Discussion III about the Suspension List

Quote: MDawg

There's a mixture of ratiocination and poisoning of the well(bush) here.

I saw the joke he posted and it was out of line for WOV, but I doubt he meant it as any kind of hate speech. In other words, nothing WellBush has posted before would indicate that he harbors any kind of prejudice or hate towards any ethnicity, race or religion. You're reading too much into motive here when clearly really all he was trying to do was illustrate a point, granted, via politically incorrect stereotypes that have no place these days. When I was in law school one of my professors was Scottish and he used to illustrate certain legal points by referencing the alleged attributes (stereotypes) of Scotsmen.

As far as suspending or nuking someone just because he continues to post what he believes in, whether or not you agree with it, that's just not right, nor does someone's being passionate about his beliefs and repeating them become trolling (otherwise, EvenBob would have been nuked long ago). Indeed, I am surprised to hear Mission146 advocate such a thing after his speech about the value of MDawg to this forum. While, yes, the Adventures of MDawg were for some reason placed in the Betting Systems section, indeed I have always said that no mechanical betting system works. I've never even said exactly what I do or don't do to win regularly. Point being, that being tossed into the betting systems bin is not nor has it ever been grounds for suspension or nuking.

A suspension for the joke that was in poor taste, sure, but not otherwise.

Is it your contention that an individual should be able to say anything that he wishes, regardless of how hateful it comes off, as long as it wasn't, 'Meant,' as Hate Speech?

To that matter, how could we possibly know the intent of a poster behind a specific statement of, 'Hate Speech?' If we draw the line at what is or is not, 'Meant,' by it, then certainly anyone could say anything that they want to and hide behind the guise of not, 'Meaning,' it that way, could they not?

The question is: Are we going to be the sort of site that allows Hate Speech by a known violator of other rules to go more or less unchecked, or are we going to be the sort of site that stops Hate Speech and cultural stereotyping at the door?

Anyway, I'm not, "Reading anything into," Wellbush's motive. I make my position based on only the words in the post. How could I claim to know what Wellbush's motive is? I never said that Wellbush himself harbors any biases of any kind.

I don't understand the last part of what you said and can't find that quote in the link. To be clear, I don't care and am not accusing you of misquoting***(SEE EDIT), but I have no idea what point you are making. My point is not that Wellbush advocates betting systems; my point is that he committed Hate Speech---which I would think would be a serious offense here---and Wellbush's other posts have virtually zero in the way of value to a gambling forum.

On the other hand, your posts provide non-zero value to the forum. The thread on the suites is very good for those who are concerned about that, for one example.

***Never mind, you didn't misquote me. You didn't close the URL bracket which made it look like I said everything that came after that. It's all good, I wouldn't have requested a suspension for that anyway.

Quote: DRich

Vote for Mission, he is probably not the worst choice.

Vote for Mission, he may suck less than the current mods.

-------------------------------

#WMOAT.

Quote: Mission146

My days usually have a tendency to go better the less time I spend interacting with other people, anyway.

(Quote clipped, relevance)

I should really start listening to myself more often.

Quote: Mission146

To that matter, how could we possibly know the intent of a poster behind a specific statement of, 'Hate Speech?'

I have a theory about that.

Quote: MDawg

Thank you for thanking my posts. >>>>>>

"speech about the value of MDawg to this forum"

Mission146, I don't think we suspend people based on whether their content is useful or not...which anyway, is subjective.

WellBush made a joke in poor taste, that was about it. Let's not make a federal case out of it.

Quote: MDawg

Mission146, I don't think we suspend people based on whether their content is useful or not...which anyway, is subjective.

WellBush made a joke in poor taste, that was about it. Let's not make a federal case out of it.

I certainly did base how strictly I interpreted the Rules on whether or not I believed an individual's posts had value to the forum. It seems to me that most people seemed to like that; the only exceptions tended to be people whose posts added no value to the forum.

Quote: Mission146

(Quote clipped, relevance)

I should really start listening to myself more often.

Call it a new "Mission Tradition".

I object to the length of EvenBob's ban only being fourteen days and the cited reasons only being profanity and personal insult.

In addition to those things, at a time when it could be reasonably expected that EvenBob saw my quote of him, (or Axel's quote of my comment on EvenBob's post if EvenBob does indeed have me blocked) EvenBob THEN amended his post which would give the impression that I misquoted him for no purpose other than to get him Suspended.

All evidence would suggest that EvenBob did this knowingly and with the intent that I get banned for misquoting. For those reasons, I request that the length of Evenbob's Suspension be reconsidered by all three moderators.

lol come on.

Okay this is the side of Mission146, I don't like to see...one that gets a little too heated and caught up in the moment over something relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

If you were in Vegas right now I'd get hold of you and suggest that you meet me for a comp'ed meal and forget about the WOV for the rest of the day.


EvenBob edited it to try to avoid getting suspended not to try to get you suspended!