GunZ' banning by Jack.

[~Vix~]

GunZ has been banned by Jack for posts made in this Thread.

On page 9 of the thread GunZ expressed his thoughts about the thread but made sure to stay within all forum rules. He then posted again saying he agreed with Jedi~Tank and that the thread was rubbish and should be deleted. GunZ and JT both are fathers and the reason they both got angry about it is because they were concerned about their children coming to play on a game and seeing lots of pictures of half naked women in interesting positions.

Then Jack came in {End of page 10} and the first thing out his mouth "Gunz I am going to tell you to shut up." Jack the stated that it was his spam temple and that GunZ could not post that type of message in his forum. GunZ's message stating his opinion, and as i said, breaking NO forum rules. GunZ said "Warn away hero, you cannot warm me for stating my opinion." Then, {page 11 now} Jack warned him. GunZ then posted "Umm...exactly HOW is it possible to spam a spam thread ? . Think on it, a wee bit paradoxical or at best silly don't ya think ?" For that... a warning. The next message from GunZ shows a small part of his convo with JT where they agree on the thread, GunZ also says that he backs JT 1000% and that he will do his best to get him removed as a mod after Jack made a comment involving GunZ's children on MSN. That was the 3rd warning and thus, banned.

Zeek, I've PM'd you the Jack and GunZ convo with mentioned the kids.
We feel like this banning is unfair and is 100% uncalled for.

Thank you. ~Vix~

[papa~smurf]

i am sorry to post here , and if out of line, please remove my post

i just said in thread

viewtopic.php?f=95&t=155656

that the level that some times happens on this game is way out of line for some ages

nice to know other feel the same way

it could be our age (know gunz is close to me/ JT a bit behind) but truly, if i had kids under age, and some of this stuff was said to them, i'd raise all holy hell

i support gunz and JT in this

Thanks, sorry to interrupt

[zeekomkommer]

jim please activly do this one, i'm in the process of ordering a new computer ...

[semper]

I won't lie I have little good to say about Gunz and I would 9/10 support jack in most of his points.. but in this situation I am about 90% behind Gunz.

That threads existence is an utter travesty and a complete sign of idiocy married with hypocrisy... threads with sexually suggestive images? You tell me how in any way that is acceptable and swearing is not? It's ridiculous and no.. comments about the spam section being 'different' won't cut it in this case as I was warned in there for masking the other day so to defend that you'd need to use arguments that would destroy the defence for that threads presence.

The only fault I can find with Gunz's objections are that he didn't necessarily voice them in the right section.. however.. he was well within his right to object to the thread as I bloody well am doing so now, and it's the spam section! Since when have there been rules about keeping things on topic..isn't that yet MORE hypocrisy surrounding this situation?

Admins.. if the four of you don't step up and do something this time.. its time for the four of you to go because you're clearly not thinking straight.

[zeekomkommer]

i'll make sure i'll oversee everything and will do all i can, it's just in case. will order new laptop tomorow

[Am Heh]

Jedi~Tank says (4:10 PM):
in response to DK, if society declares me a homophobe because i detest sexual images being placed in sight of my children, which happened to be of lesbians on this one occasion, even though I am CLEARLY NOT then so be it, I prefer to call it MAKING MY OWN CHOICE and and I have the right to voice against it, just as anyone has the right to voice for it.

posting on behalf of JT

[Sammael]

Guys please remember that only Jack, Gunz posting through Vix and the Ombudsman's can post here if you wont to argue please take it some where else. Just a reminder.

~sam

[deni]

Guys please remember that only Jack, Gunz posting through Vix and the Ombudsman's can post here if you wont to argue please take it some where else. Just a reminder.

~sam

errrrm ... no, as long as it is on topic



Jack owns the Temple. He is the supreme ruler of the Temple and his word is law there.

Now, if someone came to your house to cause trouble, you would throw him out, if he did not comply to your friendly request to leave, wouldn't you?

[~Vix~]

Well posting your opinion is fine... every where except here. Since it doesn't help the Ombudsman it isn't needed. The rules in here, as im sure you know, say...

3. the 3 parties should primarely post in a thread are:
a the person(s) making the complaunt, or is representetative(s) if he/she/they are banned (Vix representing GunZ)
b. the ombudsman/understudy (Zeek has handed this over too Jim due to RL PC issues.)
c. the mod(s) in question (Jack)

others can post in a thread but only if their post ad value to the discussion or gives new insights/information to the ombudsman.

