[TrashMan]

I think the presence of this thread says otherwise. I'm kind of looking forward to monkeyed for whining about being monkeyed now.

So a legitimate complain is "disruptive"? Criticism is "disruptive"? Saying anything you don't like is "disruptive"?
I'd hate to live in any country you'd govern then.

Other forums don't let me get away with anything. If anything they are stricter rules than here. And I behave completely the same here and there. I'l llet you do the math.

You call that maths?

Yes. Statistics to be more exact.
Either all the thousands on all other forums are wrong, or the very few on this forum are. Occams Razor. Which is more likely?

[Spicious]

So a legitimate complain is "disruptive"? Criticism is "disruptive"? Saying anything you don't like is "disruptive"?

It is if you do it right.

Yes. Statistics to be more exact.
Either all the thousands on all other forums are wrong, or the very few on this forum are. Occams Razor. Which is more likely?

Statistics is hardly maths. In any case, statistics tends to require statistics, which you have failed to provide, to work. Additionally, that relies on the assumption of universal truth. Finally, Ockham's razor tends to apply based on evidence rather than belief of crowds of people.

[Galemp]

I've been waiting for this thread, since I agree that the monkeyings are getting a little out of hand. I trust the admins and they do a good job but they seem to have a few scapegoats that get monkeyed over and over for trivialities. Can't we assume that these members are acting in good faith?

I mean we all have to deal with people who irritate us; I feel that monkeying Trashman, Mobius, or other contributing members for the smallest indiscretion is an abuse of power. Keep it up and they might leave, and we would all be worse off. The community as a whole benefits from its members, and after all they are just ordinary people.

Really, I approve the use of monkeying against belligerent, abusive, and grossly inappropriate posts (like that post in the announcements forum a few weeks ago, or the debacle with LuaPineapple, or when political arguments turn into personal attacks) but the examples cited above wouldn't have even been noticed by the majority of the community.

Give it a rest, will ya? We're all human and we all have different personalities. This repeated monkeying of the same people over and over is really irritating to the people who have to work with them; either they deserve to be banned, or they should be cut some slack.

[General Battuta]

Trashman is abrasive, childish, and blind to his own faults. I don't blame the admins for repeatedly monkeying him, because he has been a monkey.

But maybe we should grant him a period of tolerance. He's got a pretty awful custom title, after all. If he continues acting out, people will just start nodding knowingly.

I think he deserves measure of forgiveness. He knows now what he does, and if he keeps up with it, his own actions will be an effective punishment.

[Colonol Dekker]

Everyone deserves a chance, a warning at least. The admins here are pretty fair. I myself got banned over a REALLY REALLY stupid error on my aprt, but i pleaded my case and the powers that be did a bit of research (cheers Karajorma :lol) and it all worked out. We can all be a bit "impulsive" in our posts, it's just nature of the species..

[TrashMan]

So a legitimate complain is "disruptive"? Criticism is "disruptive"? Saying anything you don't like is "disruptive"?

It is if you do it right.

All right then. Please, explain it in detail on my own examples.

Go trough my last few posts that got me banned, analyze them and explain in detail what I did wrong.



I'll even list a few examples you can look over.

1. - Being banned during a discussion on female right for noticing that there really are phisical differences between men and women and for saying that if I were special forces I'd prefer a all male team (for obvious reasons). Somehow stating scientific facts in a polite manner was very insulting.

2. - Banned for questioning the validity of a historical event, as currently written. I repeat - questioning. not denying. not denouncing. Merely questioning. And then the very people who banned me say questioning things is the foundation of science. And apparently it is, only if you not question something they don't like.

3. - the last incident. Comnenting my observations on pilot files and code in a sarcastic manner and questioning initial media reports.

There's more, but this is more than enough. Look it up, quote me if you like and explain in detail exactly what I did wrong.
After all, I'll learn nothing if I don't know EXACTLY where I went wrong.

