Those Darned Politics Mods!!!!!

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting troll threads like "Somalia is AC Utopia" for the thousndth time? What a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, we're in complete agreement here. There are far too many threads in the politics forum about some fringe ultra-right wing philosophy eschewed by an incredibly small percentage of the population.

[/ QUOTE ]

Every forum in the entire site could be described like that. An incredibly small percentage of the population understands pot odds, or implied odds, or SIIHP.

Also, you might want to look up "eschewed". And "ultra right wing".

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that constant discussion of this relatively uninteresting fanatical philosophy drives traffic away from the politics forum. When Censored RR and I first came into politics, Censored made a request that anarcho-capitalism be kept to one thread, but that request was largely ignored, and we haven't really enforced it. I think its time to start enforcing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ghettoization? How is that logically supposed to work? It doesn't even make any sense. "All posts about SIIHP'ing will be restricted to one thread."

Will all "republican" and all "democrat" posts be restricted to a single thread?

First they ignore you,
then they ridicule you,
then they fight you,
then you win.

It seems we're getting closer, guys!

[ QUOTE ]
There are far too many interesting things that get pushed off the page in politics because of the dozens of new AC and AC related threads started every week by the same group of core AC posters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which ones, exactly? I don't see any that have a stark lack of replies.

[ QUOTE ]
In the next few days I'll try to get in touch with RR and Iron (and hopefully Censored) about implementing this.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is great. Your new awakening just happens to come after you've made a string of incredible blunders. Don't worry about fixing your behavior, just get rid of those who point it out. Sweep it under the rug. Responsibility? Character? Nah, that's for losers.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Prior to you banning me yesterday, is the word "troll" or "trolling" used about me in my user notes? I have never received such a warning.



[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Warned for trolling 4-4-07 iron


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Ban jman219 for posting TOP SEKRIT user notes in public, plz. "They're sacred!!! I can't post them!!! (unless I really want to)"

Rules? Jman219 has no need for rules! I AM THE LAW!!!

[[Phill]]

ACist:

I dont troll

Jman:

Yes you do, your user notes say so. I can name 5 mods who wrote that if i was allowed.

ACist:

Nahah. I dont troll.

Jman:

Evidence. Here is what a mod of my forum wrote. Technically im breaking the rules, but it is related to the forum i mod and i get along with Iron pretty good so he wont mind im sure.

ACist 2:

Broke the rules, broke the rules. Lawl.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
ACist:

I dont troll

Jman:

Yes you do, your user notes say so. I can name 5 mods who wrote that if i was allowed.

ACist:

Nahah. I dont troll.

Jman:

Evidence. Here is what a mod of my forum wrote.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not evidence, that's hearsay. If he actually wanted to provide evidence, he could provide links to the actual posts where this alledged trolling occured.

Imagine a cop accuses you of robbing a bank.

You:

I don't rob banks.

Cop:

Yes you do, it says right here: "wanted for robbing banks". Five other cops have your name down as a bank robber.

You:

Nope, I don't rob banks.

Cop:

Evidence - here's a note from another cop, and his mother. They both say you robbed the bank!

Yep, that's "evidence". CASE CLOSED!!

[[Phill]]

pvn,

Im assuming the user notes are really important here at 2+2. The mods wouldnt put jokes in there and they wouldnt make stuff up.

Its the equivalent of a signed statement being used in judgment of a case.


You:

I dont rob banks

Cop:

There are 5 cases where you were caught red handed robbing a bank. The information is secret due to the possibility of endangering ongoing cases but this will be used against you at trial. You know you were caught red handed robbing that bank, and we have all the officers on record reporting these crimes.

You:

Oh. But i dont rob banks. Honest. Plus, you cant prove it as its top secret, hahahahahaha, freedom, victory is mine.

Cop:

Here is one case in full. This wont endanger a future case as this cop works in the same division and isnt undercover anymore.

You:

I dispute that. Its my word versus a higher respected person. No way anyone gets convicted on the evidence of one cop too. Plus, i claim to not rob that bank, so throw out that evidence as im always right and that cop isnt.

Your Friend:

Err, ok, hahaha, you lied about not being able to prove evidence or something. We, err, win?

I struggled with your metaphor a little, but i think i got there in the end.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I struggled with your metaphor a little

[/ QUOTE ]

Understatement of the year. Still no links to the actual alledged posts.

[[Phill]]

pvn,

The point is i dont need posts to prove it - and due to the evidence there i physically cannot prove it by pointing to posts unless i go through all 7630 of boros posts.

I have Jman reading the user notes and relaying that info here.

Further, Jman doesnt need the posts, he has the ability to look at the user notes which has 5 different mods all saying boro has been warned for trolling.

My position is 100% sound right now. Yours has to rely on those user notes being incorrect. In which case 5 mods have a bit of explaining to Mat about why they are wrong.

Kick it upstairs, and i look forward to seeing if any fallout comes back down.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
pvn,

The point is i dont need posts to prove it - and due to the evidence there i physically cannot prove it by pointing to posts unless i go through all 7630 of boros posts.

I have Jman reading the user notes and relaying that info here.

Further, Jman doesnt need the posts, he has the ability to look at the user notes which has 5 different mods all saying boro has been warned for trolling.

My position is 100% sound right now. Yours has to rely on those user notes being incorrect. In which case 5 mods have a bit of explaining to Mat about why they are wrong.

Kick it upstairs, and i look forward to seeing if any fallout comes back down.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have very strange notions of "evidence" and "burden of proof" if you think this is "100% sound". You believe everything people tell you? Or just the ones who claim they are authorities?

[TomCollins]

It's fairly obvious that ACists are persona non grata on 2+2 politics forums. It's a shame, because I have found their posts to be the most interesting compared to anyone elses. In a year, I'm sure the power tripping mods will have them all banned.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
ACist:

I dont troll

Jman:

Yes you do, your user notes say so. I can name 5 mods who wrote that if i was allowed.

ACist:

Nahah. I dont troll.

Jman:

Evidence. Here is what a mod of my forum wrote. Technically im breaking the rules, but it is related to the forum i mod and i get along with Iron pretty good so he wont mind im sure.

ACist 2:

Broke the rules, broke the rules. Lawl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol. He distorted the facts by saying that my user notes said that I had been repeatedly warned and banned for trolling, which has been shown to be untrue, and the only mention in my user notes (prior to jamn's ridiculous antics no doubt) is because iron81 lied in them about the circumstances of his polite request ("Please stop doing that."). If he could produce any other references in my user notes to me being warned or banned for trolling he certainly would, since that is what he did with the erroneous iron81 note from 4-4-07. This has all already been pointed out, yet here you are perpetuating the same BS.

Standard for you.