[deni]

Well posting your opinion is fine... every where except here. Since it doesn't help the Ombudsman it isn't needed. The rules in here, as im sure you know, say...

3. the 3 parties should primarely post in a thread are:
a the person(s) making the complaunt, or is representetative(s) if he/she/they are banned (Vix representing GunZ)
b. the ombudsman/understudy (Zeek has handed this over too Jim due to RL PC issues.)
c. the mod(s) in question (Jack)

others can post in a thread but only if their post ad value to the discussion or gives new insights/information to the ombudsman.

If it is needed or not is not for you to decide.

[Reschef]

However, insult my mods,

hm, you several times said that mods were insulted ... could you please point me to the posts including this / those insult(s)?

[semper]

On page 9 of the thread GunZ expressed his thoughts about the thread but made sure to stay within all forum rules.

Gunz was stirring trouble in the Temple, that is against the rules in the Temple as explained here.

Stirring trouble? Is not the abuse of your banning power also stirring trouble Jacky poo? How many times in the past have you abused your power to ban someone? I have seen the mod logs in the past.. and I know the admins are aware of it. How many times did you get away with stirring trouble as explicitly stated as being against the rules?

AND! Need I point out that the thread you've linked us too was posted AFTER the incident occurred. In fact you changed the rules during the incident was occurring... which is definitely questionable.

I am sure if we could all act with the knowledge generally gained in hindsight our actions would be different. Ergo.. I point to this part of your defence being a null issue.

GunZ and JT both are fathers and the reason they both got angry about it is because they were concerned about their children coming to play on a game and seeing lots of pictures of half naked women in interesting positions.

There are NO photos of naked women in the thread, if there are then you should report it and they will be removed immediately. Nudes will not be tolerated in the thread, most photos are of women simply simply kissing, while fully clothed, thus making them far less of an issue than quite a few sigs that have been worn by users for years.

Do we need to really start going to as much detail as distinctions of soft and hardcore porn? The former generally just consisting of seductive/suggestive photos or the bare minimums of contact?

They have been in sigs for years and to my knowledge they've generally been removed or asked to be removed.... but! *raises finger*... we shall return to THIS point in a few quotes.. so hold the attention...

Then Jack came in {End of page 10} and the first thing out his mouth "Gunz I am going to tell you to shut up." Jack the stated that it was his spam temple and that GunZ could not post that type of message in his forum.

I really love this part of your argument. Why is that? Well, let's take a look at my entire post, shall we?

[spoiler]Gunz I am going to tell you to shut up. I am also going to tell you to get out of my Temple if you are just going to come here to cause trouble. I am also going to tell you where you can take your complaints. I expect you to listen and do as I say, but if you choose not to, know this, I will warn you.

Now.

Gunz STHU and GTHO of my Temple if all you're going to do is insult my mods and cause trouble. If you have a problem with threads in the Temple, you have two options, 1. you can join the no Temple group or 2. you can file a complaint in the forum issues section. If you do not cease and desist your behavior, you will be warned. Thank you and have a nice day. [/spoiler]

I want you to pay special attention to the parts in red, as they are very important. Now let's take a second look at your argument, shall we?

Jack the stated that it was his spam temple and that GunZ could not post that type of message in his forum. GunZ's message stating his opinion, and as i said, breaking NO forum rules.

With this argument, you are essentially stating that Gunz should be allowed to cause trouble and insult mods. Now, for whatever reason do you believe he should be allowed to do that?

no.. no.. no... what he's suggesting is that your tone and your language are a mod is horribly out of order. Added to that he's suggesting (and if he's not... then I am) that it's the spam temple.. so there's no rules about keeping things on topic.. or there wasn't until you invented them during this tincy snafoo... so Gunz was more than entitled to post what he did.. and then to further disagree with you... when you disrespected him.

With your argument you're stating that mods should be able to insult and cause trouble unpunished?
You cannot hide behind this righteousness Jack.. when you disrespected him first. Out right telling someone to 'shut up', followed by STHU and GTHO IS just that and it's even worse when he was objecting to something that undermines the forums rules.

He's also pointing out.. that's it's dam well NOT your temple..which again is completely right.. its Buck's temple and it shall be for the entirety of it's existence and if you don't accept that.. then it's everyones.

GunZ said "Warn away hero, you cannot warm me for stating my opinion." Then, {page 11 now} Jack warned him.

Damn straight I did, I issued him a verbal warning, he failed to heed the verbal warning, so I warned him.

