he was banned once and ever since people have just been banning him mainly because they don't like him. He has not spammed like you guys say he has
Like Aaron says, it is all about building a good reputation. Some have done exactly that, and for that, they feel safe. They can do as they please, apparently. Not so; I have just heard something that I am not going to let go.
To the point made of this ceasing to be a "Harry Potter Forum" I say this hasn't been a forum of any kind in quite a while; let alone a Harry Potter forum. Aaron turned up and told all of you, didn't claim, that Adam has been more than reasonable. Ignorance doesn't change the facts. Some feel as though they can do no wrong; again, not so.
I don't understand why people that barely posts here are voting. No sense at all. At I say that to people that are voting NO and YES.
Thats a bit of a harsh thing to say though. People have been here a long time and lurk quite often. Pat, Slant, Paco, etc all still check the forum quite a bit still and they are entitled to their opinions as much as anyone else. Same goes for random outsiders and stuff that visit the site and have an opinion on the issue. Everyone's got a voice no matter how much they post.
I don't understand why people that barely posts here are voting. No sense at all. At I say that to people that are voting NO and YES.
Thats a bit of a harsh thing to say though. People have been here a long time and lurk quite often. Pat, Slant, Paco, etc all still check the forum quite a bit still and they are entitled to their opinions as much as anyone else. Same goes for random outsiders and stuff that visit the site and have an opinion on the issue. Everyone's got a voice no matter how much they post.
I agree with Ry. I am one of those who barely post here, but I don't do it because I don't have time. I simply don't post if I have nothing good to say. Now, I do lurk all the time, therefore I know that Adam isn't as spammy as many make him out to be. I have seen that when he was here as Loki, he would post and no matter what the post was, would be marked by being spam or troll or whatever. Then, I would see Nick and other members calling him names, to what I believe, with no reason at all. Adam wasn't called just any names, he was called "retarded" to what I feel is an offensive word to say, for personal reasons. If that isn't bullying, then I don't know what is. This is why, I feel no reason for him to stay off the boards.
I don't understand why people that barely posts here are voting. No sense at all. At I say that to people that are voting NO and YES.
Wtf, you don't have to be a frequent poster to know who Adam is. There are a lot of users who simply lurk without talking much. And if you were implicitly referring to Pat, he was here fervently for an enormous amount of time, and he is perfectly apt to vote.
Where did I say that they can't vote or post their opinions? Nowhere. So there's nothing harsh about it. Nothing at all. And I'm not referring to anyone in specific, so let's not create drama, over react and take words of other people's keyboard shall we?
Yes, people will always make a big deal about it. Perhaps if we, as moderators, try and keep quiet about any further attempts on his part to re-enter the forum, we can stop an overwrought debate.
I don't understand why people that barely posts here are voting. No sense at all. At I say that to people that are voting NO and YES.
Meanwhile, I don't understand why people think a voting system decides. A voting system doesn't decide; it never did and it never will, due to popularity no longer mattering. That goes along with the biased nature of some no longer being accepted, since ignorance isn't as hidden as some would think.
They all tie up perfectly, with reasoning lost upon some, and not upon others. Because of that, we now know for sure that it is all about being liked. This "forum" is no longer a forum, and you have one sentence to blame for that, while this place goes down the drain, because of the things constantly being ignored.
"This is a community, a democracy and the majority will always have the final word."
Honestly, I don't even know how this is an argument. Adam is a character we're all irritated by. Almost all the arguments from people who would like to have him back in the forum, and this is the logical reason I too would use if I wanted him back, is based on moral compassion; letting him in based on equal opportunity, and giving everyone chances, yadda yadda. That's all well and good, but I don't see why it's even being considered to let back in a person who has proved himself time and again as nothing more than an irritation who spouts bullshit conspiracies in his personal life nobody cares about, who contributes nothing of intellectual and discussion-worthy value, and who has repeatedly been removed for his escapades, by some people who voted Yes, it should be noted.
He's been allowed back in/slipped in discreetly countless times, and each time, has been told to behave himself or he will leave. Each time, he's proven himself incapable of behaving. And yet, people want him back? Because you feel morally compelled as a human being to forgive him and give him more chances? More chances at what? To join this special secret club of people on the internet? I'm sure the attention seeking twat who delights in doing absolutely nothing for anyone here but shrieking about how he plots his revenge against Noah Ricketts could do without a forum where the majority of people find him as a bother.
Hey, guess what point this vote served? Almost none. Because he's going to slip in again. And then, when he is removed, someone will say 'should we let him back in'? And eventually, because the people with the authority to let him in will do it because they want to give him the ninetieth chance, he will last a mere three days before everyone is calling for yet another 'permanent' banning. And the cycle will continue ad infinitum until the day the miserable little wretch gives up, which I don't know is coming in the foreseeable future. But the vote served one point. That the current admins actually have the decency as figures of authority to put it to a community vote to let him back in, rather than simply letting against the wishes of the majority because they thought it was right.