[TrashMan]

Trashman is abrasive, childish, and blind to his own faults. I don't blame the admins for repeatedly monkeying him, because he has been a monkey.

Ahh...the fallout of the womens right discussion. the one where you got offended when I used the phrase "fairer sex"?
Based on that reaction alone I can form a rather negative mental image of you, worse than what you consider me now.

Yet I don't call forth for you banishment.... I assume there was miscomminication instead of taking you as a brash, militant feminist. Which I could assume if I wanted to.
And that's the friggin problem here. Too much negative assumptions thrown around.

I certanly NEVER, NEVER wanted to or tried to irritate or insult anyone, nor do I act with malice or some hidden sinister intent. I know far too many people who get their kicks from ruining the day of others in any way they can - either by pure physical force or my machinations and rumors. I'm not one of them.

He knows now what he does, and if he keeps up with it, his own actions will be an effective punishment.

Not really. I still don't know what was supposedly wrong in that posts. I showed those same posts to a lot of people I know..they don't see nothing wrong in the posts either, altough a few did point out they they could be misinterpreted, if you really were looking for smut.
However, I don't think looking for the worst possible interpretation of any post is what anyone on the forum should do - especially and admin. We tend to do that in a heated bebates, but most of the stuff wasn't heated at all.

[General Battuta]

I forgave you for that whole incident, remember? Ease off, I'm the one being nice to you. (The issue was the phrase 'weaker sex', anyway -- but moving on!)

Look, Trash, what I'm saying is that the problem isn't really what you say. It's that you act like you're perpetually angry at everyone. And I'm arguing that you don't need to be monkeyed all the time, since you've got that title to warn people off.

I think many people are frustrated that you don't seem to be learning how to behave politely.

[TrashMan]

Just FYI - weaker sex is valid and correct term (referring to physical strength, not strength in general), by itself not insultive, but I can see how it can be taken as such.


Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that I am behaving politely, both in forums and in RL.
Go trough my posts in some heated debates and you'll see. I'm the last to insult or use namecaling and I try to keep a level head and write politely and concise.

That some people might get the wrong picture and take that stance as agressive or insultive or condensending is a problem, but not with me.
I can't write more politely that I was doing so far..I simply don't see how is that possible without not writing at all.

[Wobble73]

That some people might get the wrong picture and take that stance as agressive or insultive or condensending is a problem, but not with me.
I can't write more politely that I was doing so far..I simply don't see how is that possible without not writing at all.

You, yourself have admitted to using sarcasm in your posts. That can be insulting to some people, as you are insulting their intelligence. It all depends how use sarcasm and when. Using sarcasm during a heated debate is usually insulting. Using it in general conversation is generally acceptable especially if it is used in a witty way, but when you use it to pull other people down, (or their point for that matter), it's offensive.

[TrashMan]

You hit the problem on the head.

Unless you have a lawyer with you that will go over every sentance several times (and even then), then you're bound to write things that SOME people will get insulted/offended about. Your attempts at humor or concern or sound advice will be taken the wrong way. So what's the solution? Not to joke or use sarcasm ever? And not even that would help.

Frankly, it impossible to hold a conversation of sizabe length without someone, somewhere getting insulted/irritated. Don't forget, there are people around the world who get irritated/insulted by your very breathing or existance.

So the real issue is not weather someone was insulted - the issue is weather he should be insulted in the first place and weather you meant to offend/insult him.
The internet would be far better place if people just didn't assume the worst and learned to let possible insults go.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Sarcasm is rather rampant on this board I find anyway. How many times has someone like person A posted something sarcastic, then person B gets offended, and person A goes "oh, I was being sarcastic. Didn't you notice the smilie?". If I waste enough time on here I can probably find a daily example of that.

As an observation, Trashman differs from the norm a bit, in that when he's sarcastic there's no ambiguity. And yes, Sarcasm can be taken as offensive but it can also be taken as humour as well.

