Banned Users

[TheRealLynch51]

I'm assuming that since Title2114 has posted in this thread that his ban was not a permaban?

 

[GoldenIsThyFame]

Banned Users

I'm assuming that since Title2114 has posted in this thread that his ban was not a permaban?

Correct. It was actually only supposed to be an over night ban because he was TDTP but there is a glitch in the banning function that defaults everything to a perma ban if you do it the wrong way. Didn't figure out this happened to him until a week or two later.

 

[Irish#1]

Correct. It was actually only supposed to be an over night ban because he was TDTP but there is a glitch in the banning function that defaults everything to a perma ban if you do it the wrong way. Didn't figure out this happened to him until a week or two later.

I've been in IT longer than most of you have been alive. It's rarely IT's fault. Users never have time to read the manual or learn the system and then when it doesn't work right they want to blame IT. We call this a 1D10T error.

BTW..........Send in a change request and we'll take a look at that software function sometime next year.

 

[IrishLax]

I've been in IT longer than most of you have been alive. It's rarely IT's fault. Users never have time to read the manual or learn the system and then when it doesn't work right they want to blame IT. We call this a 1D10T error.

BTW..........Send in a change request and we'll take a look at that software function sometime next year.

Hahaha I guess we're all pretty much collectively the dimmest bulbs in fixture, as it never seems to work correctly. Although we now have a workaround that hopefully cuts down on the collateral damage.

The only time I actually tried to use it to ban permanently (today) it instead applied 1 point infraction expiring in 1 day to the post. Go figure. Had to try it all over again on another post to get it to take. Cockroaches...

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I know who the two glitches were, too!

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/UpHiZAne1aY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[rikkitikki08]

The thing about this thread that makes me laugh are those who openly want others to be banned, i get it that someone annoys you but come on its a message board. I have a feeling that deep down inside some of you guys enjoyed arguing with Pat, did PAT annoy the living hell out of me sometimes? Sure he did but i didn't let him ruin the experience of this site. Also i had no idea we could say fuckin, thats super fuckin awesome! FUCKIN!

 

[palinurus]

The thing about this thread that makes me laugh are those who openly want others to be banned, i get it that someone annoys you but come on its a message board. I have a feeling that deep down inside some of you guys enjoyed arguing with Pat, did PAT annoy the living hell out of me sometimes? Sure he did but i didn't let him ruin the experience of this site. Also i had no idea we could say fuckin, thats super fuckin awesome! FUCKIN!

This is kind of how I feel, though Pat didn't annoy me. Sure, he could be a little harsh, but we're not made fine China or anything. I think some of the personal animosity and glee shown by some posters is politics-based (though I can't prove it), and that's too bad. I think it's best to keep political differences from becoming personal; I just don't see the value in it.

 

[Grahambo]

Pat was banned?

SMH.

 

[GoIrish41]

This is kind of how I feel, though Pat didn't annoy me. Sure, he could be a little harsh, but we're not made fine China or anything. I think some of the personal animosity and glee shown by some posters is politics-based (though I can't prove it), and that's too bad. I think it's best to keep political differences from becoming personal; I just don't see the value in it.

I didn't agree with Pat on anything -- especially his political views -- and I agree with everything in this post.

 

[koonja]

I'm not a mod, and if I were I understand that that might change how I see things.

But let it be known how I feel.

#FreePat!

Lol.

 

[Wild Bill]

The thing about this thread that makes me laugh are those who openly want others to be banned, i get it that someone annoys you but come on its a message board. I have a feeling that deep down inside some of you guys enjoyed arguing with Pat, did PAT annoy the living hell out of me sometimes? Sure he did but i didn't let him ruin the experience of this site. Also i had no idea we could say fuckin, thats super fuckin awesome! FUCKIN!

This is kind of how I feel, though Pat didn't annoy me. Sure, he could be a little harsh, but we're not made fine China or anything. I think some of the personal animosity and glee shown by some posters is politics-based (though I can't prove it), and that's too bad. I think it's best to keep political differences from becoming personal; I just don't see the value in it.

Same here. I enjoyed pat's bullshit. Perhaps my opinion would change if I was a mod constantly monitoring him.

 

[kmoose]

Pat's banning seems certainly NOT to be based on any political bias, but rather, an intelligence bias.

 

[palinurus]

Pat's banning seems certainly NOT to be based on any political bias, but rather, an intelligence bias.

Just to clarify, I didn't speculate that his banning was based on political bias, just that I wondered if the joy some showed at the banning was politics-based. Fact is, I don't root for anyone's banning, except for the obvious trolls like allgator and that sphincter from Ohio State.

