Fanatics missing in action

Cyclonepride · 12-16-2007, 11:56 AM

Just noticed that a member or two that I enjoyed conversing with are MIA, and no longer listed as members. I am sure it is a very frequent occurence to report someone's post when you don't like it or don't agree with it, but what about those who enjoy their comments? If a member gets reported, yet has a high rep, doesn't that mean that a large majority of members either agree with them, or don't find their posts offensive? Is there a criteria for eventual reinstatement?

brianhos · 12-16-2007, 11:59 AM

unless you are being a total *** or attacking someone, I doubt anyone would do anything about a post that is just not the same viewpoint as you have. I know darts and I used to get into it pretty good, and he was always 100% wrong, but we never got nasty about it. So I doubt any of our posts got reported. I bet there is less reporting of posts than you think. Heck I am the second most prolific poster, and I have never reported a post.

Wesley · 12-16-2007, 12:00 PM

Did they resign or were they fired? The Dan question.

Karma reaction?

Cyclonepride · 12-16-2007, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by brianhos

unless you are being a total *** or attacking someone, I doubt anyone would do anything about a post that is just not the same viewpoint as you have. I know darts and I used to get into it pretty good, and he was always 100% wrong, but we never got nasty about it. So I doubt any of our posts got reported. I bet there is less reporting of posts than you think. Heck I am the second most prolific poster, and I have never reported a post.

I've never reported a post either, mainly because the people I disagree with are half the fun of having a discussion. Threads would suck if everyone just agreed on everything, particularly in the political cave. Possibly there are more sensitive members?

chadm · 12-16-2007, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclonepride

I've never reported a post either, mainly because the people I disagree with are half the fun of having a discussion. Threads would suck if everyone just agreed on everything, particularly in the political cave. Possibly there are more sensitive members?

No one has been removed do to there beliefs. Constantly breaking site rules will get someone banned. And it usually means after multiple warnings.

alaskaguy · 12-16-2007, 12:06 PM

In particular, I miss herbiedoobie. I found his posts to be witty and sharp. He may have challenged some of the more illogical posts and users, but isn't that the intended purpose of a message board?

Cyclonepride · 12-16-2007, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by chadm

No one has been removed do to there beliefs. Constantly breaking site rules will get someone banned. And it usually means after multiple warnings.

I understand that there has to be a criteria and system to keep it a friendly board, and I am all for that. I'm just weighing in with the other side of the story. Supporting my peeps you know

Wesley · 12-16-2007, 12:08 PM

Who else is missing from the poster family?

Cyclonepride · 12-16-2007, 12:10 PM

Herbie is the poster I speak of, though I am sure there are others. Every once in a while you just have an epiphany that so and so hasn't posted for a while, and you miss their input. Herbie had a way of being very direct with his points, but nothing that I found even mildly offensive.

Jeremy · 12-16-2007, 12:19 PM

I can assure you that ONLY members that repeatedly and purposely break rules are banished. Usually it takes severe actions to be banished forever and I can assure you that members are given ample warnings before being removed from the site.

Some good examples, without giving names, are members that repeatedly send vulgar PMs to members that are threatening or otherwise "bad", members that repeatedly break the posting rules even after being reminded and warned several times by mods via PMs and members that do other severely inappropriate things. Most of the time there are several warnings followed by a temporary ban followed by the permanent ban.