I am afraid I disagree. Where is the evidence that people complain about -- that is, report to moderators, not simply gripe about -- people with whom they disagree or whom they find annoying? As I said upthread, I think this is a canard. The people in this thread seem to be posting out of a desire to prevent arbitrary bans, such as PILOFOLO's appeared to be, and are seeking additional warnings and notice for posters before their accounts are suspended, and temporary suspensions before posters are banned. This is a sign of tolerance and concern for fellow posters, even ones they may not like, and I don't know how you read it otherwise.
Cliff007 is probably not a great example of anything except, perhaps, EarlCat's favoritism or lack of objectivity. (I certainly know that lots of "regulars" hated him or felt tormented by him.) I wasn't hanging out in a lot of the threads where he posted, but the few times I saw him post, I thought he was terribly obnoxious (and I knew who his other identity was when I thought this). I may have even complained about him myself. In any case, I know that in at least one thread (I'll try to find it and add the link here), .cliff007 acknowledged that people had complained about him and that a moderator had contacted him about it. That's really all we know for sure about what happened until EarlCat comments himself.
I don't know what your last sentence means, exactly, but if it has something to do with me, please be more straightforward: what things are people saying that seem unfair to you?
That's cool how you referenced a case.
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.
Your first paragraph - you're right, I don't care enough.
On Cliff, we're not going to get anywhere. You gave 3 guesses as to why Cliff wasnt removed. I'm not sure what I should do with that information. I said he should have been banned. Can't you just concede on that point?
Your last pargraph is hilarious! Attacked?!?!? Come on, Miss P! You're tougher than that. You have to be..I would think being a Mets fan would give you a thick skin I'm just trying to be objective, which, as you said in your post above, isnt always necessary.
Quote from: Scentless Apprentice on June 18, 2009, 10:43:11 PMYour first paragraph - you're right, I don't care enough. I guess I should be more direct: I don't think you should level accusations against people unless you have some basis for them.
My claim in that paragraph - "here is a board full of future/current lawyers coming up with all kinds of conditions and scenarios to protect this little island from what they don't agree with or may consider annoying"Now, do you think I can go back in this thread and find some posts that would support the above quote?
F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French
I just think we disagree about why he wasn't. You seem to think he wasn't banned because regulars liked him.
Quote from: Miss P on June 18, 2009, 11:08:02 PMQuote from: Scentless Apprentice on June 18, 2009, 10:43:11 PMYour first paragraph - you're right, I don't care enough. I guess I should be more direct: I don't think you should level accusations against people unless you have some basis for them.I said I didnt care enough to go through the effort of digging them out - NOT THAT I DIDNT HAVE BASIS FOR THEM. My claim in that paragraph - "here is a board full of future/current lawyers coming up with all kinds of conditions and scenarios to protect this little island from what they don't agree with or may consider annoying"Now, do you think I can go back in this thread and find some posts that would support the above quote?
Yes, I have been attacked, baselessly, by this poster/these posters for about a month now. First, they tried to claim I was some sort of elitist who is obsessed with some imaginary status system on the LAW SCHOOL DISCUSSION board. Then, one of them called me a psychopath several times. Later, two of them chimed in that I was a racist based on a complete distortion of a remark I made about another poster's avowed Asian fetish. Finally, two of them have alleged, without a shred of evidence, that I tried to get PILOFOLO banned because I disagreed with him, and that, in fact, I do this regularly to people with whom I disagree (and so, probably, do my friends). You may think these are minor allegations; I take them seriously because I think that if any of these things were true or widely held to be true it would detract from my ability to give advice, etc. Also, my board persona and my real-life personality are effectively merged, so how "Miss P" is perceived is important to me on a more general level. And yes, I'm making myself more vulnerable by admitting that. Whether I am tough (and I'm not all that tough, obviously -- perhaps rooting for the Mets all these years has frayed my nerves) has nothing to do with whether this poster or these posters are attacking me. And if others want to defend me, that's their prerogative. It's not evidence of any kind of desire to exclude unpopular viewpoints; it's evidence that they think that ISUCKATTHIS et al. are off base and that it's important enough to say something.
Quote from: Miss P on June 18, 2009, 11:08:02 PMI just think we disagree about why he wasn't. You seem to think he wasn't banned because regulars liked him. 100% wrong. I never said regulars liked him. I have no idea if that is true. I do know, because you told me, that some regulars are aware that cliff had/has an alt ID. That's the extent of it.
Your post to me implied that some regulars on the board know who the "real" cliff is. You do. Also, Earlcat's not the only moderator, and I don't think all of Cliff's posts were in the Pre-law boards. So, Cliff IS a good exmaple because it's one poster who most would agree should have been banned, he received complaints, and NOTHING HAPPENED. I guess moderation on this board is a joke, correct? Posters who should have been banned were not, and posters who shouldnt have been, PILOFOLO, were banned.
Well, Miss P, this makes me very sad for you. I'm not trying to put you down, but I can only imagine the frustration of trying to keep your so called 'merged' online identity "clean" of all accusations.