Are you pleased with Hamilton's banning?

[segwaystyle2012]

I can see why a lot of people didn't like him, but he was the first friend I made here and always reached out to me to give me a hand with stuff related and unrelated to this forum. When I was still lurking I noticed the irony embedded in his posts but I'm not sure a lot of people caught on judging their reactions. We still talk on AIM, though, and I'm sure he's going to be back soon.

[segwaystyle2012]

No. I usually don't favor banning. But I'm new here and I'm not aware of Hamilton's record. Sometimes hard decissions are required.

His post history remains. You be the judge.

[segwaystyle2012]

Well, the mods are already going after Libertas (he's been warned for empty-quoting and making a thread similar to a Rochambeau thread, his was deleted, Rochambeau's wasn't). I think I'm next. This is going way too far.

[segwaystyle2012]

Abusing the reporting system? I'm not sure how that could be unless Hamilton reported every post no matter what. Empty quote is mod-worthy yet I see dozens of empty quotes a day.

i've seen the posts you guys consider mod worthy (Libertas' forwarded me Leip's PM).

Tolerance is not applied equally, for whatever reasons.

[segwaystyle2012]

How is your post not character assassination, Senator Duke?

[segwaystyle2012]

Abusing the reporting system? I'm not sure how that could be unless Hamilton reported every post no matter what. Empty quote is mod-worthy yet I see dozens of empty quotes a day.

i've seen the posts you guys consider mod worthy (Libertas' forwarded me Leip's PM).

Tolerance is not applied equally, for whatever reasons.

It may or not be, but the most important fact is that IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE APPLIED EQUALLY.  This isn't the steps of City Hall, this is Dave Leip's backyard, he gets to make all the rules.  They don't have to be fair.  You (and I) don't get any say in the matter.  You are more than free to go make your own forum with your own rules.  There is no protected speech here.  If you don't like it, you don't have to keep coming back.

We've had our own forum for a while now, and the quality of discussion is exceptional. You'd like it better there.

[segwaystyle2012]

Abusing the reporting system? I'm not sure how that could be unless Hamilton reported every post no matter what. Empty quote is mod-worthy yet I see dozens of empty quotes a day.

i've seen the posts you guys consider mod worthy (Libertas' forwarded me Leip's PM).

Tolerance is not applied equally, for whatever reasons.

It may or not be, but the most important fact is that IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE APPLIED EQUALLY.  This isn't the steps of City Hall, this is Dave Leip's backyard, he gets to make all the rules.  They don't have to be fair.  You (and I) don't get any say in the matter.  You are more than free to go make your own forum with your own rules.  There is no protected speech here.  If you don't like it, you don't have to keep coming back.

We've had our own forum for a while now, and the quality of discussion is exceptional. You'd like it better there.

If it's better there, then why do you care about here?

I think we all know why I'm here-- to support Gary Johnson and give his supporters a presence in the online political world and additionally add to that support group by making convincing arguments in favor of liberty within the Republican Party.

[segwaystyle2012]

Abusing the reporting system? I'm not sure how that could be unless Hamilton reported every post no matter what. Empty quote is mod-worthy yet I see dozens of empty quotes a day.

i've seen the posts you guys consider mod worthy (Libertas' forwarded me Leip's PM).

Tolerance is not applied equally, for whatever reasons.

It may or not be, but the most important fact is that IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE APPLIED EQUALLY.  This isn't the steps of City Hall, this is Dave Leip's backyard, he gets to make all the rules.  They don't have to be fair.  You (and I) don't get any say in the matter.  You are more than free to go make your own forum with your own rules.  There is no protected speech here.  If you don't like it, you don't have to keep coming back.

We've had our own forum for a while now, and the quality of discussion is exceptional. You'd like it better there.

If it's better there, then why do you care about here?

I think we all know why I'm here-- to support Gary Johnson and give his supporters a presence in the online political world and additionally add to that support group by making convincing arguments in favor of liberty within the Republican Party.

So how does that transfer over to you caring whether or not Hamilton is banned?

I never said I cared whether or not he was banned. If he isn't at all upset about it, I see no reason for me to be, though some are. The way I see it, it is the circumstances that are troubling, not the poster in particular. The circumstances did not warrant a ban.

[segwaystyle2012]

I'm not "new" if I've been here over 2 months, am I?