 

[BGIF]

This is kind of how I feel, though Pat didn't annoy me. Sure, he could be a little harsh, but we're not made fine China or anything. I think some of the personal animosity and glee shown by some posters is politics-based (though I can't prove it), and that's too bad. I think it's best to keep political differences from becoming personal; I just don't see the value in it.

Some of the cheers or jeers may well be politics based but his politics wasn't what got him launched. He took himself out.

He should have been launched a long time ago for calling a player a piece of shit on the board. These young men aren't the Oilers, the Bears, or the Yankees. This isn't a full time job for them. They don't have multi-million dollar contracts. They go to school and have to study, turn in assignments, and pass tests as well as pass football. They get banged up or susttain serious injury, they still have to go to class and excel in the classroom. The NCAA says they get 20 hours a week for their sport. They don't have 168 hours a week to hone their craft like the pros do.

To Pat the players were just something to vent on. It's ironic you mention making it personal as that was Pat's M.O. whether he was in the Lep Lounge discussing a President or in a GameDay Thread trashing a linebacker.

Drop a pass, miss a block or tackle, throw and INT and he got crude and rude. One can critique without the need to be abusive.

His excuse was that he was drunk. It was suggested that he put his phone in his pocket then and post when he was sober.

He's a high maintenance poster for a group of volunteers who serve as mods. They have jobs, families, and don't need to baby sit adults who feel the need to act out.

I'm a former mod and am familiar with the procedures. Several mods have documented in this thread that they reached out to him. I know I did.

Pat was counseled by multiple parties on multiple ocassions. He was sent to the Penalty Box before. The action taken wasn't over a single post but was a culmination of Pat's body of work ... not his politicial viewpoints

Many here have crossed the line at times, and when they persisted they suffered the consequences. Most were smart enought to have learned their lesson. Those that didn't, like Pat who chose to be atagonistic, are now high maintenance on somebody else's board.

 

[ACamp1900]

and then there is acamp... who just walks between the rain drops...

 

[palinurus]

Some of the cheers or jeers may well be politics based but his politics wasn't what got him launched. He took himself out.

I wasn't calling out the mods on this and I hope I didn't imply that. I think the mods do a pretty consistently good job and they seem to be temperate lot with reasonable fuses. And they aren't petty tyrants on power trips. I'd have guessed the mods gave him plenty of chances.

What caught my attention was the cheering comments. Just wondering what their motivation was. I suppose shrinking violet types who avoid conflict themselves might be glad to see him go, but wasn't sure that's what was the motivation of everyone. Hence my speculation. Only they know for sure, I guess. Maybe they're just happy to see a toxic personality disappear.

 

[IrishLax]

I wasn't calling out the mods on this and I hope I didn't imply that. I think the mods do a pretty consistently good job and they seem to be temperate lot with reasonable fuses. And they aren't petty tyrants on power trips. I'd have guessed the mods gave him plenty of chances.

Yeah... just to reiterate again for those that missed it: 9 previous infractions, a short previous "cool off" ban, and countless warnings. He was on his umpteenth chance and we had agreed that next time he crossed the line would be the last. To be honest, previous moderators have been less lenient with far more reputable posters than irishpat (like Bogtrotter, Neut, etc.), and while I understand that some will disagree with the decision or miss irishpat, know that the decision was made in consensus after many weeks of discussion. At some point, enough is enough. Never commenting in the Yeargin thread then coming out of the woodwork as soon as he planned to visit Clemson to make numerous posts lauding over him being a "freak" comparable to a #1 draft pick and multi-time All-Pro, and then calling a moderator a "fucking schizo" was one troll job too many.

I just want to make clear that this had nothing to due with irishpat's political views (you'll note that some of us, including myself, came down on his side far more often than we did on the other)... but rather with his consistent detrimental and inappropriate conduct.

What caught my attention was the cheering comments. Just wondering what their motivation was. I suppose shrinking violet types who avoid conflict themselves might be glad to see him go, but wasn't sure that's what was the motivation of everyone. Hence my speculation. Only they know for sure, I guess. Maybe they're just happy to see a toxic personality disappear.

I think there are a lot of people happy to be rid of someone who spent the entirety of his time trolling, and I think there are others that have other reasons related to the views he expressed. To each their own.

