Freethought & Rationalism Archive

seebs · 05-01-2007, 02:58 PM

Yes, Tas. The sender has privacy expectations unless you get permission to post the contents. Same goes for messages from you, which is one of the reasons we haven't ALL seen some of the gloating.

TasManOfGod · 05-01-2007, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

Well, most of us don't have access because they were trashed.

That said, the reason is simple: The contents of the posts are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT.

You were banned for quantity, not quality. Responding to every post in a thread with substantively identical posts is spamming, and it's bannable.

Ah I see the orchestra is playing another song
OK then have you a rundown on the numbers then and the circumstances of the posts ie Have I exceeded the number of posts I have made on the matter here today for instance?

herev · 05-01-2007, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

What if some particular staff member either believed that, or chose to claim it, in a PM to him or to someone else? That, coupled with the refusal to just openly accuse him of the real sock people had identified him with, creates a situation where people reasoning from partial information would reasonably draw false conclusions.

Can you be totally sure that NO ONE thought that? That NO ONE said it?

I bet you can't. I bet there was a PM to him stating or implying that, possibly from someone who failed to understand the substance of the accusations correctly. Not from you, of course; you knew better. But CF's policy of doing everything in secret means that someone else could have sent such a PM, and you wouldn't know.

to answer this better--can I be sure no one thought that? NO, can I be sure that no one involved in his suspension thought that? YES

herev · 05-01-2007, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

Perhaps it was, but why wasn't he just told, outright, what the cause was? Why didn't the PM to him say "we think you lied on your mod application because you didn't mention your sock, ..."?

(Sure, in theory, it could be something else. Just an example, of course.)

suffice it to say that the reason (at least as far as I'm aware of it) was justified to do it this way in my mind. You seem to know a lot of this behind the scenes stuff, I'm surprised you can't figure this part out.

seebs · 05-01-2007, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TasManOfGod

Ah I see the orchestra is playing another song
OK then have you a rundown on the numbers then and the circumstances of the posts ie Have I exceeded the number of posts I have made on the matter here today for instance?

Doesn't matter. You posted tons of disruptive material in a thread immediately after a mod had to clean it up from the same stuff, and it was substantively identical. Spam.

Right now, you're "discussing", loosely speaking. Not-spam.

Just have some balls, man. You get told not to say something, you think it's important, you say it anyway, you get banned. That's okay. You knew what the rules were, you decided you'd rather post than not.

I say again:

This has become an idol to you. Put it down.

seebs · 05-01-2007, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by herev

suffice it to say that the reason (at least as far as I'm aware of it) was justified to do it this way in my mind. You seem to know a lot of this behind the scenes stuff, I'm surprised you can't figure this part out.

Remember, I'm (probably) mildly autistic; I'm very good at some patterns, but not at others, and I don't really understand intentionality in others. Presumably, asking in IM changed things in some way from asking in PM. I don't know why or how, though.

Is the reasoning itself confidential? If you think I can figure it out, can you suggest a course of analysis that would reveal a reason for which an accusation could be discussed in IM, but not in PM?

05-01-2007, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brietta

Piers Anthony's Blue Adept series, I'd finish the end of the book and impatiently wait the next one to hit the shelves and read it just as fast.
I believe the last one I read in that series was book 7
I have the first 4
It's the only series of his I've read.

I haven't read the books past the first three in so long I was scratching my head wondering which of Piers' books you were talking about lol.

BTW, you should really try his Incarnations of Immortality and Bio of a Space Tyrant series'. Not to mention the first 10 or so Xanth novels

Oh, and Ender rocks!

seebs · 05-01-2007, 03:14 PM

I really enjoy some Piers Anthony, but not others. I haven't ever seen a complete Bio of a Space Tyrant series. I did like the Incarnations books, some more than others; pale horse was, IMHO, the best.

ravenscape · 05-01-2007, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TasManOfGod

Are email messages addrssed to me copyright?

If you don't have the permission of the message author, they can't be posted. They can be paraphrased, though.

TammyJ · 05-01-2007, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Yesterday

I haven't read the books past the first three in so long I was scratching my head wondering which of Piers' books you were talking about lol.

BTW, you should really try his Incarnations of Immortality and Bio of a Space Tyrant series'. Not to mention the first 10 or so Xanth novels

Oh, and Ender rocks!

I've heard lots of good recommendations on the Xanth series, my only problem with starting it is there are sooooo many in the series I'd have to read them all lol.

The Piers Anthony series I was talking about is actually called The Apprentice Adept. The first 3 are great, I read them back to back, and they were also my first time for reading fantasy novels. While waiting for book 4 I read the Magician or Magic (wish I could remember which it was) but I have enough info to try to find it again if I can do a character search.
The Pern series I read 4 of.
Now Ender was another story, I had to read them all, but other than Lost Boys I didn't read any others of his. (Orson Scott Card)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-01-2007, 02:58 PM	#1501
seebs Contributor Join Date: May 2002 Location: Saint Paul, MN Posts: 24,524	Yes, Tas. The sender has privacy expectations unless you get permission to post the contents. Same goes for messages from you, which is one of the reasons we haven't ALL seen some of the gloating.

05-01-2007, 03:14 PM	#1508
seebs Contributor Join Date: May 2002 Location: Saint Paul, MN Posts: 24,524	I really enjoy some Piers Anthony, but not others. I haven't ever seen a complete Bio of a Space Tyrant series. I did like the Incarnations books, some more than others; pale horse was, IMHO, the best.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.