[/quote]

Your verbal warning would most definitely have been misconstrued as a joke considering the tone surrounding it..

GunZ then posted "Umm...exactly HOW is it possible to spam a spam thread ? . Think on it, a wee bit paradoxical or at best silly don't ya think ?" For that... a warning.

There is only one section appropriate for discussing mod actions, and that's not the Temple. And whether or not people realize it, the Temple does have limits on the spam allowed. Again, I refer to this thread, but also I point you to this thread.

Gunz's point still stands... the existence of the spam temple is to spam. Gunz was spamming... if you're going to warn him.. then I suggest you do it to everyone who's posted in there.

The first topic you linked us too has been nulled earlier in this post as it was created during the incident and is questionably subjective... in the essence that it was created by yourself to cover your ass.

The second topic mentions nothing that directly refers to this case and I am sure anyone of the ones you will attempt to tie it to.. can be found many times over during the spam temples lengthy history or since those rules creation.

The next message from GunZ shows a small part of his convo with JT where they agree on the thread, GunZ also says that he backs JT 1000% and that he will do his best to get him removed as a mod after Jack made a comment involving GunZ's children on MSN. That was the 3rd warning and thus, banned.

The first two warnings should have been enough to tell him that he was causing a fuss in the wrong section, that is entirely he is own fault.

The first two warnings were wrongly handed down so the third should never have occurred.

threads about lesbians? You tell me how in any way that is acceptable and swearing is not?

That's a bit homophobic, isn't it? There is nothing in that thread that violates any rules(asides from Gunz' and JT's posts, ironic no?), there are no images that contain any nudity, it just happens to be about lesbians. Are you saying that talk of homosexuality should be banned from the forums? Because if so, I must say that that is fairly homophobic.

You should know better than to try and purposefully misconstrue my post's jack poo.. and you know very well what I was saying.

By your own admission there are post's within the topic that contain two women kissing.... and ultimately homosexuality is STILL a taboo topic despite any and all individual differences... we don't continually post heterosexual sexually suggestive pictures around the forums, nor are they in post's... the point is (and we're also partially returning to the one I promised to come back to earlier)...

That thread exists for a sexual orientated purpose, no one for one second would believe it existed for the sheer sake of exploring the different poses open to two women kissing or some other innocent reason. Sex.. or porn..is banned from these forums. Soft porn and suggestive images are insidious in nature... and no different when used in a sophisticated conversation to using a swear word.

Swear words are as much a part of everyday life as the notion of gay, sex, blow job and the other more interesting terms are... the point being (and I am going to mask for the sake of an example here.. edit and remove it.. or even warn me if you wish.. I don't care).. if a common a word as b*stard or B*tch cannot be used when they have more sophisticated meanings.. then I see no difference to make any further discretion with a thread about potentially sexually suggestive images and ideas as in general they too can be used as insults...but we don't ban them or hinder them.. however we do with swear words which is why these threads with such images should not exist. We don't ban or warn for the minor swear words the same as we don't for using the terms Lesbian or gay etc etc... because there be nothing wrong with it. However.. when people go to far with swear words... or avoid that filter.. we act. The same should apply when sexually explicit or suggestive things are posted in such an excessive way.

[~Vix~]

Deni, what you playing at? Are you looking for me to say/do something? Your posting your opinion and saying its relevant to this, your saying the Ombudsman NEEDS your opinion. Either that or your admiting your breaking a rule...

We're not here to argue about JT. JT and GunZ agree on this matter, they went about it in 2 different ways... and the both ended up banned I'm here for GunZ.

[deni]

Deni, what you playing at? Are you looking for me to say/do something? Your posting your opinion and saying its relevant to this, your saying the Ombudsman NEEDS your opinion. Either that or your admiting your breaking a rule...

We're not here to argue about JT. JT and GunZ agree on this matter, they went about it in 2 different ways... and the both ended up banned I'm here for GunZ.

Yes. It is definitely more relevant then the quoted post above.

[Sammael]

Jack you think you own, beacuse what

You can close topics and open them and you can ban people.

wow

when an admin can delete your account and take that away and delete the spam temple all together, they wont but they can.

And jason can Delete the forum then you wont noting.

you may think you own it but you dont.

now back on track.

Gunz and JT was banned for what voicing their opinions, then you should ban a lot of people for doing it. you say you wrned him for it atleast and told him to get out, and he didnt, why becuase he seems its unfair for his warning and for him posting.

Why??