[General Battuta]

You hit the problem on the head.

Unless you have a lawyer with you that will go over every sentance several times (and even then), then you're bound to write things that SOME people will get insulted/offended about. Your attempts at humor or concern or sound advice will be taken the wrong way. So what's the solution? Not to joke or use sarcasm ever? And not even that would help.

Frankly, it impossible to hold a conversation of sizabe length without someone, somewhere getting insulted/irritated. Don't forget, there are people around the world who get irritated/insulted by your very breathing or existance.

So the real issue is not weather someone was insulted - the issue is weather he should be insulted in the first place and weather you meant to offend/insult him.
The internet would be far better place if people just didn't assume the worst and learned to let possible insults go.

I agree with most of what you're saying...but, nonetheless, nobody else on HLP seems to have this problem! So you must be doing something differently.

We just have to figure out what. As I'm said, I'm eager to keep you on board and un-monkeyed.

[karajorma]

I mean we all have to deal with people who irritate us; I feel that monkeying Trashman, Mobius, or other contributing members for the smallest indiscretion is an abuse of power.

Mobius was warned not to spam that particular thread numerous times. On at least two occasions I've told him to talk less about off topic nonsense as that thread is meant to be about screenshots and not about chat.

If we were going to monkey Mobius for generally spamming we'd have done it years ago but since he had been warned more than once something more severe than a simple telling off was called for.

As for Trashman, I'll give this debate a little more time before I go into why I've been monkeying him so often.

[Snail]

And as a moderator I shouldn't have been egging him on there...

[Mobius]

I don't want to join the monkeying/spamming debate but I want to post something about forum discussions.

As TrashMan said, certain comments aren't likely to be shared by the whole community. It's normal to have and discuss different opinions.

I don't like, however, when people point me out as a second TrashMan or a flamer when I keep discussing certain subjects in a correct and civil way. If people think I'm wrong I have all the right to provide additional proofs(if there are any) that backup my theories, thoughts, choices, etc.

People simply don't tend to tolerate prolonged discussions.

[Colonol Dekker]

I think the key is to use sarcasm tags, or insincesetity tags. It's only the internet, keep it jovial

[Goober5000]

People simply don't tend to tolerate prolonged discussions.

Well, not exactly.  Internet discussions tend to follow a generalized version of Godwin's Law: as a discussion grows longer, the probability of it becoming stupid approaches 1.  That's why long threads are frequently locked.


I don't have a problem disagreeing with TrashMan.  Nor do I have a problem with him being theatrical about it.  What I have a problem with is his condescension and arrogance.  In the SCP thread, for example, he was told twice by two different SCP veterans that the pilot file upgrades were highly infeasible, yet he responded in just about the most arrogant way he possibly could.  His disclaimer did nothing to mitigate that.

I've removed TrashMan's title as a show of good faith, but I've read nothing in his explanations that convinces me the monkeyings were unjustified.  If anything, his responses demonstrate that he continues to refuse to learn from his mistakes, even when people take the time to sit down and walk him through the problem areas.

[karajorma]

2. - Banned for questioning the validity of a historical event, as currently written. I repeat - questioning. not denying. not denouncing. Merely questioning. And then the very people who banned me say questioning things is the foundation of science. And apparently it is, only if you not question something they don't like.

You were banned for repeatedly posting about it after being warned it was off-topic.

And that's pretty much why you were nearly monkeyed on the Syria attack thread too.

[Mobius]

Well, not exactly.  Internet discussions tend to follow a generalized version of Godwin's Law: as a discussion grows longer, the probability of it becoming stupid approaches 1.  That's why long threads are frequently locked.

It happens when people start posting nonsense, more emoticons than words and other bad stuff. I still don't get why keeping a discussion on tends to lead people to consider me a second TrashMan(no offense, Toni).


If my vision of the Ancients doesn't share yours and you keep acting as if your theory is the only, correct one I have all the rights to reply. It's legitimate.