I'm only going to focus on this small bit of it because I'm too tired to respond to the rest and this particular point irks me.

We're not eating steaks. We serve the forum, the forum doesn't serve us. Everything, absolutely everything, we do is out of interest to the good of the forum. I know you know this, but I don't think I can stress it enough honestly. Ever since I became a mod I noticed what a thankless job it really is. I'm happy to do it because I enjoy working with the team and love MusicBanter, but I'm not getting any perks. Neither is anyone else. (Besides the bigger inbox space... but mine is still always filled up. I'm just a popular guy :p:)

That statement was meant towards the wealth of information, and how it is given to us on a limited and controlled basis. It had no bearing on the leisure or luxury of modship. I knew it was a terrible analogy.

My point was, I'm expected to be satisfied with a nibble of truth, when you are given a multitude of facts on which to base your stance on an issue.

We're "given" a multitude of facts" because we're in the position to gather "a multitude of facts". We see behind the curtain because that's our job, we were hired to make judgment calls based on the information we observe. It's our information gathered by us, if we don't want to share it we don't have to.

Again, in case you didn't catch it the first time. That is how I feel, how I have felt, and how I will remain to feel about the issue for the foreseeable future.

I can't believe this fuss is still raging. It's ridiculous!

It's a clear case of somebody finding a horse before the owner loses it.
The way I see it, the mods didn't invent this new rule...Dirty did.

Somebody close this mess.

I was late to the party, and I like that logic.

Just bumping this thread cause its been like an hour and half with no posts and I know how everyone is a fan of this thread so................................................ ......................................

Carry On!!

i can't understand the logic of having someone like Dirty banned whilst The Virgin still subsists here

The Virgin is fine because he's not going around insulting people which is more serious than the light trolling that he does from time to time.

When his trolling gets more extreme that's when he gets banned like he did for a week.

I'm glad that I've managed to stay out of this conversation for the most part. I'd like to remind everyone that this thread was intended for a more brief discussion of why someone was banned, and if you still have questions, PM a moderator. It's as simple as that.

Someone in this thread has "Sometimes The Problem Can Be Mistaken For The Solution"
in their signature line.

Evidently, drama is a problem. Drama has occured because people are mistaking "Gossip" for "Helping". You've all been given progressively more info and then asked for more, jumped off the handle, made statements and generally acted weird.

Hows about this for a solution - From now on, why don't people just try and stay out of arguments with the mods about someones banning or infraction or whatever, if they didn't see what happened? Unless the mods decide amongst themselves that all bannings are going to be made public and the posts or chatlogs hosted onsite for the perusal of the many, then the fact is, no explanation is going to be complete enough that people can make objective decisions as to whether someone should or should not have been banned.

And as far as I can tell, it seems the mods aren't going to do that. In fact it seems that because of this thread the mods (or at least some of the mods) are edging closer to simply providing no specific information at all, so as to avoid ****storms instigated by people who don't have the full story.

Now for gods sake, people, this is the internet. I've been banned from forums, IRC channels, all sorts of places for all sorts of reasons. I have never once given a ****, there are always other places to go. If musicbanter is that bad you can't trust the mods, have to bitch, need to complain and bitch and moan and generally make asses of yourselves, by all means, reduce your musicbanter posting like I did and go somewhere the **** else for the most part.

^Exactly^!

Its not like its the first time he's (Dirty) been banned. (I like Dirty also). But I might suggest, as for myself, I totally trust and respect the judgment by all of our current Mods. I don't really see how we could ask for a better Mod team than the one we have now. These ladies and gentlemen are a lot more reluctant than some of other Mods in the past would've been when it comes to banning members. To be completely honest, I dont know of one Mod that has been unfair to anyone here at MB since Ive been here, when these guys & gals decide to retire as a Mod, they put a lot of consideration and effort into making decisions on who will be replacements. We should also understand that MB holds high expectations and a certain amount of "higher Standards" as to say, here at MB. That's why we're # 1.

Now now, you're clearly just trying to kiss ass and play the game for a mod position here.

NO! but thanks anyway, I have enough "Children" to take care of here at home already. :)

you don't need to understand the logic. insulting members is something you always do but never understand.

tnx djchameleon but let me correct you, it's never my intention to be trolling even in the slightest manner. some members just view my love to the pop mainstream and unique opinions to be trolling. when a different opinion is posted here that is totally opposite to that viewed by some of the members, they think it's trolling. i just view it as uniqueness of a personal opinion. nothing more nothing less.


agree. though there's this one mod that i really, really hate since the beginning of my stay here, i think some mods are doing the best they can to make this forum as fun as possible. and i can't believe Conan is a mod after all.. hmp! you lied to me. i should have known earlier that when you're name is written in bold in the active user's list right above the shoutbox is an indication you're a mod.

Yeah Conan,you are such a dick

you said, that, not me.
and fyi, the mod that i said i really hated is not conan.

So who is it?

Some people have commented on how dumb this thread is. I'll come right out and say it: I love this thread.

It showcases just how bored most of us really are and how much we love drama. This is a lot of fun. I really do wish we could go back to insulting each others' taste in music. For now this works, I guess.

