Policy on Previously Banned Posters

[tominator89 0]

I think the time has come to unban everyone.

[Firestarter 0]

I hereby submit a petition to bring back Mike. "He was banned before" will not be considered a serious argument. Either tell me why he's a detriment to the board, or un-ban him.

[Guest (Loggins Name)]

Okay, let's commence a serious discussion about this.

 

Pros: He's about as much of an opposing viewpoint as our Current Events folder could possibly have right now, and even though multitudes of posters here absolutely can't stand the guy at all, they dart to his incendiary posts and threads like moths to a lantern and generate precious, precious pageviews for Mike The Admin. Also, the fact that he's been at this whole schtick for so long (not to mention his phone mishap) has obliterated his relevance and credibility to an almost Limbaughian extent, so he'd possibly just be another Current Events gadfly rather than some dominating force that makes people get up in arms. Agree or disagree with him (I've done both), he was a big part of our community for quite a long time, and you'd have a hard time arguing that the discourse in CE has been in any way elevated as planned since we partitioned it into dueling echo chambers three years ago.

 

Cons: Lots of people still can't stand him, and the rest of the staff and I are certain to be flooded each day with reports and complaints about his conduct. He makes outlandish disgusting comments that even cross our line, like how some rape victim had it coming or whatever that was. He once argued at great lengths about the content of a Michael Moore film which he admitted to never seeing. When godthedog talked about how political discourse has just become "beat the other team," Mike's visage would be in the encyclopedia entry. He's such a lightning rod for criticism, bad feelings, and resentment of the community that maybe it wouldn't increase page views after all, and it would drive people away were he to come back.

 

I don't know. It's not 100% up to me. There will be good arguments from each side, but unlike reinstating some generally harmless sports guys, I'm worried that this might upset a lot of members.

[Firestarter 0]

I'm glad to see you're following Dames' fine example and actually indulging in debate on matters of board policy. Thank you.

 

Here are my views.

 

PRO: he's familiar with a lot of sites that even I don't frequent; on more than one occasion he's provided me with information that even the DoD didn't have. I've had to look up his sources several times and he's never been proven wrong. Whatever else he might do, Mike does add serious content - I think this is undisputed. Point number two - Mike always argues in good faith. No matter whether you agree or disagree with him, what you see is what you get. He never brings up some specious line of argument "just to debate" - he says what he says because he means it. And on a personal note, frankly, I'd like some company. It's sort of lonely in my ideological corner in CE right now.

 

CON: "I'm worried that this might upset a lot of members." Pretty much anything upsets someone. The only question is, is it the right thing to do? - and was it ever right to ban him in the first place? I submit that the answer is a resounding "No." He never broke any rules, save the least important: no flaming. Whatever. It's a fucking messageboard. Anyway, the only con I can see is that he might scare away idiots. Now if you're terribly concerned about your idiot audience, there might be an argument to be made there (and given that this is a "professional"-wrestling themed messageboard, I can see why this could be relevant), but otherwise, there isn't much of a leg to stand on there.

 

COUNTER: "He makes outlandish disgusting comments that even cross our line, like how some rape victim had it coming or whatever that was."

 

I think you misinterpreted that entire thread over on the Pit, but Mike (as I read it) was basically arguing for total war. He wasn't advocating rape. He was just saying that we don't need to put a war on hold and start apologizing to Mohammedan enemies who want to fucking KILL us just because they may have accused one or more of our soldiers of rape, credibly or not.

 

"He's such a lightning rod for criticism, bad feelings, and resentment of the community that maybe it wouldn't increase page views after all, and it would drive people away were he to come back."

 

This conclusion I doubt. Even - in fact, especially - the people who complained the most about Mike were the people who engaged him in debate most often. Mike always took on all comers. No exceptions. It didn't matter whether he was outnumbered 50 to 1 - Mike always stood by his principles, and he was always willing to explain them. At great length. Innumerable times. You want page views? Mike's your man.

 

Also, as a side note: I don't suppose anyone else remembers this, but my very first serious interaction with Mike (something like six years ago) concerned GLAAD and Laura Schlessinger. I took GLAAD's side. Mike took Schlessinger's. This resulted in a vicious, multi-page argument, but in the end, he beat me, fair and square. Two years passed before it became obvious that his position had been correct from the beginning and I had been wrong. But that's just one example of what Mike could bring back to your board. There are countless others. Say what you want to about him, but the man always backs up his claims. And he's always been right far, far, far more often than wrong.

 

In sum, if you want more discussion, more diverse views, and more originality in the CE folder, you should get down on your knees and BEG Mike to come back. He might not even want to - I haven't discussed this with him. But I sincerely believe that he would be nothing but a net benefit.

[EricMM 0]

Excuse me, but it wasn't your friends who he was saying "deserved" their past sexual assaults. If I recall correctly the thread had nothing to do with Islam, and everything to do with The Great Satan (Duke).

 

The only reason I'd have for not wanting him back (and you) is that I already can post with you at The Pit to my hearts content, and this CE board was different.

 

You all will bring your "total war" to this board too, and dominate it as well.

 

Oh well.

[Firestarter 0]

Excuse me, but it wasn't your friends who he was saying "deserved" their past sexual assaults. If I recall correctly the thread had nothing to do with Islam, and everything to do with The Great Satan (Duke).

There were two threads in which Mike was accused of advocating rape. I was referring to the first one. In the second, he simply said that your friends were dumbasses for putting themselves in situations in which they could get raped.

 

And with that point I agree.

 

He also said that many women cry "rape" when it's just a matter of them regretting it the morning after.

 

This is also true.

 

So?

