile", or topical, or polite standard could be fairly held to everything written here, I doubt that this would be as comfortable an environment for so many people to share their thoughts in, as it now is. I really do applaud your considerable effort, and I do agree that standards do need to be applied. It's very subjective, and here we just have an example of what I personally consider, and have tried to explain, as a point of diminishing returns. Just consider this one small egg, tossed upon the flank of your paddy-wagon.
Oh! reading this reminds me of the three monkeys: I see nothing, I hear nothing, I don't say nothing. Can't we all just get along?.. Godless.
(Does a lack of a title make this titless?) It's all in how you say it. Really. I promise. Look, there's just a really fine line on this one--when I saw the phrase "act like", I did a double take because there's a couple posters around here with whom I frequently get into less-civilized arguments and we end up telling each other much about what the other is acting like. The difference? Well, frankly, I can think of one fellow who likes to spend a few hundred words on what I'm acting like when he gets the notion to mention it at all. If it was merely a flick of a sentence, he wouldn't bother. And I think therein lies a distinction; taking the time in the first place to tell someone what they're acting like and that they're not worthy of the time it takes to consider them ... well, it seems somehow paradoxical and self-consuming. By a superficial reading of Undecided's managed vacation, we can all think of many folks around here who ought to be similarly kicked out to the beach--myself included. So it can't possibly be something merely as superficial as the appearance of Undecided telling someone what they're acting like. I won't claim what those additional criteria are or aren't, as I'm not in charge of who takes a vacation when. But really, it's all in how you say it. Perhaps a subtle difference, but maybe that's natural selection in action.
Power is intoxicating, with the side effect of making the user want to use it more. Thus is the case with the moderator team. At first, they were quite lenient, tolerating people like Proud_Muslim and muscleman for long periods of time, but now they apparently take joy in abusing their power for sheer amusement and ego inflation value.
