I would like to see a stompy foot explain he's been banned - in the Firefly thread - if that's not against policy.

Actually, I'd prefer to let the matter drop at this point. If it comes up, we can explain, but otherwise, best to just let things go.

I'll post an explanation.

I'm of two minds about his posts. On one hand, I'd like to see them kept around as evidence of why we banned him. OTOH, I don't want to frighten off newbies who come across them while catching up, and who then get totally turned off to the board before they see the resolution.

Nilly, I'll Nilly the problematic posts for you. It only seems fair.

To summarize though, the problem isn't so much that he puts his foot in his mouth, or presents weak arguments, but rather, that when he is called on something or asked to clarify something (because a Buffista was kind enough to give him the benefit of the doubt), he would attack, or twist words rather than apologize and modify the problematic behaviour. He was a poster who often had interesting things to say. However, there was little-to-no respect for the fact that the Buffistas are a community with standards and an existing and pleasant culture.

Third post ever, calling Buffistas barely literate: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 19, 2002 10:23:28 am EST

Fourth post ever, dragging in Nazis and Saddam: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 19, 2002 10:46:57 am EST

The posts...

In which after a stompy had to edit other-show spoilers, he makes smart remark asking to have editors for grammar and spelling: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 23, 2002 6:43:11 pm EST

In which he says you're not trying if you're not causing trouble: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 23, 2002 7:19:27 pm EST

In which he starts tossing out the "idiot" label: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 23, 2002 9:52:52 pm EST

note: There are quite a few posts in which this continues, primarily aimed at Kristen, including posts: 1720, 1722, 1731, 1734

In which he says he didn't insult anyone, despite liberal use of the word idiot: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 23, 2002 10:12:20 pm EST

In which we receive a promise to get our pot stirred another day: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 23, 2002 10:56:25 pm EST

In which he responds to the campaigners who don't like being characterized as "rabid" and says we can call him a "rabid, raping dog": mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 24, 2002 11:08:28 am EST

Note: This line continues in posts 1881 (in which he says we're all rabid because we post), 1882

In which he continues the "rabid" needle, tossing in hyper-sensitive and lacking in humor: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 24, 2002 2:24:35 pm EST

In which he gets nasty to Knut's kind attempt as playing m's behaviour as only a joke: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 24, 2002 2:43:01 pm EST

In which - after being told we can't always tell if he's joking, instead of apologizing - he again questions the sense of humor of Buffistas: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 24, 2002 2:59:37 pm EST

(actually, in the post after that, I'd thought he'd seen the light and was rooting for him, but it was a false hope)

In which he's crude about Dawn's (BtVS character) breasts: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 26, 2002 7:04:26 pm EST

In which, after it's been explained to him that we found that disturbing, he tries to spread the blame to everyone else, and attacks wolfram for no discernable reason: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 26, 2002 7:17:11 pm EST

In which he says it's all Fay's fault he's a dirty bastard: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 26, 2002 7:25:18 pm EST

In which, after a Buffista tried to explain the difference between off-color but funny posts and disturbing posts, he again takes the attack route: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 26, 2002 7:32:12 pm EST

Note: This continues in posts 2413, and is still being alluded to for the next 10 posts or so

In which he explains his attitude toward posting here and makes a "joke" that we should hurl bottles at FOX employees: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 27, 2002 3:54:25 pm EST

In which, when he is again asked to make it more clear if/when/that he's kidding, he questions the sanity of anyone who doesn't get his "humor", rather than apologize: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 27, 2002 3:57:02 pm EST

(To me, this is the one that is the epitome of the problem with this posting style. It's the post that most bothered - it showed a disregard for the community.)

In which the final "debate" started, and the problems with same have been pretty well discussed here, in natter and Firefly itself: mieskie "Firefly 2: You Can't Take the Sky From Me." Dec 31, 2002 2:56:33 pm EST

See also 3535, 3547, 3554, 3564, 3572, 3578, 3594, 3618, 3621, 3625, 3628 and 3636

Cindy - you rock.

There is no way to uniquely identify him, so there is no way to ban him in all his incarnations. He does require a working e-mail address each time, so that *might* run him out of steam should he get a head going.

There is no way to uniquely identify him, so there is no way to ban him in all his incarnations. He does require a working e-mail address each time, so that *might* run him out of steam should he get a head going.

Fair enough.

I'm of two minds about his posts. On one hand, I'd like to see them kept around as evidence of why we banned him. OTOH, I don't want to frighten off newbies who come across them while catching up, and who then get totally turned off to the board before they see the resolution.

I'm with the former. Newbies either skip to the end, or read through from the beginning. Either way, they'll see it was an abberration. I think deleting massive amounts of posts would be counterproductive.

I understand people being upset, and it's a legitimate feeling. The person enjoyed being disruptive. But, dammit, the whole banning thing just gives me a nasty knot in my stomach. I've never been on the side of the shunners before, only the shunned. I can think of no other action to be taken against him that could possibly be effective, and he most likely deserved the suspension. But I want to say that watching the machinery of exclusion move into action upset me, personally, more than anything he said. That's only my feeling, I don't want anyone to change anything they've done. I just want it said.

That's only my feeling, I don't want anyone to change anything I've done. I just want it said.

Again, fair enough. Truth be told, I'm not sure how I feel about it, either, but I think it was neccesary.

Sorry, victor, just noticed the pronoun error, so now you look like you can't quote. Nothing personal ;)

With you on the stomach butterflies. When people first started showing up and saying they didn't feel like Buffistas, I felt all creepy. I'm supposed to be in the out-group. Being part of the exclusive in-group was a horrible sensation.

I continue to feel the stomping was necessary. Just scary.