The Official Welcome Back Rasp/Trout and Hopper/Taint Thread

[One Brow]

Hopper is considering how he wants to approach his return.

Marcus, you should be carful with that signature. Word from on high is that the use of quotation marks, as opposed to quote balloons, makes these threads more difficult to read. I would hate for you to get a warning for that.

 

[sirkickyass]

Marcus, you should be carful with that signature. Word from on high is that the use of quotation marks, as opposed to quote balloons, makes these threads more difficult to read. I would hate for you to get a warning for that.

Now that deserves the old eye-roll emoticon.

 

[sirkickyass]

So where's Hopper at? I can't imagine him not multi-posting as soon as possible after the ban was lifted. Did Kicky forget to lift the ban like he did with Trout?

No. And I did not "forget" to lift the ban with Trout. The ban periods are all done automatically. Trout was back in as soon as restarted his browser.

 

[One Brow]

Now that deserves the old eye-roll emoticon.

I agree completely, if possibly for a different reason.

 

[Bronco70]

I agree completely, if possibly for a different reason.

You're barking up the wrong tree there, Rin Tin Tin.

 

[One Brow]

You're barking up the wrong tree there, Rin Tin Tin.

Cool. What's the right tree? I'll be happy to apologize, if I misunderstood.

 

[sirkickyass]

Cool. What's the right tree? I'll be happy to apologize, if I misunderstood.

Before going around telling people what the word is from "on high," especially with respect to statements that weren't made to you directly; you might consider that you are operating from incomplete, and perhaps even selectively chosen, information.

 

[Hopper]

Before going around telling people what the word is from "on high," especially with respect to statements that weren't made to you directly; you might consider that you are operating from incomplete, and perhaps even selectively chosen, information.

Why don't you answer the simple, one sentence question I asked you in a P.M., and let us all know what's coming from on high, eh, Kicky?

If you didn't understand the question, you can look at the second message I sent you, making it quite clear. Why do you refuse to clarify or elaborate, I wonder?

 

[Hopper]

Just in case anyone reading this thread wants to know what it's all about, I got this "warning" from Kicky in an infraction notice:

"...we have noted a tendency to post large block quotes without using the quoting feature. Some users have complained that this makes it difficult to determine which portions of your text are original material and which portions are quotes. Please be advised of this effect on the board's readability." (Sirkickyass)

My question was simple:

"Is this supposed to be a warning?"

I got no response, even though it was asked two days ago, with a follow-up request for a response also being ignored.

 

[sirkickyass]

Why don't you answer the simple, one sentence question I asked you in a P.M., and let us all know what's coming from on high, eh, Kicky?

If you didn't understand the question, you can look at the second message I sent you, making it quite clear. Why do you refuse to clarify or elaborate, I wonder?

I have no messages from you in my private inbox. That is why I have not answered any PMs. It is usually difficult to respond to messages you have not received.

You received no warning points for the block quoting issue. I would think that would make the answer to your question relatively obvious. It was included because it was an issue under discussion that was related to the larger issue at hand and was structurally separated from discussions of your infraction and the penalty.

 

[Hopper]

I have no messages from you in my private inbox. That is why I have not answered any PMs.

Funny, the exact same thing happened the last time I had questions about a very vague, ambiguous, and incomprehensible "warning," I sent two messages, and never got a response. Only to be told (and have the whole board told, falsely) that I has been clearly warned. I guess the claim by that admin was that, since he has me on ignore, he can't get my messages. Kinda funny that I get no indication whatsover that the message was not sent or received.

See my prior post for the question, Kicky.

 

[sirkickyass]

Only to be told (and have the whole board told, falsely) that I has been clearly warned.

The issue of whether or not you were :clearly" warned has been extensively litigated by you. You lost your both an informal and a formal appeal. This issue is and has been closed for some time.

I guess the claim by that admin was that, since he has me on ignore, he can't get my messages. Kinda funny that I get no indication whatsover that the message was not sent or received.

This is a software issue. Perhaps if you do not receive replies in what you consider to be a timely fashion, now that you are aware of the issue, you should direct your queries to other moderators before simply assuming that others are maliciously ignoring you.

See my prior post for the question, Kicky.

