Okay, so why was Treeburst banned exactly?

[Frunze]

Near as I can figure out, it was for flaming Fionn in his post of August 3, 4:11 PM, on page 4 of the thread "Clash of the Titans, Part 2". Personally, I like to read stuff for myself before forming an opinion about it, so here's a link for anybody else who wants to read it.

Now flaming is a violation of forum policy, which says in part:

1. No Flaming and/or Baiting. Strong opinions are welcomed but are required to be expressed in a way which is not abusive and/or emotionally charged. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. Chronic violators of this simple, civil requirement are not welcomed here and are at risk of being banned.

So is Treeburst a chronic violator of this policy, then? Has he been warned before? Or did he just lose his temper once?

And did Madmatt also lose his temper, maybe reacting a little more harshly than he otherwise mighta? Going by his posts at the end of the "Clash of the Titans" and "The Truth had to Be Made Public" threads (both locked now), he does seem to be reacting more in anger than in sorrow, so to speak.

Now I'll admit I'm interested in this partly 'cause Treeburst is running a tournament I'm participating in (and which will continue, I hear, BTW.) But I'm not suggesting Treeburst should get any special treatment because of the effort he puts into running these tournaments - the rules have to be the same for everyone. I'm more questioning whether anybody should be banned for one flame - shouldn't they be warned first?

And I know this forum isn't a democracy, and decisions aren't made by majority vote, but I felt like I oughta say something, and since I'm probably not the only one who feels that way, why not have a thread for the discussion rather than having it take over other threads...

[ August 04, 2002, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: Frunze ]

[offtaskagain]

I feel i must add my opinion here. It certainly appears to me that Treeburst has been treated unfairly here. Granted, his "The Truth had to be made Public" he pretty much asked for banning, but i can't really fault him for that. I probably wouldve done the same as him had i been treated that way by the admin. One or even two flames, however warranted they were, is not cause for banning. If it were, then why the hell is Aunty Jack still around? His sig line alone is nothing but a flame. Treeburst got the shaft, plain and simple.

[Michael Dorosh]

I think perhaps Treeburst would rather not see a lot of public discussion of this topic. Suffice to say I agree with the comments on Aunty Jack, and sympathized with Treeburst's reaction to being unfairly accused of sabotaging a tourney he worked so hard to put together.

But perhaps now is not the time for a frank and open discussion of all this - perhaps a decent night's sleep all around will provide some more answers?

[Bastables]

Yes I have to agree that it's a bit off that the new no tolerance was applied to treeburst and not to significant others.

[Guest Mike]

Well he was warned about his lambasting of Fionn in one thread, then kept up by slagging MM's actions in warning him and saying "If I'm to be banned then good" - more or less.

IMO MM did nothing more than carry out TB's wish as expressed.

Ie he hadn't been banned until he literally asked to be!!

Regretably being a great organiser doesn't make TB immune to being a twit sometimes.

[Ligur]

IMHO Madmatt gave Treeburst a chance to take his words back or just behave... which wasn't exactly what he did on the "Truth must be known..." thread, practically asking to be banned.

But if us, mostly adults, can't take a few short rows now and then and instead ban usefull, well known community members its not exactly the best way either, IMHO.

[Madmatt]

Since this seems to be a hot topic at the moment let me give some more incite on this issue as well as some general comments about the forum itself.

First off, no one was more surprised by Treebursts comments than Steve and I. I only became aware of this morning when a concerned forum member emailed me to say that he found what TB said rather offensive and uncalled for.

I read the thread in question and was amazed at the roasting given to Fionn for, what as I saw, rather tame comments about the tourny. Tb's response was totally out of line and in direct violation of forum rules and just common sense. It was more in a sense of shock than anger that I posted my warning to him but when I locked up the thread he was NOT banned. Those of you that have been around long enough know that if you aint banned when I first step in than I am giving you a second chance.

At this time I met with some guys on the CMHQ chat server that were mutual aquintances of TB's. I was asked if perhaps some further discussion could be had and possibly the ban removed if he were to retract his comments.

Due to TB's long history with CM and the forums I told an intermideary to contact him on my behalf and say that I was willing to discuss this matter one on one. My offer was flatly refused it seems as he has not emailed me since but he did reply to the intermideary and basically restated what he said in his first flammatory post.

Some time during this he posted his second post in which he said he wants to be a martyr. That sort of comment seems odd in the extreme and since he refused to abide by the forum rules and it seems he does not wish to take back what he said in public we had no choice but to issue the ban against him.

If I seemed mad in my comments to him than it is an accurate appraisal. Even after admining this board for two years I can not understand what prompts people to sometimes behave in this way.

This issue is not about Fionn, and its not about Treebursts long history on the forum. It is about one person crossing the line and posting rather slanderous material on another and then refusing to retract those same statements. I don't care if what he said about Fionn is true or not, thats not the point, the point is that to make comments like that is against the rules.

Now, about this Aunty Jack and other related concerns. People must understand that the sheer size and volume of these forums makes it all but impossible to keep up with every thread and post. Usually we only come in to a "issue" once someone (and normally more) has emailed us to indicate that there is a problem brewing. Normally a simple padlock is enough for all parties to cool off a bit.

This means that sometimes some threads, posts and posters DO slip under our radar. Now I can spend a few hours researching all the posts by one idiot and track his ip's and ban him and do all the admin stuff that is required or I can work on CMBB. Today I spent completely on this issue, I won't do so tomorrow.

This issue is now closed. Any further comments I see on it will be locked up. If Mike see's this and still wants to talk he has until tomorrow afternoon to contact me and I will listen to what he has to say but a reinstatement at this point is not too likely after his behavior so far.

Madmatt