As for me...I infracted oojay for something I think was totally justified. Was it a direct insult? No, but it sure as hell was a passive one. It really annoys me when people toe the line and then expect there won't be anything done. He obviously wasn't banned and now hopefully he knows that **** won't fly, so was it really that big a deal that I did it?

does anyone else think that the tie of this thread sounds like the title of a children's book? Yes, how ironic.

I can't infract you for telling the truth.

The withholding of facts is meant to take focus off of the banned and the victim, re-direct it on staff, and ultimately reduce the amount of inevitable drama. Other than you being curious and mistrusting, revealing information will solve literally nothing. It will extend the distress of the person who was verbally abused, it will increase the infamy of the user who was banned, and it will open up a massive can of worms amongst all users as to whether or not it was "fair", because everyone has a different opinion subjected to their bias for or against other users. All I am seeing is gossip, and nothing beneficial can come from increasing the drama. Publicizing information can also negatively effect the person who was abused, and that's another excellent reason not to share all the details.

I think she was being a little sarcastic with that comment. Conan is a nice guy! And by the way, who are you talking about? Just like you guys want to know all the details about someone's banning, I want to know which mod you hate :laughing:. Even though neither will solve anything, really.

I love this post. :beer:

Honestly, if I cause half of our regular users to hate me in order to protect the integrity of one user who has already had to deal with enough negativity, I'm happy to take that bullet. They deserve respect and privacy just as much as others deserve answers.

When somebody is banned... this thread gets 850 new replies.

Usually redundant ones too.

lol keep that tid bit of information to yourself

The thread starter isn't lost on me, either.

More like this one ...

http://amultimodallife.files.wordpre...ryonepoops.jpg

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kz...kgtmo1_400.jpg

Lol how this thread manages to annoy so many is amusing

Okay, there has been discussion of closing this thread, so I am going to draw a line. If we can't get back on topic and make relevant, reasonable posts, then there's no reason to keep this open, and you'll be left without a thread for information on the matter of bans.

The amusing part is the OP got banned - maybe it was a self fulfilling prophesy.

I guess I'm supposed to forget all the times I've seen you insult people on this forum? Passive or otherwise?

My point is, oojay didn't say anything that you, or any other member of this forum (including most mods) wouldn't post in response to something they felt strongly about.

I see the posts for which he was infracted have now been deleted, nice move, so now all we're left with is your account that it was "totally justified". Some people might buy that, but not me. I had a chance to read the posts, and back and forth that followed, I'm calling bull****.

Now is the time to go back and ammend the rules to include whatever rule you think he broke, by the way.

This is exactly what I'm talking about everytime in this thread, although to a lesser degree. It's this kind of selective enforcement of self-made rules that are causing these problems, or "drama" as you like to put it. Enforce the ****ing rules, as they're written, and provide REAL justification if your actions are really justified. Empty explanations come cheap.

In a rare case where I got to see the unfoldings of the situation before it was systematically removed from public eye, it's obvious that by looking at the actual happenings that you were in the wrong. Yet, the posts are deleted, and you claim justification. At this point, it's your word against his, and the threat of a perma-ban is waiting if he pursues the issue further. A gross misuse of mod power if I've ever seen one.

In short, yes, it's a big deal that you acted like a bullying hypocrite because someone said something off-color that you didn't like. Please, MB, if we're going to have BS rules, apply them fairly.

p.s. Yes I know this is an internet forum, and that I'm over-reacting in almost every post I've made in this thread, including this one. But that doesn't mean I don't believe every word of it. I see something I don't like, I'm going to comment on it. I know the mods don't have sinister intentions, and I don't think they're evil. I've been around long enough to remember nearly all of them when they were regular members before they were modded, and they seem like decent people for the most part. I just hate how when someone gets banned, it's turned into this big to-do. A he-said, she-said nightmare.

That is all, I am now open for personal attacks from mods and regular members alike.

ban The Virgin for life and the mods are redeemed in my eyes

We were speaking of leniency vs. continuity. What do you mean "how would you know?" A user's history is irrelevant in that argument. She said it was moderators' leniency that was causing upheavel, I proposed that it was a lack of continuity in moderation (which really sounds worse than it is, more just different levels of temperment between different moderators).

What (mostly) pisses me off is that my "infraction-worthy" post was fact, not opinion. Like it's okay for someone to make stupid posts, but against the rules for someone else to point out that those posts exist (especially when those posts are made by a mod). I said that Vanilla posts about what flavor of frosting her vagina tastes like and which members she wouldn't kick out of her bed (content that was taken from HER OWN posts in HER OWN thread). Ever heard of not killing the messenger?

Perhaps requiring posts to be openly approved would be a good thing? Or even just making it known that if threads go way off topic, they'll be deleted?

I just feel like closing a thread which 99.7% of users find to be a good source of information because .03% of users decide to be dicks isn't cool.

I don't feel like that's a good idea. Whether it gets deleted, or switched to censorship monitoring, the quality of the thread, and the information it contains will both decrease.

itll just move to different thread

I wouldn't like to have the thread moderated. I think it would subvert the entire discussion in the thread, and cause further mistrust of us. It's good for it to be wide open, but frivolous posts are merely wasting bandwidth and irritating the people who are attempting to have a discussion.