Poll Cad Impeachment Vote

Is Cad unfit to serve in the position of moderator?

  • Yes

    Votes: 40 46.5%
  • No

    Votes: 46 53.5%

  • Total voters
    86
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
26,728
55,510
Oh a warning? NOT A THREAD BAN?

You realize the warnings will give him a 30 day RRP right? I gave him a 3 day thread ban. Which is worse? Fucking tard.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Daezuel

Potato del Grande
24,648
57,508
You realize the warnings will give him a 30 day RRP right? I gave him a 3 day thread ban. Which is worse? Fucking tard.
You realize if you tell people that a 3rd warning will result in said punishment may give those people a chance to change their behavior or suffer the consequences? Nah, just thread ban without telling him why, gosh I wish I was as smart as you.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
26,728
55,510
You realize if you tell people that a 3rd warning will result in said punishment may give those people a chance to change their behavior or suffer the consequences? Nah, just thread ban without telling him why, gosh I wish I was as smart as you.

He knew exactly what he was doing and why he was doing it. No sympathy.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

DickTrickle

Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
13,731
16,088
You realize the warnings will give him a 30 day RRP right? I gave him a 3 day thread ban. Which is worse? Fucking tard.

Only if you don't change the time on the warnings. There's a time drop down on the warning, isn't there?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
26,728
55,510
Only if you don't change the time on the warnings. There's a time drop down on the warning, isn't there?

Indeed there is. But why change it?

With as few warnings as we give out, honestly you have to be like a king shitposter to hit 3 even if they never expired.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
My understanding is that Cad wanted to try the thread-ban because he thought that another warning was harsher than a 3 day thread-ban that would allow him to post everywhere else.

Now maybe that was a mistake, but it seems to have been a mistake based on not wanting to over-moderate. So the accusations of him being a nazi and that AngryGerbil is making the right decisions only kinda holds up if you think Olscratch should have been dealt with more harshly shrug.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,660
YOU TAKE YOUR FACTS AND YOU STUFF THEM RIGHT UP YOUR ASS.

WE REQUIRE THE BLOOD OF A LAWYER. NOTHING LESS WILL SATE US.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 3 users

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,571
45,198
Break the deal, face the wheel!
 
  • 2Solidarity
  • 2Like
Reactions: 3 users

DickTrickle

Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
13,731
16,088
Next time, just say something that says "Next time you get a thread ban for three days." Again, thread ban is not anywhere in the rules, was never even informally talked as a consequence of one warning. You can say all day that Olscratch wouldn't have changed his ways but you have to give him the chance because up until you did it, it was reasonable to think he might get a second warning, not a thread ban.

Also, because of the boilerplate text, he might have just thought it was for having so many links without other content, and not general posting habits. So, if he stopped the multi-linking, he could have thought he was okay going forward, especially since so many other people shitpost without problem.

But it seems you'd rather just ban and think about it later.
 
  • 2Solidarity
  • 1Like
Reactions: 2 users

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
26,728
55,510
Next time, just say something that says "Next time you get a thread ban for three days." Again, thread ban is not anywhere in the rules, was never even informally talked as a consequence of one warning. You can say all day that Olscratch wouldn't have changed his ways but you have to give him the chance because up until you did it, it was reasonable to think he might get a second warning, not a thread ban.

Thought: If he was just going to shitpost in the politics thread until he gets 3 warnings, then the thread ban was the right thing to do. Far more surgical. Outside of the politics thread and shitposting about the politics thread in comments/suggestions, he seems reasonable elsewhere. Which goes to show he's just trolling for the lulz.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Hoss

Make America's Team Great Again
<Gold Donor>
28,196
18,008
I like what cad has done, but I want to vote to impeach just because we illegally have too many moderators.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 users

Olscratch

tour de salt
<Banned>
2,114
536
13 years of foh political thread posting and this is my first ban, and the reasons given so far have been vaguely described shitposting, not enough effort, and not enough content. Despite lack of content cad still spent 48 hours arguing directly with me in the political thread before resorting to pussyshit.

Lemme grab it cad.
 
  • 2Solidarity
  • 1Like
Reactions: 2 users

Daezuel

Potato del Grande
24,648
57,508
A lawyer that can't follow procedures, go figure. The point is if you guys would follow the procedures before summarily passing judgment a poster would know why they're being punished and have a chance to change their behavior. At that point if they disagree they can then use the appeals process. A warning also allows a poster to appeal that warning before action is taken.

Afaik one warning then punishment is not the proper procedure. And again we're talking about alleged shit posting and not some instant ban worthy action like doxxing.

Comparing a warning that by itself does nothing but alert a poster that their posts are being monitored to a thread ban with no justification given is fucking retarded, but I expect that from most mods at this point.
 
  • 2Solidarity
  • 1Like
Reactions: 2 users
Status
Not open for further replies.