Please, read.

FileCabi.net Forum Index > Everything Else

Salvaged from Archive: These posts were salvaged from the web archive of the original FileCabi forum (2007–2008). Usernames are as they were then and aren’t linked to today’s accounts.

Author	Message
Jack Klompus Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 01:35 · [Salvaged from Archive] The latest events in the forum made me think for a while, as I got to the first conclusion. There´s a chrisis here. I will considerer this thing going on with Evil Conservative. 1 - EC got suspended. I will restrain myself from giving any opinion on the justice of the suspension act. The fact is that he thinks the suspension was founded on a whim, an arbitrary act. I will not state my position on that either, because that´s not the point. That´s not the real problem here. 2 - IMO there´s a problem in the system. How things are done here on filecabi. 3 - You see... Basically, we have two systems of trial. We have the inquisitorial system and the accusatory system. In the first one we have the following: 3.1 - the person/organ that makes the accusation and gathers all the evidence is the same person/organ that will judge in the end. This type was common during the inquisition era, "during which the Roman Catholic Church established to find, question, and sentence those who did not hold orthodox religious beliefs". In the accusatory system, 3.2 - there is the clear separation of the action of persecution and the act of judging. 4 - The accusatory system (3.2) shows more adequacy to moral values, liberty and justice. 5 - So how does that apply to what we have here on filecabi? Because clearly, EC was banned by the same person that made lets say the "accusation". First I thought we could have this one person away from all the threads, therefore no one could point their finger and say "hey u do that yourself" like EC said somewhere else like Merrillizer once "flamed against every religion". But then that solution would be inviable since no one would ever do that job: just judge, not posting, without getting paid. Besides the idea of having that obscure, dark, secret judge from outta nowhere is a stupid thing anyway. 6 - So I came up with something. And thats finally my idea. We should have in this case a topic about the possible ban/suspension, like a Grand Jury. The moderator in charge would give the accusation, make it public, showing the reasons why that particular member should be banned. All clear, no secret trials. Then, in this thread the accused member would have one post for the chance to defend himself from the accusations and for showing all the other members why he should stay. Then, after the defense post from the accused member, we the filecabi members would vote during 48 hours. Not a secret vote, not a poll thing. The members (those who were willing to of course) would vote while posting (again, not like this poll thing), that way we would give our reasons for voting for the ban/suspension or against it. 7 - Why? I feel like that way: 7.1 - it gives the right to decide to those who are interested the most. Filecabi members. 7.2 - it gives the right of response to the accused member, as well as the legitimate right to defend himself, which is only fair. 7.3 - the mod is not responsible alone for suspending/banning or not suspending/banning, that takes a lot from the mods shoulders. 7.4 - the power of the persecution would be only with the mods. That way we would not have one crazy "accuse atack" frenzy on one another for personal reasons. The mods then will be responsible enough to open a ban trial only in those clear and serious violation of the forum rules, like a DA. 7.5 - we would not have this almighty mod who can just ban members. We are all humans. Humans make mistakes. So I think when it comes to big decisions, like suspending or banning one member, we should give it to the largest number of people, afterall vox populi, vox Dei. just adding something here ---->> of course that ban trial thread would be opened with the post from the mod in charge that would cite the violated rule(s). And then the other members, after the defense post from the accused member, would only post "yes, he did violated that specific rule because..." or "no, he didnt, because..." only one post for each member, no changing opinions, no changing votes, one post and one post only, so we wouldnt have those flame posts all over the voting thread. Add one more (and hopefully last) thing here ---->> the only votes that would be counted, would be those from preexisting accounts. So no member would create new accounts to vote more than once, pro or against the suspension/ban of course.
crazyjoe Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 01:39 · [Salvaged from Archive] I'm all for it. How big is the jury going to be and I'd like to be in it if at all possible.
