Salixes is banned from creating threads?

Author: TheRealNihilist

Posts

Total: 36
Topic's author
#1
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
Reasoning behind it:

***
Your behavior has crossed the line too many times. Fighting Words are banned within the CoC, and you seem incapable of starting topics as more than that. Accusing people of having boils on their asses for which they refuse medical treatment (https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3789/post_links/162530), declaring you did not intend any honest discussion while spewing insults (https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3835/post_links/162682), and various other infractions.

Given the previous hard warning, we take your continued behavior to be a request for help with your impulse control. You may no longer start threads (you may appeal this after one month).
-Ragnar, DM
***

First thing is that he got banned for creating threads when the "reports that have been handled" green tick box were from replies he made not the thread itself. To this day there has yet to a "Reports have been handled" for either of the threads mentioned by Ragnar but guess ban him from creating threads? Just ban him from using the forums.

Other thing I guess this is also a sign of literal hypocrites. The same people against hate speech, toughen up and all that other stuff are the same people literally reporting Salixes. This is an attack on their character but I didn't think very highly of them anyway so yeah.

If it wasn't clear I think the moderators are stupid but that wouldn't be a shocker. Banning threads when you can ban the users, banning a person from creating topics even though what was being reported on was his replies? 

I would've liked to said other stuff but I just realized I probably could get banned just for hurting their feelings as well. If I get banned at least I know someone is calling out this stupidity because I don't think someone has and given there has been 16 days past I think there has been enough time for someone to talk about it even on this dead site. 

#2
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Salixes is banned from creating threads?
Yes.


green tick box were from replies he made not the thread itself
Context of the offenses were key; as already outlined in the public warning given to him prior to the restriction.


Banning threads when you can ban the users
The same nonsensical statement could be made of giving warnings instead of jumping to bans at the first offense, or even answering dumb questions instead of banning, or ultimately having users instead of just a ban log.
#3
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Barney
@TheRealNihilist
The thread spamming needed to stop. 

I think the decision to restrict privileges rather than going straight from a warning to an outright ban for every infraction is a good idea on the mods part and I like the precedent it sets for allowing mods flexibility in their interactions with users going forward.
#4
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Other thing I guess this is also a sign of literal hypocrites. The same people against hate speech, toughen up and all that other stuff are the same people literally reporting Salixes.

This part I may or may not agree with you on, depending on whether you are saying that these people should change their stance on hate speech or you are saying that they should stop reporting Salixes (I assume the former based on context but this assumption could be innacurate). Whichever of these two stances you take your observation is indeed both accurate and relevant.
Topic's author
#5
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Barney
Context of the offenses were key; as already outlined in the public warning given to him prior to the restriction.
Okay:
You started a topic designed to provoke, and then respond to concise half line disagreement of your interpretation with five paragraph rant rife with insults.

The only reason why it is provoking is the because of the audience of the Religion forum. Literally all of them apart from Salixes, Stephen and Discipulus_Didicit are Christian. It might as well the Bible studies forum at this point.
The same nonsensical statement could be made of giving warnings instead of jumping to bans at the first offense, or even answering dumb questions instead of banning, or ultimately having users instead of just a ban log.
It is not nonsense because he is the only one creating opposing threads in a debate platform. It is literally a circle jerk at this point. It's been a month since Stephen's last thread in the Christian forum. 

Topic's author
#6
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
depending on whether you are saying that these people should change their stance on hate speech
I couldn't give a damn about Salixes but they are too stupid to realize they are unironically advocating against hate speech but acting using hate speech as a way to ban Salixes. 
you are saying that they should stop reporting Salixes (I assume the former based on context but this assumption could be innacurate)
If they cared about acting accordingly to what they preach but they don't.

The choices literally link to one another. The first one is an idea and the other is that idea put in practice. I would have to be for both since they are hypocrites both in their actions and words. 
#7
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
The only reason why it is provoking is the because of the audience of the Religion forum. Literally all of them apart from Salixes, Stephen and Discipulus_Didicit are Christian.

I would rather not be considered part of the religion fourm if at all possible. I drop by there now and then as a guest but if it just kinda disappeared in a puff of code I wouldn't really mind.
Topic's author
#8
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Okay 1 person who frequently posts and another who posted a thread a month ago.

I don't see the point of the forum apart from it being a circle jerk or some random atheist or agnostic debating them. 
#9
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
Imagine, just because a board on the forum is dedicated to a common interest, that is offensive to someone.

Is anyone upset that the game forum has only gamers? Or that the politics forum has people who want to talk politics? Why is it a problem if the religion forum has a majority of religious people?

Irrational bias maybe?

The point of each forum is evident in its name. If you don't care for Current Events for example, go to another board. But the purpose of the current events board is for people interested in current events. Same for every board.

Is it the religion boards fault that it gets atheists whose only interest is to attack and demean theists obsessively? Are Jews similarly at fault because anti-semites seem to follow them around?

