So, I got banned for this, since it was my only post in that entire thread:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=42627491&postcount=131It's disgusting tbh, especially because there's no real need. Just stare if you must, why the photography? The word creepy cannot be overstated enough.
Well when enough people tell you "take a picture, it'll last longer"...
And here's my eloquent ban message from bishoptl:
And if you go through my post history, there's nothing else that is even close to bannable since I was back from my last questionable ban which was 3 months for coming to a logical conclusion in a thread where ChiTownBuffalo misled us before editing his whole OP about his female friend being "date raped" and dramatically changing up his story. Having been banned this way, and being banned by the specific mod I was banned by, I found this post from Stumpokapow to be incredibly ironic:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=42714593&postcount=4157one of the first things in the mod tutorial guide is "You're not a moderator to be a "personality."... That is, do not ... derail discussions because of your status, or perform "public hangings" when banning people." Obviously everything has context and I'm not going to second guess bish, but my point is that that's not the way things get done in general.
He seriously said this right after what bishoptl did and he always does this. Yeah it's his style and whatever and a lot of his "personality" so to speak is encouraged by posters and the overplayed "bishoptl is Sam Jackson from Black Snake Moan" meme, but this isn't the first time he comes in with his nonchalant, lacking-in-punctuation-and-sentence-structure threats which always derail a thread and get a shitload of bishoptl banning GIFs posted and what have you. Personally I don't have an issue with his style per se and it's kind of funny I guess, but here you have another mod saying that bishoptl's modus operandi goes completely against GAF's mod tutorial guide, so that's something I guess.
I think we generally do a good but not perfect job at making the rules clear, and I think fear of "unwritten rules" is pretty overblown if people really just read the TOS and FAQ forum in a holistic, not-hyper-literal way.
I also think people overthink the significance of someone getting a 5-day cool-off. No one is being considered a terrible irredeemable poster because they blew off steam on a bad day or stepped slightly over the line.
Yeah okay Sentry says something amounting to "I don't know why someone has to take a picture, why not just stare if that makes you happy" and I found that hilarious because of the classic thing you're supposed to tell someone who's staring at you which is "take a picture, it'll last longer". I don't understand how what I said was against any kind of rule in the TOS. I wasn't trying to derail the thread or troll or anything. Just a funny observation that was very tame.
Ban messages in 2012 are better than they were 5-6 years ago in terms of imparting info. Again, not saying they're perfect, but in general someone who gets banned now should understand why they were banned even if they don't agree.
Then I wonder what he thinks ban messages from 5-6 years ago were like. Again:
Finally, a lot of people who are bitter about their bans hold a vendetta against the people they believe have banned them. In some cases, it's that people disagree with the rules and so think they shouldn't apply--that's not how any system works. I totally get why people would disagree with some of the rules here. But they do apply. So "shooting the messenger" by implicating the mod who banned you isn't really productive. If you really feel someone in specific has it out for you, PM another mod about it and try to be detached and rational about it instead of getting aggressive. Either way, we don't want to enable or empower this kind of thinking--even if Kabouter (or Mumei, or charlequin, or Blackace, or myself...) bans the same person 8 times, that doesn't mean that 10 other mods wouldn't have made any of those calls.
It's not a rule that shouldn't apply that I'm miffed about here, it's being banned for something I shouldn't be banned for even following the rules and all and I don't mean in a hyperliteral sense, I mean the spirit of the law. Repeatedly.
And I know my ban is just for one day so it's not that big of a deal but I feel it's an indicator of a trend in terms of just how puritanical the GAF moderation is becoming.
