New feature: banning users from a thread

[El Presidente]

Ideally the mods would like to keep the forum to a narrow demographic for friends and others who share their sensibilities. You might encounter someone who is frequently rude, offensive and wonder why he [he mainly] is never banned. You might encounter others who are banned just because he/she ruffles some feathers. Draw your own conclusions. If you can annoy people who are set in their ways, it should usually be a good thing which should be encouraged for a healthy forum. otherwise it can be ahhhh! zzzzzzzzzzz

Could you illustrate the above observation with some evidence?

 

[jimbob5]

Could you illustrate the above observation with some evidence?

Someone suggested a manager was having an affair with a player's wife. No action. I have just had a weeks ban apparently for 'not being remotely amusing'. I have not the faintest idea what they were referring to. I rest my case.

 

[El Presidente]

Someone suggested a manager was having an affair with a player's wife. No action. I have just had a weeks ban apparently for 'not being remotely amusing'. I have not the faintest idea what they were referring to. I rest my case.

Seems odd as when a ban is given there is usually a link to the original comment by the miscreant.

 

[jimbob5]

You couldn't be more wrong, I have a very good mate on here who I have banned at least twice on here (for very good reason I might add!) we encourage everyone to NSC even away fans.

I think past and very recent events have shown how much of a close knit community we are, regardless of where ANY of us live.

yeah sure

 

[jimbob5]

Seems odd as when a ban is given there is usually a link to the original comment by the miscreant.

There we go. On the 'Was this a good idea…..' thread. Someone has just suggested that instead of calling jimbob a Palace fan they should have called me a c…t. I'm not massively offended but you can be sure if the boot was on the other foot I'd get a bare minimum of a weeks ban.

 

[El Presidente]

There we go. On the 'Was this a good idea…..' thread. Someone has just suggested that instead of calling jimbob a Palace fan they should have called me a c…t. I'm not massively offended but you can be sure if the boot was on the other foot I'd get a bare minimum of a weeks ban.

Perhaps the ban came about as a result of the totting up procedure for a series of yellow cards?

 

[jimbob5]

Perhaps the ban came about as a result of the totting up procedure for a series of yellow cards?

Well. One thing I DO know and that's ………………. I spend WAY to much time on here whether the bans are justified or not.

 

[El Presidente]

Well. One thing I DO know and that's ………………. I spend WAY to much time on here whether the bans are justified or not.

You're not the only one!

 

[hitony]

Well. One thing I DO know and that's ………………. I spend WAY to much time on here whether the bans are justified or not.

You do your best to de-rail any thread, with any comment that suits you at the time, as is being proved on this very thread now!

Your 33 infraction points and 10 infractions, still all very much ongoing and "Live" I believe! do not assist your situation here on NSC, as it stands, even a further minor 1 point infraction will amount to a "Totting up" ban

 

[Westdene Seagull]

There we go. On the 'Was this a good idea…..' thread. Someone has just suggested that instead of calling jimbob a Palace fan they should have called me a c…t. I'm not massively offended but you can be sure if the boot was on the other foot I'd get a bare minimum of a weeks ban.

You're a sensitive soul aren't you ? IT WAS A JOKE ... based on the thread theme. You even said you weren't offended Or does that make you a liar as well ?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Even Blind Pew could see that jimbob is an undercover Palace fan

 

[jimbob5]

You do your best to de-rail any thread, with any comment that suits you at the time, as is being proved on this very thread now!

Your 33 infraction points and 10 infractions, still all very much ongoing and "Live" I believe! do not assist your situation here on NSC, as it stands, even a further minor 1 point infraction will amount to a "Totting up" ban

You are so powerful. You hate anyone disagreeing with you.

 

[jimbob5]

You're a sensitive soul aren't you ? IT WAS A JOKE ... based on the thread theme. You even said you weren't offended Or does that make you a liar as well ?

Now you're calling me a liar with impunity. Am I allowed to call you a hypocrite?

 

[jimbob5]

You're not the only one!

Obviously. This backs up my premise that the mods only want people who agree with them to make posts.

 

[jimbob5]

Even Blind Pew could see that jimbob is an undercover Palace fan

well I DID support them against Chelski which is why I got my last ban. Most of the Chelsea supporting mods weren't around when Chelski were getting crowds circa 10k

 

[El Presidente]

Obviously. This backs up my premise that the mods only want people who agree with them to make posts.

That's incorrect. Disagreement and binfests drives traffic on NSC, which pays for the cocaine and hookers lifestyle that we enjoy on the back of it.

 

[fat old seagull]

So how come we did not get a vote on this feature ? Or, was it a Mods only vote ? We were given the choice over " Mandatory " icons to bracket posts yet this has just appeared overnight, I thought there was some degree of democracy on here ? Have we shifted to the One Man, One Vote system where Bozza is the man and he has that one vote ?

Guess that's your last post on this thread then!

 

[maltaseagull]

Someone suggested a manager was having an affair with a player's wife. No action. I have just had a weeks ban apparently for 'not being remotely amusing'. I have not the faintest idea what they were referring to. I rest my case.

Well the punishment didn't work.

This post is not very amusing either

 

[Rugrat]

Well the punishment didn't work.

This post is not very amusing either

If all the "not remotely amusing" were banned who would be left to post?

 

[maltaseagull]

If all the "not remotely amusing" were banned who would be left to post?

True