Jack Klompus Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 01:56 · [Salvaged from Archive] my idea is one vote for every member, during 48 hours.
crazyjoe Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 01:58 · [Salvaged from Archive] oops :lol: yeah I noticed that after I reread it :P
Merrillizer Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 02:42 · [Salvaged from Archive] Might be a fair sight better than Merrly going around banning people as he's doing now in his hypocritcal stupidity...but what do I care? :P EC, you were never banned. You were placed on a Temp Suspension until the Staff, Site and Board, could decide what to do with you. However, unable to handle this, you have decided to go the TRUE Disturber route, and continually join the board under Psuedo-Usernames, as if we are all fools. This is a B L A T A N T "middle finger" to the owners and Admins of this site. Your continued disturbance now, will be met with ban, after ban, after ban, until the day you decide to find a life, and stop wasting your time DISTURBING this community under different usernames.
Merrillizer Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 03:17 · [Salvaged from Archive] Jack, its a nice thought. However your means are severly flawed. First, EC was NEVER BANNED. He was first ASKED to remove his avatar UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. Again, he was ASKED, to remove it TEMPORARILY, until Filecabi STAFF could come to a conclusion on what to do. HOWEVER, EC chose NOT to do what was ASKED of him by STAFF. Are you getting it yet? Ok, so he was ASKED. And instead of just removing it, he went off on a little tantrum. And yet still, HE WAS NOT BANNED. Got it yet? Still NOT banned at this point. Now, here we are, with a former member choosing to BLATANTLY and THOROUGHLY disregard the STAFF and ADMINISTRATION of Filecabi.net, by CONTINUOUSLY registering under different usernames, to PURPOSEFULLY AND KNOWINGLY disturb this community. NOW, yes, THIS activity is dealt with using "PERMA-BAN". You are asked NOTHING, but to adhere to the rules set forth by the owners of this web site and community. When you are ASKED by its STAFF to do something, then you either do it, or you do not do it. Everyone has a choice. Those who choose to disregard the owners rules and the Administrators and Moderators of those rules, are NOT WELCOMED HERE. There are only a few who wish to disregard the owners wishes. Notice that? The majority of members here can conduct themselves in a proper manner, and easily follow the VERY FEW RULES that we have. Yet, there will always be a few who choose to be Disturbers, and DISREGARD the rules and Moderation. These few will be dealt with accordingly.
Captain America Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 05:55 · [Salvaged from Archive] Another TOS Violation. Accounts registered after ban or suspension that are used to continually disrupt and disturb this community will be deleted. - Merrillizer
That Dude Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 13:09 · [Salvaged from Archive] EC, you spazzed out like a PMSing little French girl and now you do nothing but whine about it on the internet. The fucking INTERNET! Hang up the Ethernet connection already and go have a warm cup of joe, the day's done! Jack, it's a nice idea.
Jack Klompus Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 14:53 · [Salvaged from Archive] Jack, its a nice thought. However your means are severly flawed. First, EC was NEVER BANNED. He was first ASKED to remove his avatar UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. Again, he was ASKED, to remove it TEMPORARILY, until Filecabi STAFF could come to a conclusion on what to do. HOWEVER, EC chose NOT to do what was ASKED of him by STAFF. Are you getting it yet? Ok, so he was ASKED. And instead of just removing it, he went off on a little tantrum. And yet still, HE WAS NOT BANNED. Got it yet? Still NOT banned at this point. Now, here we are, with a former member choosing to BLATANTLY and THOROUGHLY disregard the STAFF and ADMINISTRATION of Filecabi.net, by CONTINUOUSLY registering under different usernames, to PURPOSEFULLY AND KNOWINGLY disturb this community. NOW, yes, THIS activity is dealt with using "PERMA-BAN". You are asked NOTHING, but to adhere to the rules set forth by the owners of this web site and community. When you are ASKED by its STAFF to do something, then you either do it, or you do not do it. Everyone has a choice. Those who choose to disregard the owners rules and the Administrators and Moderators of those rules, are NOT WELCOMED HERE. There are only a few who wish to disregard the owners wishes. Notice that? The majority of members here can conduct themselves in a proper manner, and easily follow the VERY FEW RULES that we have. Yet, there will always be a few who choose to be Disturbers, and DISREGARD the rules and Moderation. These few will be dealt with accordingly. Merrillizer, you see... I´m not talking about EC here. I know you think you did every reasonable act, you gave him the chance to behave properly etc. But that was not my point from the start. 