[segwaystyle2012]

In my defense, I am against Hamilton's banning on the grounds of freedom of speech. I would've been just as outraged if a Neonazi forumer got banned for expressing his opinion as I am over Hamilton. Personally, as much of a jerk I thought Hamilton turned out to be in the last few weeks, the last thing I would've wished on him or anyone else is a banning. Just because this is an internet forum doesn't change my views of free expression, even if I can't stand whoever is saying it.

Was anyone here not a jerk to him?

[segwaystyle2012]

pizzathehut014 (12:02:30 AM): i did call alcon a liar
pizzathehut014 (12:02:31 AM): he lied
pizzathehut014 (12:02:38 AM): he said mods didnt act on the word retarded
pizzathehut014 (12:03:02 AM): masterjedi often edited posts containing the word retarded, as he did to mechamans post "atlasia retard coalition"
pizzathehut014 (12:03:11 AM): thanks for keeping me up to date on their bs and lies

[segwaystyle2012]

pizzathehut014 (12:03:11 AM): thanks for keeping me up to date on their bs and lies
segwaystyle (12:04:51 AM): theyre acting immature
pizzathehut014 (12:05:00 AM): look, libertas got trolllisted for "abuse of reporting system"
pizzathehut014 (12:05:12 AM): libertas said he only reported a post where mechaman called someone a nf****t
segwaystyle (12:05:26 AM): he also called people nc**nts today
pizzathehut014 (12:05:25 AM): exactly
pizzathehut014 (12:05:33 AM): there is a clear double standard in where the rules do and do not apply
pizzathehut014 (12:05:42 AM): i called someone a troll- personal attack
pizzathehut014 (12:05:48 AM): people call me a troll- nothing
segwaystyle (12:05:56 AM): yeah its so stupid
pizzathehut014 (12:06:06 AM): ha
pizzathehut014 (12:06:07 AM): oh well
pizzathehut014 (12:06:20 AM): they'll sya anything to build their case because they can get away with it
pizzathehut014 (12:06:25 AM): public opinion is on their side
pizzathehut014 (12:06:27 AM): snowball effect
pizzathehut014 (12:06:38 AM): itll just get bigger and bigger until i have no one there left
segwaystyle (12:06:47 AM): i know what you mean
pizzathehut014 (12:06:52 AM): thanks for keeping me up to date

[segwaystyle2012]

Pizzathehut was banned from using this forum early in the morning and can not even read it.

Now, Mechaman please answer the question I posed at the top of this page. I'd be interested in seeing a hopefully rational response.

[segwaystyle2012]

In my defense, I am against Hamilton's banning on the grounds of freedom of speech. I would've been just as outraged if a Neonazi forumer got banned for expressing his opinion as I am over Hamilton. Personally, as much of a jerk I thought Hamilton turned out to be in the last few weeks, the last thing I would've wished on him or anyone else is a banning. Just because this is an internet forum doesn't change my views of free expression, even if I can't stand whoever is saying it.

Was anyone here not a jerk to him?

THis is the question I was referring to, Mechadude.

[segwaystyle2012]

Alcon, might this be relevant:

Discrimination and Hateful Speech: Posts deemed to be discriminatory or hateful against other posters or groups in general due to race, religion, etc. are deleted when reported.

"retarded" fits under there by any rational definition of the terms outlined.

[segwaystyle2012]

GaryJohnson,

In about the same sense that "sucks" fits under sexually vulgar language.  I'm reasonably sure, although not completely, that I PMed Hamilton asking him to cease reporting "retarded," at least until I hashed it out with Dave.  Either way, if he paid enough attention to notice that the one post was edited, he surely noticed that the others weren't being.  Even if there was a sincere miscommunication about "retarded" and he didn't notice they weren't being deleted, stuff like the "drug paraphernalia" report was clearly systemic abuse of the reporting function.  And it doesn't serve to dispute the central fact, that Hamilton was reporting posts while breaking rules anyway, which makes no sense even if we assume his reports were benevolent, which is straining credulity.