I'm sick of the self-righteous members who think they are better or smarter than theists on the religion board. It is funny because it is atheists who stink up the religion board.

Why the hell are you on the board if you aren't religious? If you don't believe God exists, how many times are you going to come there and tell us?

Circle jerk? What do you call the technology board? How stupid. People on the board, doing exactly what the board was created for, you call a circle jerk.

What are theists on a religion board supposed to discuss Poindexter?

It is your low self-esteem that leads you to pretend the religion board is worse than any other and that you are somehow better. Putting the religion board down does nothing for your status.

My hat off to the mods who have steadily gotten rid of the riff-raff on the religion board. And notice, every one of them have been atheists.

Neither of you buttaching here can hold a candle to Athias, or Rosends, Or PGA2.0, or EtrnlVw. Away with all of you pretentious, self-important pretenders.




#10
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
The only reason why it is provoking is the because of the audience of the Religion forum.
Given that there's at least whole other thread about how annoying his threads were, that is patently untrue.


It is not nonsense because he is the only one creating opposing threads in a debate platform.
And you're advocating he should have been outright banned from the site, while complaining that his behavior was reprimanded to a lesser degree. Again, you speak nonsense.

As things stand, he may still engage in any thread within the forum; as he is choosing to do.


It is literally a circle jerk at this point
Please don't turn your fantasies into accusations of what other members literally partake in with each other.
Topic's author
#11
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Barney
Given that there's at least whole other thread about how annoying his threads were, that is patently untrue.
Can you not read? That was about spam. Oh wait guess you provoke people with spam? Pefrect time to given me a definition of provoke but well you were never in the position to give sane feedback. 
And you're advocating he should have been outright banned from the site, while complaining that his behavior was reprimanded to a lesser degree. Again, you speak nonsense.
I am saying if I wasn't a moron I would ban a forum poster from forum posting. It was implied that since I did call you stupid, I think you are doing something wrong which should mean when I am trying to follow your logic I'm probably making your stupid actions better not agree with them entirely. 
As things stand, he may still engage in any thread within the forum; as he is choosing to do.
Never knew a thief can literally rob someone but get sentenced for murder. That is some dumb shit.
Please don't turn your fantasies into accusations of what other members literally partake in with each other.
Please don't delude yourself oh wait I'm talking to the moderator who made this decision and is a Catholic. It must be difficult to comprehend a level of sanity when all you do literally resides on fantasies. Yes without exaggeration but guess you are delusional. 
Topic's author
#12
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@ethang5
Neither of you buttaching here can hold a candle to Athias, or Rosends, Or PGA2.0, or EtrnlVw. Away with all of you pretentious, self-important pretenders.
Athias is literally an anarchist. Do I need to say more?
Who is Rosends? A quick glance I see he uses nice words but like Athias it ultimately can be boiled simple and easily debunked ideas.  
PGA2.0 is literally Mopac but with more words.
EtrnlVw is a spiritualist without any evidence, basically a waste of anyone's time unless he does drugs.

Self-important? The projection is real. 

I didn't read it all. Guess this must hurt you since you do love thinking how important you are. Please make a TL;DR. Please understand I don't want to spend time reading a long statement of a person who I don't actually enjoy conversing with.

The longer you make it the more I feel like you are just vomiting words out of your mouth without any clear understanding of what was your aim. I guess if your aim was to write a story I guess you passed but if it was just to tell me atheists bad, Religious forum is a circle jerk, these people are better than you and you are not actually that important well lets say you wrote a lot for very few topics. No whataboutism doesn't actually add value to what you say. It is you preaching to the coir as if you are expecting a different result. Do you know the definition of insanity?
#13
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
@TRN


It mostly because it was spamming a forum post with topics that were short paraphrases constantly and insulting people. I get on Dr.F for it. He doesn emit enough bad conduct to get banned, but enough to restrict that ability. He can still post freely within the coordinance of the CoC, but simply can create threads. His threads are used to attack Christians and make jokes. He can do that without making a post, but repeatedly doing it will get them banned
Topic's author
#14
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
@SupaDudz

Okay guess Christians are no no to insult since they are a majority on this site but refugees are not? K gotcha.

Your so lucky you have a connection with the moderation team because I would've banned your sorry ass. You should've been banned for skirting the lines but guess if your friends with the moderation team your intent can't be bad.

I am blocking you for a reason. Do you not understand? I don't want to communicate with you. I stayed well away from you and I would like to keep it that way because I lose brain cells talking to you. You give more than what Dr.Franklin gives in discussions which I thought was a good thing but then it only meant I had to sieve through more shit to find any semblance of anything coherent.

I probably get banned for this but whatever. Worth it. 


