Samson, I think you're being a little too literal here. Obviously, anybody with the proper access rights to the database can do that from a practical standpoint. But, I assume that if an admin were, in fact, to do so for some reason, the other admins would be 'slightly' unhappy, or at least somewhat confused. And one would sincerely hope that the other admins would start the process of reversing such a thing. If you are going to maintain that you wouldn't, I also would get a little concerned about your policies. Seriously, are you saying that, if an admin put in a blanket ban of people whose names contained 'e', it would stick?

I think you're being a little too strong in saying the Crat is trying to lead this to anarchy or is being defiant. I don't think it's defiant to ask a question about policy. In fact, I think it's perfectly reasonable to do so, and frankly you seem to have said similar things too, saying that healthy discussions are ok. It would be "defiant" to say something like "your policy is a bucket of crap" but not to say "is that really your policy?" (You could argue, I suppose, that the former can be implied by the latter, but then you'd be the one jumping to assumptions.) I have a whole bunch of questions about policy, but they're just that, questions, and I would hardly consider it unreasonable to ask for clarification. The point is that just because you ask a question doesn't mean you are trying to "bring down the system". To think otherwise is something I would be more seriously worried about. :wink:

I'm not a saint and nobody said I was, but until I actually DO something besides make sarcastic remarks and call people names, I'd say my behavior is well within acceptable limits. If you disagree, start a petition and get me fired from my volunteer development position here at MudBytes.

If anyone here is going to exist here in perpetual fear that an Admin might some day have to use one of their Admin Hat Buttons to keep these forums clean, tough. We've got what I think is a pretty proven track record with regards to keeping the peace.

Fact is Myself or any other Admin could ban you right now for no reason at all. That's how Forums work. I could ban you because my alphabet cereal says "Ban Cratylus." BUT UNTIL SOMEONE ACTUALLY DOES THIS, please keep your speculation and suggestions contained.

x0x0x0x

Hey, if that ever happens, could you take a picture first? :stare:

You bet.

I think you know as well as I do that the main point was that at anytime, any admin here could do such a thing. There are even actions which are irreversible once applied. So even if the rest of the admins took offense and wanted to act to correct it, doing so would be impossible. This applies at every forum where admins exist. It's not something unique here.

The question thus becomes, would we do such a thing? Probably not. Getting banned takes an awful lot as I'm sure you're aware. I'm sure you would have seen signs that it's pending long before it gets to that point because topics would start getting locked, posts might get deleted, people will get called out for crossing the line, and we'll respond to challenges to that authority whether they're direct or indirect. I think our track record speaks for itself. We've had to ban a grand total of one person. That happened only after he decided to repeatedly engage in personal attacks, we removed his posts, he'd put them back, we even moved him into a restricted group at which point he simply switched to abusing the private messenger. There hasn't been a need for similar action since.

So being worried that you're all subject to the apocalypse tomorrow morning is just speculation and conjecture that's not grounded in fact.

In that case I think that you and Crat are actually in vehement agreement, as you both are making the same point. You're both saying that just because somebody could, doesn't mean that they should; and you just confirmed that some actions would be reversed (if possible) by other admins. And yes, you do have a track record to back up the suggestion that you guys are reasonable admins (I'm not sure that was under dispute, for what it's worth). I for one am content to leave this at that and move on to happier thoughts, such as considering the probabilities of alphabet cereal actually forming such messages, or the action of propeller hats on Samson's bowl of popcorn. :smile:

Oh, and speaking of popcorn, I think I can emerge from the nuclear bunker, too, as it seems that the religion comment either went unnoticed or nobody cared enough to start a war about it…

This sounds like tacit agreement that his behavior was in fact
not praiseworthy. I do not believe I am in error when I say
there is general consensus on this. I do not assume it because I
think it, I say it because that is what people's comments demonstrate.




Mhmm…





Nice.

I hope it is noticed that despite me being the one labeled a
troll, I'm not the one resorting to this kind of stuff.




If that's what he said, that's a relief.


-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

Cratylus, put simply, you're delusional. That's the only thing I can come up with to explain why you keep insisting on trolling this topic attempting to continue a fight nobody but you seems interested in having.

I think that's just unwarranted. I can see you don't understand my
position, but getting personal about a debate is something you only
just got on KaVir's case about. Why are you engaging in it?




I guess I'd like to be shown an example of this trolling.
I've been responding to points you've made. This post,
for example, is in response to yours. Is this post a
troll also?

We've been engaging in a debate. That you characterize it as a "fight"
and that you apparently think that my opposing view is a troll
is disappointing.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

We're done here. This thread is locked as it's not accomplishing anything anymore.