That's the point:  Hamilton was reporting these posts while breaking rules he knew were worse.  How does that disprove the A) and B) points I just outlined?  He knew he was breaking rules, he didn't care, he didn't talk to a moderator about it until his posts were being deleted for it, and even when he did, he refused to cooperate and kept intentionally offending.  Unless anything disputes that fundamental tenant, or you believe that there should be no punishment

Imagine.  You're a judge.  Some dude comes into court with 500 shoplifting convictions, mentally fit to stand trial, with two previous probations for felony theft, and says:

I don't have to cooperate with you, and besides there are other shoplifters out there, and here are ten people who parallel park (or have photographs of bongs!!!)

You're going to, what, just set him free and have him return the merchandise every time he's caught?  Or actually punish him with jail time?  We're doing jail time.

P.S. I appreciate your commitment to this cause and Internet security in general, since you've only posted from proxies.   I have no idea if this means you're Hamilton.  I doubt it, but if you are, I'm not bothered, because this is exactly the way you should have talked to us to have prevented this mess from happening.  If you aren't, welcome aboard, and I appreciate your temperate civility.

Well, I must say, a permaban isn't jail time, it's the death penalty. Make of that what you will.

Also, you might wonder why I post from proxies? I'm at school so I make all my posts from proxies. not because I'm a weirdo (I might be) but because I frequent drug sites while I surf this forum and another political forum. Why do I frequent drug sites, you might ask? To find more like-minded people to support Gary Johnson. I don't think my school seeing a bunch of drug related websites from my name would be very helpful on my resume.

[segwaystyle2012]

GaryJohnson,

In about the same sense that "sucks" fits under sexually vulgar language.  I'm reasonably sure, although not completely, that I PMed Hamilton asking him to cease reporting "retarded," at least until I hashed it out with Dave.  Either way, if he paid enough attention to notice that the one post was edited, he surely noticed that the others weren't being.  Even if there was a sincere miscommunication about "retarded" and he didn't notice they weren't being deleted, stuff like the "drug paraphernalia" report was clearly systemic abuse of the reporting function.  And it doesn't serve to dispute the central fact, that Hamilton was reporting posts while breaking rules anyway, which makes no sense even if we assume his reports were benevolent, which is straining credulity.

That's the point:  Hamilton was reporting these posts while breaking rules he knew were worse.  How does that disprove the A) and B) points I just outlined?  He knew he was breaking rules, he didn't care, he didn't talk to a moderator about it until his posts were being deleted for it, and even when he did, he refused to cooperate and kept intentionally offending.  Unless anything disputes that fundamental tenant, or you believe that there should be no punishment

Imagine.  You're a judge.  Some dude comes into court with 500 shoplifting convictions, mentally fit to stand trial, with two previous probations for felony theft, and says:

I don't have to cooperate with you, and besides there are other shoplifters out there, and here are ten people who parallel park (or have photographs of bongs!!!)

You're going to, what, just set him free and have him return the merchandise every time he's caught?  Or actually punish him with jail time?  We're doing jail time.

P.S. I appreciate your commitment to this cause and Internet security in general, since you've only posted from proxies.   I have no idea if this means you're Hamilton.  I doubt it, but if you are, I'm not bothered, because this is exactly the way you should have talked to us to have prevented this mess from happening.  If you aren't, welcome aboard, and I appreciate your temperate civility.

Well, I must say, a permaban isn't jail time, it's the death penalty. Make of that what you will.

Also, you might wonder why I post from proxies? I'm at school so I make all my posts from proxies. not because I'm a weirdo (I might be) but because I frequent drug sites while I surf this forum and another political forum. Why do I frequent drug sites, you might ask? To find more like-minded people to support Gary Johnson. I don't think my school seeing a bunch of drug related websites from my name would be very helpful on my resume.

Part of me is beginning to believe this guy is Hamilton. He just used a stereotype (that all Gary Johnson supporters/libertarians are drug users) to justify being here, and already posts from proxies. Plus, he's certainly not only here to promote Johnson. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

This isn't a Gary Johnson thread, but it's also worth pointing out that people who frequent drug websites aren't exactly likely voters and are a rather problematic constituency to attract (being the "druggie candidate" is a deadly image for a campaign).

Which is why I'm reaching out, also, Senator Duke, I didn't say all Gary Johnson supporters are drug users if you'd actually have read what I wrote. I said I frequent those sites to find people I could convince to support Gary Johnson. Not a very difficult concept, as I've got a few people on board already (even some liberal Democrats!).