#15
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
@TRN

Keep being hypocritical in your responses. I am literally dissociating myself with the mod teams if you can read what I am posting in my announcements. Your little tangents about me posting an opinion on the ban and my logic really angers you then that's extremely pathetic. I have too stayed far away from you and kept silent too, but I addressed this is in a formal matter

And good luck. There has been nothing done that is violating the CoC. If me being a conservative bothers you so much, then just say it, don't claim I'm a bigot and all this world of false accusations. I haven't been in association with mods since this summer, and have only gotten banned once for things I said, which were out of impulse and bad things to say on my end, but again controversial, just as how my ban for the RO with you was controversial. 

I will call out anyone who does it, from fellow Christians, to Athiests, and anyone else who decides to spam hateful words. I fought BDT on this as well and he is a Christian. That is how a person who gives advice for the site handles themselves.

I was trying to be respectful, but you seem to ignore that. Oh well.
#16
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
Go ahead

Defend your fellow nihilist/atheist

If a Christian did this, you would be fine with the ban
#17
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Barney
What a shame.

A blow for freedom.

And the rise of Religious Conservatism and Assumed affectation.

How long before your banning all atheists. Big Bro.

Theists require Atheists, otherwise it ceases to be Debateart.com and becomes ChristianSelfGratification.com.


#18
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@zedvictor4
What the fuck lmao. This is very hypocritical on you. When you atheists are known for people like disgusted then maybe there is a reason. Other Christians have gotten banned for misconduct straight up. This isn't getting banned but a precautionary method. What do you not understand? Or do you want to act like the victim
#19
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Neither of you buttaching here can hold a candle to Athias, or Rosends, Or PGA2.0, or EtrnlVw. Away with all of you pretentious, self-important pretenders.

Athias is literally an anarchist. Do I need to say more?
He's more intelligent than you by miles and he's a theist.

Who is Rosends?
A poster who is a theist and more intelligent than you by miles.

PGA2.0 is literally Mopac but with more words.
And yet PGA2.0 is a theist and more intelligent than you by miles.

EtrnlVw is a spiritualist without any evidence,
And he's a theist and still more intelligent than you by miles.

Guess this must hurt you since you do love thinking how important you are.
Yeah, I'm shedding tears.

I probably get banned for this but whatever. Worth it. 
Yeah, we can see that you aren't worried about getting banned at all, given how often you mention it.

Please make a TL;DR.
That's what you should have done with that scatter-brained thing you posted.

So I skipped the rest.
#20
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Vader
"Precautionary measure".....Are we referring to a person, or to the Coronavirus?

And as I have never asked for anyone to be banned and never would do.....How am I being hypocritical?

I'm far to thick skinned to get all upset over something as trivial as a few derogatory words on a debating website.



#21
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@zedvictor4
What a shame.

A blow for freedom.

And the rise of Religious Conservatism and Assumed affectation.

How long before your banning all atheists. Big Bro.

Theists require Atheists, otherwise it ceases to be Debateart.com and becomes ChristianSelfGratification.com
Literally Salixes wasn't banned. Only Athiests perma banned is disgusted. In fact more Christians have been temp banned versus Athiests. No hypocrisy at all
#22
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Are we referring to a person, or to the Coronavirus?
Depends. Do you plan to abort it? If "yes", then no, it isn't a "person".
#23
Seth
Seth's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 114
0
1
1
Seth's avatar
Seth
0
1
1
Accusing people of having boils on their asses for which they refuse medical treatment (https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3789/post_links/162530), declaring you did not intend any honest discussion while spewing insults (https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3835/post_links/162682),
These accusations are not supported by the attached links.

#24
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
Ok. 

So you are saying that abortion is a good precautionary measure.

I didn't have you down as a pro-abortionist.
#25
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Experience has taught me that whenever an atheist says...

So you are saying...
Instead of simply quoting you, he's lying.

Experience is a good teacher.
#26
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@zedvictor4
How long before your banning all atheists. 
Being an atheist does not necessitate committing CoC violations. Nor does being religious prevent them. I've banned members of both groups when their behavior became too indecent.

#27
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Barney
Is it a coincidence that Willows came back and started posting OPs just when Salixes was made to stop? Genuinely curious, not accusing. Obviously the mods have more access to information that would answer that question than I do.
#28
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Because of his compulsion, I knew it would be almost impossible for him to not post a thread for a whole month.

The funny thing is, he's posting to himself. Hilarious. But I'm in favor of treating this as a disease rather than a CoC violation.

The guy literally cannot help it.

11 days later

#29
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
Willows keeps creating new accounts everyday to try to harass Christians. But again, "HE IS ONLY BEING BANNED CUZ HE'S ATHIEST!"
Topic's author
#30
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
@SupaDudz

No one has posted for 12 days on this thread. Let it go. If you have a problem talk to the moderators that you are already friendly with instead of virtue signalling. If you want to virtue signal just make another thread I don't want to be notified with your brain-dead takes. 

I never knew conservatives would be so stupid to selectively target harassment against a majority from a minority. My shock that a conservative Christian doesn't care about the powerless like Jesus did instead care about his tribes that make up a greater majority then any other group in the US. It is almost as if you don't actually understand the Bible instead virtue signal like you do.