1 - EC got suspended. I will restrain myself from giving any opinion on the justice of the suspension act. The fact is that he thinks the suspension was founded on a whim, an arbitrary act. I will not state my position on that either, because that´s not the point. That´s not the real problem here. All you stated above was about the "meritum" in your decision. I still don´t think I should discuss that. That will cause even more trouble then we have at the moment. What I defend here is that we should have this thread where you could expose every aspect u stated above so every filecabi member would decide. And in my previous post i dont discuss only banning actions, I refer to suspension as well. Again my point is not whether your decision to suspend him was right or wrong. The fact is that it was controversial. I think we agree on that. In other words, the only way EC would resign himself from any act of suspending/banning/restriction/whatever is if the other members voted for it. And for all the reasons I posted previously. Come and think about it, we, the filecabi members, are directly involved in it, since we lose a member that one might think: "well too bad he or she is gone". Not only that, but (and now i am talking about EC) when he says "aw wtf. i dont care. Youre all stupid anyway. F*ck you all." or whatever he said. I really doubt he means that since the guy cared enough to have close to 1,000 posts on filecabi. Anyway, what would be submited to this trial thread would be a simple question like a "yes or no" question. Is he guilty? In other words here is 1 - what he did (link to the thread where he supposedly violated the rule(s); 2 - the rule (cite rule); 3 - does that rule applies to that conduct. Yes or no? Guilty or not guily? Yes? then the moderator would suspend, restrict, ban etc... Not guilty. The endo... The mods would still have the power to offer the "accusation". And of course the power to edit the posts and all that. All the rest is in my previous post in this thread.
Merrillizer Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 15:31 · [Salvaged from Archive] I understand what you are implying and bringing to the table. And, as far as making decision relating to "custom" forums and other board related things, I am a big advocate of asking the Community and its members for opinions and ideas. For instance, the Pirate Room, I believe the community should be able to voice opinions and decide for itself, by majority, what should replace that forum. However, what you are not understanding is the User Agreement and Terms of Service policies. The owners and Administrators of this web site have made it abundantely clear that violators of the User Agreement and Disturbers are not welcomed here. If you violate the rules or policies of this web site, then you are gone. There is no vote. You agree to follow rules set forth by the owners and Admins of this site when you register. When you violate those rules, especially serious violations such as re-registering after a suspension or ban in order to disrupt the community, then you are dealt with accordingly. The OWNERS of this site reserve the right to operate this web site and message board any way they deem fit and proper. THEY OWN THE SITE. I really can't lay it out any simpler than that. The owners of this site have rules and regulations for a REASON. Again, they pay the bills, and their Staff enforces the rules. It's nothing more than that, quite simple. Obey the rules, or do not obey the rules. It's a simple choice. And so many members here have no problem whatsoever conducting themselves in a proper manner. But I'll say it again, there will always be a few Disturbers along the way. 9 1/2 years of Administrating online communities, and I have never seen the level of Disturbance shown here in the last 24 to 48 hours. I have never seen more TOS Violations inside of 6 hours in my entire life. Record breaking.
Jack Klompus Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 25 Aug 2006, 19:41 · [Salvaged from Archive] However, what you are not understanding is the User Agreement and Terms of Service policies. The owners and Administrators of this web site have made it abundantely clear that violators of the User Agreement and Disturbers are not welcomed here. If you violate the rules or policies of this web site, then you are gone. There is no vote. Yes, I do understand the User Agreement and Terms of Service policies. It´s quite reasonable that violators of the User Agreement and Disturbers are not welcomed. But my point is who´s to decide whether certain act violated the rules or not? I know there is no vote. And that is what I find wrong. But that is ok in the end. I know where this is going and it´s nowhere. Not because you do not agree with me. It´s just that it seems that it has been that way for such a long time. And you know... old habits die hard. So they say. So I do hope you can handle whatever is going on here the best way and I equally hope the community learns and grows in the end.