 

[connor_in]

Just to clarify, I didn't speculate that his banning was based on political bias, just that I wondered if the joy some showed at the banning was politics-based. Fact is, I don't root for anyone's banning, except for the obvious trolls like allgator and that sphincter from Ohio State.

sigh...remember the good ol days of bruin steve the UCLA "lawyer"...

sigh...good times...good times

 

[Old Man Mike]

To give a slightly different perspective: I have felt forced to disregard and not post at all in certain threads when some poster goes on such an egocentric trip that all possibility of discussing what the thread is supposedly about is lost. Although IPat is not the only one who does this, he was one of the consistently most self-immersed.

I also can see that some IE members see a poster who can cause me to not participate as a real positive --- we all are our own breed of a$$hole I know --- but my support for IPat's vacation is grounded in my selfish desire to be able to read the threads productively.

 

[ThePiombino]

What caught my attention was the cheering comments. Just wondering what their motivation was. I suppose shrinking violet types who avoid conflict themselves might be glad to see him go, but wasn't sure that's what was the motivation of everyone. Hence my speculation. Only they know for sure, I guess. Maybe they're just happy to see a toxic personality disappear.

I think there are a lot of people happy to be rid of someone who spent the entirety of his time trolling, and I think there are others that have other reasons related to the views he expressed. To each their own.

^^ This.

Some found him amusing. I thought he was a douche and feel the site is better off without him.

 

[GATTACA!]

Damn just saw the news. Reading though the thread im surprised to see that im one of the few that really enjoyed Pat. Maybe im just a sucker for a good troll.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/y-lolbx6-5s?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Im anxiously awaiting Irishrat

 

[Whiskeyjack]

To give a slightly different perspective: I have felt forced to disregard and not post at all in certain threads when some poster goes on such an egocentric trip that all possibility of discussing what the thread is supposedly about is lost. Although IPat is not the only one who does this, he was one of the consistently most self-immersed.

I also can see that some IE members see a poster who can cause me to not participate as a real positive --- we all are our own breed of a$$hole I know --- but my support for IPat's vacation is grounded in my selfish desire to be able to read the threads productively.

I doubt anyone feels that way, but if I'm wrong, such posters should step forward to be counted.

 

[palinurus]

I just want to make clear that this had nothing to due with irishpat's political views (you'll note that some of us, including myself, came down on his side far more often than we did on the other)... but rather with his consistent detrimental and inappropriate conduct.

And for whatever it is worth, I completely believe this. In fact, I think the site does a very good job picking mods, to the extent I even know who they are, who bend over backwards to be patient and objective, and appreciative of differing viewpoints.

 

[Grahambo]

I doubt anyone feels that way, but if I'm wrong, such posters should step forward to be counted.

 

[Luckylucci]

To give a slightly different perspective: I have felt forced to disregard and not post at all in certain threads when some poster goes on such an egocentric trip that all possibility of discussing what the thread is supposedly about is lost. Although IPat is not the only one who does this, he was one of the consistently most self-immersed.

I also can see that some IE members see a poster who can cause me to not participate as a real positive --- we all are our own breed of a$$hole I know --- but my support for IPat's vacation is grounded in my selfish desire to be able to read the threads productively.

Two thumbs up OMM.

 

[connor_in]

To give a slightly different perspective: I have felt forced to disregard and not post at all in certain threads when some poster goes on such an egocentric trip that all possibility of discussing what the thread is supposedly about is lost. Although IPat is not the only one who does this, he was one of the consistently most self-immersed.

I also can see that some IE members see a poster who can cause me to not participate as a real positive --- we all are our own breed of a$$hole I know --- but my support for IPat's vacation is grounded in my selfish desire to be able to read the threads productively.

I AM SPARTACUS ... I MEAN I AM OLD MAN MIKE !!! (said with Brooklyn accent)

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I AM SPARTACUS ... I MEAN I AM OLD MAN MIKE !!! (said with Brooklyn accent)

I am Old Man Mike!

 

[Emcee77]

Didn't have any problem with Irishpat except that he was disruptive and made threads all about him. Good posters make their point and let others make theirs, and they only argue if they think there's a misunderstanding. When it's clear there is no misunderstanding but simply a disagreement, they agree to disagree. They don't argue just for the sake of contradicting someone -- which is what pat did.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Didn't have any problem with Irishpat except that he was disruptive and made threads all about him. Good posters make their point and let others make theirs, and they only argue if they think there's a misunderstanding. When it's clear there is no misunderstanding but simply a disagreement, they agree to disagree. They don't argue just for the sake of contradicting someone -- which is what pat did.

I've spotted a few problems you had with him...

 

[Emcee77]

I've spotted a few problems you had with him...

LOL. I see your point. I was trying to say that I didn't have any problem with his political views or with him personally ... but I agree with the mods that he was a disruptive presence on this site and we'll have better discussion without him.