Zagatto Wrote:I'll state that I am dead set against this practice.
I do not like the idea of perma-bans at all. I believe that everyone can improve with time. In the case of babyeater, even though this is his second ban he has still improved since his arrival here. Given time I believe he will become a model citizen and we will benefit from his presence. Growing pains can be difficult but I believe in the long run that patience and working with people makes for better members.
Okay... but have fun banning jugdish once a week for THE REST OF ETERNITY.
EDIT: Damn you... beat me to it by perma-banning him.
Well... let's hope that he's the first, and the last. I'm going to miss his contributions.
Sad... sad day.
Blight Wrote:Yes, but the funny part is he claimed to be a hacker. Most of the Internet asses are competent with web tech. and would just use a proxy server to get around the banning of their IP address. jugdish however, just used a farce, and made up his skill, so I guess we won't see him again. But he undoubtedly needed permanently banned. The thread was about people voting on others to get perma bans so I just don't want that happening.
He wouldnt call himself a hacker as much as ive heard he did if he really could. That would be the game of a fool...
Puppet Master Wrote:He wouldnt call himself a hacker as much as ive heard he did if he really could. That would be the game of a fool...
True, and as Mr. T once said, "I pity the fool." That kind of raises a good question, would
Mr. T pity Jugdish? Personally I don't thinks so but then again I could be wrong.
I'd just like to point out that this wasn't a case of the public voting to do a perma-ban. It was a decision made jointly by the moderators of the forum.
You guys seem to have the impression that this is a democracy. It's actually more of a benevolant dictatorship. JJ is the monarch in charge with Schultz and myself as lieutenants. We like having people use this forum so we do our best not to piss off the majority of members so we listen to what you have to say.
Ryo of Inferno Wrote:True, and as Mr. T once said, "I pity the fool." That kind of raises a good question, would
Mr. T pity Jugdish? Personally I don't thinks so but then again I could be wrong.
Mr. T would ignore Jugdish and not waste his pity on that fool...
Zagatto Wrote:I'd just like to point out that this wasn't a case of the public voting to do a perma-ban. It was a decision made jointly by the moderators of the forum.
You guys seem to have the impression that this is a democracy. It's actually more of a benevolant dictatorship. JJ is the monarch in charge with Schultz and myself as lieutenants. We like having people use this forum so we do our best not to piss off the majority of members so we listen to what you have to say.
That's why I am still here personally most forums have jackasses for owners and everything else. Not to mention childish bullshit runs wild all over. A ban being voted on by members wouldnt work though once again so keep up the good work....
Puppet Master Wrote:Mr. T would ignore Jugdish and not waste his pity on that fool...
Thats what I thought, either that or teach the fool a lesson he wouln't soon forget.
He is just a fake. He doesn't know his ass from his head. You don't know the half of the stuff that he has said in emails talking with Zagatto. He "claims" he was the one that took down getterdome.. which did it go down or i thought it moved to anime-icon didn't it?
Schultz Wrote:He is just a fake. He doesn't know his ass from his head. You don't know the half of the stuff that he has said in emails talking with Zagatto. He "claims" he was the one that took down getterdome.. which did it go down or i thought it moved to anime-icon didn't it?
He really said that? Well, I guess it doesn?t surprise me that much; he had a severe lying problem. I was 100% sure that he had no knowledge or skill in this area, because if he did, he would not have bragged about it; he would of just did it and kept quite.
Also, HOLY CRAP, the vote is almost even! :eek: Great and omnipotent rulers don't fall to this crazy line of thinking. Your fair and firm grip is the reason I like this place so much.
I voted yes on the poll, I think it was Puppet Master who said it, but I agree with the members NOT having anything to do with the decision to perma-ban someone. That's what the admins are for. Obviously perma-bans wouldn't be handed out like candy just because one memeber doesn't like another, but in extreme cases like jugdish, I feel perma-bans should be considered.
I know I'm gonna open up a whole new can of worms by saying this, but it's just like the death penalty. Should we have a death penalty? In some cases yes. I know not all of you will agree on my point of view and I don't expect you to. But that's how I see it.
I agree with using the death penelty, sometimes a crime can only be punished by death.
Scott Petterson is a good example of this. I hope before he dies his cell mates make him a queen...
ladysilverice Wrote:I voted yes on the poll, I think it was Puppet Master who said it, but I agree with the members NOT having anything to do with the decision to perma-ban someone. That's what the admins are for. Obviously perma-bans wouldn't be handed out like candy just because one memeber doesn't like another, but in extreme cases like jugdish, I feel perma-bans should be considered.
I know I'm gonna open up a whole new can of worms by saying this, but it's just like the death penalty. Should we have a death penalty? In some cases yes. I know not all of you will agree on my point of view and I don't expect you to. But that's how I see it.
The way they put killers to death is to lenient for guys like Peterson. I can think of some very sick and demented ways they should deal with him. Mercy is for those who deserve it not killers...
Puppet Master Wrote:The way they put killers to death is to lenient for guys like Peterson. I can think of some very sick and demented ways they should deal with him. Mercy is for those who deserve it not killers...
Yes, but this is where the lines of justice get blurred. For the most part, I believe an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. If someone kills someone, they should die. However, there are cases where this is not appropriate.
Then there's the issue that if a serial killer enjoyed gutting his victims while they were still alive, should this be the way he is killed? And if so, does that make us any better than he is? The fact of the matter is, I really don't care, as long as that person is no longer alive to get another chance. What burns me up is when a guy is on death row or is in prision for life and ends up released because of budget cuts or something similar and equally stupid.
This brings up the question, what about the wrongfully accused?