James, I can see the point you've made above, how you think it's unfair on him that the majority of the population have decided to keep him out, and I can understand it completely. Unfortunately, the wicked way of the world is that the majority having the way of the community is how the world has always, sadly, worked. In any vote, the majority will get what they want, and the minority end up disappointed. But just wait. It will all cycle back around in a month or so.
Hey wow, I wrote four paragraphs on this shit. I must be bored.
I gotta say, the funniest thing about all of this is how seriously people take Adam and the things he posts lol. Like, yeah, it's ridiculous, but some people react to it so strongly you would think Adam had insulted them personally lol.
I gotta say, the funniest thing about all of this is how seriously people take Adam and the things he posts lol. Like, yeah, it's ridiculous, but some people react to it so strongly you would think Adam had insulted them personally lol.
I don't know if you're misinterpreting my wall of text as me taking Adam seriously or being personally offended by him, but if you are, then speaking on behalf of intelligence and wit everywhere, I happily take it as a compliment. :P
"James, I can see the point you've made above, how you think it's unfair on him that the majority of the population have decided to keep him out, and I can understand it completely. Unfortunately, the wicked way of the world is that the majority having the way of the community is how the world has always, sadly, worked. In any vote, the majority will get what they want, and the minority end up disappointed. But just wait. It will all cycle back around in a month or so."
It's unfair on a number of levels, but I'm not about to go into that now. All I will say is that, yes, things will change for the better, and that is because of the fact that "the majority" will no longer just automatically have their way simply because of a number. An example would be that if most people here were to want you or I gone, they would assume because they want it, we go. Nope. Hate only means you're bitter, and that's all I've seen from the No people. The Yes people (like me) are actually talking about it.
"We don't like him. We find him annoying. We're not using reason (or sense for that matter) and we're keeping him out because of that."
You may not like me, but are you banning me for that very reason? Not a chance. Without me and people like me, you'll soon have no forum. Sure, this place may exist, but not for the better. You'll have a dictatorship, though, if that's what you want.
This is not a popularity contest, James. If those people who voted No did so for the reason I did, it was to protect the forum. Adam was a complete embarrassment to the forum, and he was scaring people off.
As you said, this forum survives by its members. If Adam had returned, many of the forum's key members, the ones who are here everyday and contribute to the threads, would leave. Then where would the forum be? On a down-spiral, and it would be bare in the near future. If there aren't many people posting, no one else is going to post, because they would have nobody to discuss it with.
We did it to protect the forum. Is that not your goal as well, to ensure the longevity of the forum?
Unfortunately, this is a popularity contest, as shown and proven through my previous posts. Proven? I haven't had anybody strongly contest my points. Not at all. All I've seen is ignorance with "Adam is annoying as hell" and "I hate Adam" while people like me continue to show them up. Why doesn't that matter? Because of the ignorance, the bitterness and the biased nature. Too few stand up to it, while too many follow the leader. Why else would you see most good points coming from the Yes people? It isn't to be denied; many of you have lost your voice. Even when you haven't, nothing is backed up. I tend not to lose my voice, and I will always back myself up, as I have done.
I'm not the only one; look back and you'll see how we're ignored, and how we still prove "the majority" wrong. Ask me: how the hell do we do that? I say you can't prove me wrong by ignoring me or by laughing at my opinion. You know as well as I do that you can only prove me right by doing that, and few of you have made a point against me.
I can see the point you were making about the popularity contest thing. When you say that if, theoritically, the majority of the population don't like you, obviously they're not just going to up and ban you. That would be ridiculous, and I can see why you're applying that reasoning to the unfairness on Adam, but to me, that reasoning isn't applicable to him. As I said, he's had all the chances, and frankly I have to agree that he's an embarrassment to the place. I get where you're coming from with the No peoples lack of reasonings other than simply finding Adam annoying and not liking him. But to be honest, what more is there? It's not exactly a popularity contest, so much as Adam's complete and utter disregard for decorum and forum etiquette. He's proven himself unable to follow rules and treat the forum with respect. Nobody's insulting you for saying yes, or disrespecting you, and I don't think it's right for you to say that a majority vote makes the place a dictatorship. It's a dictatorship if the people in charge make the decisions, like you said above. A community vote is far more fair on the group as a whole, and even if you disagree with that, it's far fairer on this place as a whole than if there are only a select few making a decision on behalf of the rest of the politics.