Merrillizer Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 26 Aug 2006, 00:07 · [Salvaged from Archive] But my point is who´s to decide whether certain act violated the rules or not? Who decides? The Administrators and owners of this web site. That was Administration is for. Like I said, very simple.
Monstermash Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 26 Aug 2006, 01:49 · [Salvaged from Archive] Hi Jack. I think you've come up with a very good idea, kind of trial by jury. Does this mean a person will have to be picked as 'defence' and anotther for the 'prosecution' if this idea is taken to extreme or is this to complicated? Of course it all depends on whether people are interested in voting at all, but I guess Filecabi who makes the rules would have to decide whether the rules need changing first, but a cool idea Jack.
Jack Klompus Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 26 Aug 2006, 09:16 · [Salvaged from Archive] Hi Jack. I think you've come up with a very good idea, kind of trial by jury. Does this mean a person will have to be picked as 'defence' and anotther for the 'prosecution' if this idea is taken to extreme or is this to complicated? Of course it all depends on whether people are interested in voting at all, but I guess Filecabi who makes the rules would have to decide whether the rules need changing first, but a cool idea Jack. Hi, Monstermash. The "prosecution" would be made by the moderator who thinks the member should be banned or suspended. The defense would be made by the member himself. And the other filecabi members would vote to decide whether the rule has been violated or not by the accused member. This is not about impunity or discarding the rules of prohibition. They are there, and whoever decided to violated them would still be punished. The only difference would be that the filecabi members would judge whether the rule has been violated or not. Yes, just like a trial by jury.
crazyjoe Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 27 Aug 2006, 01:49 · [Salvaged from Archive] I've sent an email concerning this issue on offensive material being allowed on the site and not being allowed on the forum. I sent it the day EC was suspended/left. I have yet to get a reply.
Overlord Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 27 Aug 2006, 10:54 · [Salvaged from Archive] Jack, I do want to point something out. This is site owned by someone other than you and you have the priviledge of posting on it for free thanks to that person. This is not a sovereign nation where you have rights as a tax paying citizen. This is a privately owned website where the ownership of which can do anything they want. They can ban you without reason and change any of your posts as they see fit. If you don't like it or don't like the way it's being run you have only two choices. To participate and try to ask for changes or to leave. I'm not trying to aggrivate you here but I want to point out that any "justice" you feel you want from the staff on this site is only available should the staff agree or care to do so. To go back to the original questions and posts. I don't particularly care to vote or have a mock trial. There is no way to regulate it, or make it "fair" so instead I would simply appeal to the mods and if they make a ruling (like banning ec) then just accept it.
Jack Klompus Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 27 Aug 2006, 12:47 · [Salvaged from Archive] Yea I got that already. Take or leave it since there are people paying for it. That´s the reason why I said before this is going nowhere.
Jack Klompus Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 27 Aug 2006, 13:26 · [Salvaged from Archive] Jack, I do want to point something out. This is site owned by someone other than you and you have the priviledge of posting on it for free thanks to that person. This is not a sovereign nation where you have rights as a tax paying citizen. This is a privately owned website where the ownership of which can do anything they want. They can ban you without reason and change any of your posts as they see fit. If you don't like it or don't like the way it's being run you have only two choices. To participate and try to ask for changes or to leave. Oh... just adding something here... Ive never said I had rights for a change. All Ive posted: ideas. I think it should be done according to modern values of "good justice". However I am not demanding anything because yes I do know this website is owned by third parties. Believe me you don´t have to try to teach me what is owned and what is public. EDIT - unecessary flaming on my part.
crazyjoe Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 28 Aug 2006, 21:24 · [Salvaged from Archive] Still no response from the site admins about the email I sent them. :?
Clouds in the Sky Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 28 Aug 2006, 22:48 · [Salvaged from Archive] I've sent an email concerning this issue on offensive material being allowed on the site and not being allowed on the forum. I sent it the day EC was suspended/left. I have yet to get a reply. Would you mind sending a copy of that e mail to my personal account?
crazyjoe Salvaged from Archive	Posted: 29 Aug 2006, 00:21 · [Salvaged from Archive] check your pm