I edited my response to reply to your edit.

The answer is still the same: you did not receive a warning for that particular issue. It was an advisory statement related to the global topic.

 

[Hopper]

You lost your both an informal and a formal appeal. This issue is and has been closed for some time.

Let me get this straight, eh, Kicky? I "lost" a "formal appeal?" When, where, and how? Kinda funny that you would call something a "formal appeal" where the one appealing gets to say nothing whatsover. Apparently the proceedings carried on in these secret "appeals" chambers are so super-secret that no one ever even knows they occured, let alone the outcome of the kangaroo court antics, eh?

I mean, like, ya would think someone would at least say "Ha, ha, you lost your formal appeal," ya know? But no one ever told me. Please tell me more about this whole "formal appeal," eh, Kicky?

 

[sirkickyass]

Let me get this straight, eh, Kicky? I "lost" a "formal appeal?" When, where, and how? Kinda funny that you would call something a "formal appeal" where the one appealing gets to say nothing whatsover. Apparently the proceeding carried on in these secret "appeals" chamber is so super-secret that no one ever even knows they occured, let alone the outcome of the kangaroo court antics, eh?

You appealed directly to Jason, on or around 8/2/2010, regarding what you perceived to be unfair moderator action. You lost. I don't know what you wrote in your message to Jason but your position was extremely well chronicled on the board. That is the formal appeals process on this board.

I understand you believe you are entitled to a larger process, but that is not the way the rules work here. If you wish to use a message board with an appeals process that more closely approximate what you consider to be fair I welcome you to find and join such a board or start one of your own. Those are not the rules here and you agreed to abide by those rules when you signed up for your account. I'm sorry that you're out of luck, but that issue has been closed for some time.

 

[jhenderson008]

I wish I cared.

 

[Hopper]

You appealed directly to Jason, on or around 8/2/2010,

I sent Jason an email around that time, wherein I offered to voluntarily quit the board. Jason never responded to it. You want to call this email an "appeal?" What issues were raised in this "appeal?" This issue of vague, ambiguous, and incomprehensible warnings? Was that issue raised, for example? NO, it wasn't, nor was any issue at all appealed. So retract your false statement, please.

 

[Gameface]

Oh joy!

With such injustices it's a wonder that such reasonable people as yourself, Hopper, can even stand to participate in this farce of a fan message board.

It really does get kind of old. It's kind of like my brother-in-law telling me over and over why he can't wipe his feet before walking all over my carpet. I tell him it's my carpet and if he doesn't like it he can refrain from coming into my house at all. He responds by telling me that it's a carpet and the reason it's there is to be walked on, so why in the world would I be so unreasonable as to forbid him from doing so.

Good times.

 

[sirkickyass]

I sent Jason an email around that time, wherein I offered to voluntarily quit the board. Jason never responded to it. You want to call this email an "appeal?" What issues were raised in this "appeal?" This issue of vague, ambiguous, and incomprehensible warnings? Was that issue raised, for example? NO, it wasn't, nor was any issue at all appealed. So retract your false statement, please.

Jason posted, in the moderators forum, on that date, in a thread regarding the exact infraction you're talking about, a post that began with the sentence: "He has asked for an appeal."

I feel no need to retract my "false" statement. Clearly your dispute is with Jason regarding the character of your e-mail to him. I have not seen the e-mail personally and was telling you the information I had been given by the recipient of that e-mail. I have no basis upon which to opine on the exact contents of the message, but I will say that experience has taught me that arguing with you on this issue is pointless.

I fully expect multiple parables about injustice to populate this board in the coming weeks.

 

[Hopper]

Jason posted, in the moderators forum, on that date, in a thread regarding the exact infraction you're talking about, a post that began with the sentence: "He has asked for an appeal."

I feel no need to retract my "false" statement.

What "exact infraction" would that be? Please retract your false statement.

 

[sirkickyass]

What "exact infraction" would that be?

The one issued to you for trolling on 7/14/2010. Your notice argument related to the prior warning issued to you on 7/8/2010.

Please retract your false statement.

There is no need. Obviously you believe there is an issue of fact as to whether or not it was an appeal, but the owner of the board stated it was one to the moderating staff. My statement accurately reflected the information available to me.