Yes, he deserves to be and should be banned, and kept so; I agree on that. At least these words show that the past often isn't to be kept in the past, and so, people who have been banned for breaking the rules can't return while claiming that the past is the past.
Not that I particularly care, seeing as I'm rarely here, but I agree with Tyler. It was decided that Adam would not be permitted re-entry. Letting him back in after repeated offences and multitudes of second chances is pretty silly. He may not have done anything ridiculous yet, but he will. His presence is disruptive. And if he slips underneath the radar and manages to get back in, just look for a new member with a username based on a villain with some current hype. Next it'll be Malekith, I'll bet.
Get rid of the fat fucking dick. The forum agreed that he was never coming back. Stick to your word mods.
Kranen, could you please be more mature and not resort to personal attacks. If you have a problem then please deal with it in a mature manner and not resort to name calling, no matter who it is.
Comments
Lord Stafford.
To the point made of this ceasing to be a "Harry Potter Forum" I say this hasn't been a forum of any kind in quite a while; let alone a Harry Potter forum. Aaron turned up and told all of you, didn't claim, that Adam has been more than reasonable. Ignorance doesn't change the facts. Some feel as though they can do no wrong; again, not so.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
I just don't understand. My opinion. K bye
Let's hope this subject is not brought up anymore.
Lord Stafford.
"This is a community, a democracy and the majority will always have the final word."
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
He's been allowed back in/slipped in discreetly countless times, and each time, has been told to behave himself or he will leave. Each time, he's proven himself incapable of behaving. And yet, people want him back? Because you feel morally compelled as a human being to forgive him and give him more chances? More chances at what? To join this special secret club of people on the internet? I'm sure the attention seeking twat who delights in doing absolutely nothing for anyone here but shrieking about how he plots his revenge against Noah Ricketts could do without a forum where the majority of people find him as a bother.
Hey, guess what point this vote served? Almost none. Because he's going to slip in again. And then, when he is removed, someone will say 'should we let him back in'? And eventually, because the people with the authority to let him in will do it because they want to give him the ninetieth chance, he will last a mere three days before everyone is calling for yet another 'permanent' banning. And the cycle will continue ad infinitum until the day the miserable little wretch gives up, which I don't know is coming in the foreseeable future. But the vote served one point. That the current admins actually have the decency as figures of authority to put it to a community vote to let him back in, rather than simply letting against the wishes of the majority because they thought it was right.
James, I can see the point you've made above, how you think it's unfair on him that the majority of the population have decided to keep him out, and I can understand it completely. Unfortunately, the wicked way of the world is that the majority having the way of the community is how the world has always, sadly, worked. In any vote, the majority will get what they want, and the minority end up disappointed. But just wait. It will all cycle back around in a month or so.
Hey wow, I wrote four paragraphs on this shit. I must be bored.
"James, I can see the point you've made above, how you think it's unfair on him that the majority of the population have decided to keep him out, and I can understand it completely. Unfortunately, the wicked way of the world is that the majority having the way of the community is how the world has always, sadly, worked. In any vote, the majority will get what they want, and the minority end up disappointed. But just wait. It will all cycle back around in a month or so."
It's unfair on a number of levels, but I'm not about to go into that now. All I will say is that, yes, things will change for the better, and that is because of the fact that "the majority" will no longer just automatically have their way simply because of a number. An example would be that if most people here were to want you or I gone, they would assume because they want it, we go. Nope. Hate only means you're bitter, and that's all I've seen from the No people. The Yes people (like me) are actually talking about it.
"We don't like him. We find him annoying. We're not using reason (or sense for that matter) and we're keeping him out because of that."
You may not like me, but are you banning me for that very reason? Not a chance. Without me and people like me, you'll soon have no forum. Sure, this place may exist, but not for the better. You'll have a dictatorship, though, if that's what you want.
Lord Stafford.
As you said, this forum survives by its members. If Adam had returned, many of the forum's key members, the ones who are here everyday and contribute to the threads, would leave. Then where would the forum be? On a down-spiral, and it would be bare in the near future. If there aren't many people posting, no one else is going to post, because they would have nobody to discuss it with.
We did it to protect the forum. Is that not your goal as well, to ensure the longevity of the forum?
I'm not the only one; look back and you'll see how we're ignored, and how we still prove "the majority" wrong. Ask me: how the hell do we do that? I say you can't prove me wrong by ignoring me or by laughing at my opinion. You know as well as I do that you can only prove me right by doing that, and few of you have made a point against me.
Lord Stafford.
Thanks for your attention and comprehension, guys.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
And if he slips underneath the radar and manages to get back in, just look for a new member with a username based on a villain with some current hype. Next it'll be Malekith, I'll bet.
Lord Stafford.
The problem is solved and he has been banned.