 

The only reason I'd have for not wanting him back (and you) is that I already can post with you at The Pit to my hearts content, and this CE board was different.

 

You all will bring your "total war" to this board too, and dominate it as well.

 

Oh well.

I really don't know what you're trying to say here. This part of your post could be interpreted as BAN MARNEY~!! or UNBAN MIKE~!! or KEEP MIKE BANNED~!! or pretty much anything else. The only thing that wouldn't change is the implication (and the fact) that the Pit is better.

[Firestarter 0]

PS. If you do decide to invite him back, I'd suggest you include a sincere apology. I really can't imagine him accepting if you don't.

[EricMM 0]

I did not go into the details as to where or when or by whom my friends were raped.

 

He had no idea, at all, any of the logistics. And yet, he told me that it was their fault they couldn't, "keep their legs shut"

 

He was a reprehensible idiot in that thread, which he apologized for. Don't defend him.

[Firestarter 0]

I'll defend whomever I please whenever I please and however I please. Whether Mike himself apologized or not is irrelevant, except to prove that on the score of assuaging your hurt feelings he's a much better person than I am, which is not a point at issue here.

 

Given the bare minimum details you provided, nothing Mike said was out of line. If you wanted to make a better case, well, then, you should have MADE a better case.

 

(Hint: providing more details might have helped.)

 

But you didn't.

 

And then you blamed the inevitable summary judgement on the presumed misogyny of anyone who disagreed with you. It was pathetic. You are pathetic.

 

You predicate your arguments on vaporous hypotheticals which you could have brought up but didn't, and then you claim moral superiority on the basis of something you never even tried to establish or even argue. The necessary and sufficient response to this is: fuck you, and fuck your friends.

 

 

 

I suppose people might be a little late to the latter party, though not to the former.

[EricMM 0]

No, he went right to his apparent gut instinct of blaming women who get raped, which was basically what the entire argument was about.

 

Again, he said he was sorry. The fact that you can't appreciate what he did was wrong is mystifying.

[Firestarter 0]

I imagine it would be to you.

 

If Mike said he was sorry, I think it would have been because you made such an idiotic argument in the first place and he didn't want to denigrate the people you were so inadequately trying to defend.

 

Anyway, it's kind of funny that now you're the one praising him while attacking me... and last I checked, my membership on this board wasn't the point in question.

[EricMM 0]

I didn't say it was. I wasn't addressing the issue at hand, merely a tangent raised.

[Firestarter 0]

Then either address the issue at hand or explain why your tangent is relevant.

[EricMM 0]

Tangents are relevant because we never stay on topic ever.

 

I got no problem with anyone at the Pit posting here, now that WP is banned from The Pit.

[Firestarter 0]

On this we can agree.

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

Mike's not coming back because I can't stand the motherfucker. Personal bias completely. Take it or leave it. If he's invited back, I'll ban him again. Period.

[Firestarter 0]

Mike's not coming back because I can't stand the motherfucker. Personal bias completely. Take it or leave it. If he's invited back, I'll ban him again. Period.

If that's the reason, and the other admins don't overrule your dumbfuck ass, then I won't be posting here again either. Congratulations, Agent: in that case, you'll have been part of why I left this board twice now, despite a dozen people imploring me to stay, reconsider, or rejoin.

 

Good job.

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

The other admins (maybe a couple exceptions) also haven't had the misfortune of moderating a messageboard at which that bum is active. Throw a fit again if you like. Didn't hurt my feelings the first time you ran away with a quivering lip.

[Firestarter 0]

you ran away with a quivering lip

Please, spare me your inane attempts at condescension. I left of my own accord because I found the board policies contemptible, and several others followed in my footsteps.

 

Throw a fit again if you like. Didn't hurt my feelings the first time

That you're as much of a twit now as you became at around that time surprises me not at all. I didn't have a problem with you when you were a regular poster. Remember how it was back then? We used to get along. Then you became a mod, and something, it seems, snapped in your brain. You became a preening, self-important jackass.

 

Get over yourself already. You're a nobody, and you probably always will be a nobody, but at least you used to be a likeable nobody.

 

Now you just fucking annoy me. That's not necessarily a place where you want to be.

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

[Firestarter 0]

Whatever.

[bob_barron 0]

If you guys are willing to bring back Anglesault, who was just as argumentative as Mike, if not more, then I don't see how can you justify not bringing back Mike.

 

His banning was incredibly suspect to begin with, and I don't think being an argumentative prick is or should be against the rules of this place. TSM is about discussion isn't it?

 

And if people don't like Mike's arguments or posts, they can ignore them. Not that hard.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

If that's the situation....I'd rather they just reban Anglesault.

 

No more Mike.

 

Please.

[Guest]

Bring back Mike. If he gets out of hand, just ban him again, but give him another chance.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Important reference thread.

 

4.) MikeSC was a cancer to this board, and if you don't think so, you probably need to be slapped in the fucking face with a taste of reality, because you're so deluded that common sense is the most foreign concept you've ever experienced. Never, ever in my entire history of modding messageboards have I seen one person cause so much strife and bullshit and get away with it.

[IllustriousOne 0]

Ahh, I reminisce back to my more incendiary days as a message board moderator.

 

*sighs*

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

I say we bring back of fanofcoils to do a weekly movie review.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Bring back Jerean.

 

We never even got to scratch the surface of the greatness that was Jerean.

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

Next PBP?

 

Hotbutter Spoontoaster

 

Edit: Oh, it seems he's already unbanned. Disregard this post.

[geniusMoment 0]

I say unban Boff, he really wasn't given a chance. And some of his posts were pretty good.