
Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
( , Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread

I don't mean b3th, I mean the one that gets up early and steps people for satirising a satirical website.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 9:56, 4 replies, latest was 12 years ago)

And all the dog-bumholery and kid-finglerisation.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:00, Reply)

Be somebody a modwhosenameIwon'tmentionbecausepeopletendtodisappear doesn't like and get heavy-handed treatment.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:09, Reply)

Battered did spend a couple of weeks following him around the internet accusing him of being an alcoholic nonce.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:15, Reply)

I MEAN BATTERED'S KID
HE'S OBVIOUSLY GOT TOO MUCH TIME ON HIS HANDS
DON'T STEP ME I'M REALLY FUCKING BORED
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:19, Reply)

( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:29, Reply)

Not a very good reason to use your mod powers to punish him because you don't like him.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:37, Reply)

Well I could, but not honestly, and this really isn't the sort of place where argumentative dishonesty is encouraged.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:38, Reply)

The naughty kid at school always received harsher treatment than everyone else.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:39, Reply)

and then saying "what me, what did I do?" and trying to look innocent when you get stepped after basically yelling PLEASE STEP ME!!!!
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:51, Reply)

Which is what makes it unreasonable.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:53, Reply)

Now I can see that they might not like him posting this in three places on the site.
But is this really 'deliberate trolling'?
No one appears to be upset by it.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:55, Reply)

but yeah, they're pushing the definition to victimise him. IMHO.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:57, Reply)

particularly as on /talk he just linked to this post. I certainly wouldn't call it "repeated trolling".
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:59, Reply)

Well, that and being a cunt.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:01, Reply)

he even said in his own post he'd be stepped, he knew the risks and even seems to have expected the result. seems he was right.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:58, Reply)

Or was he anticipating he'd be stepped because the mods have got it in for him?
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:01, Reply)

you ask for it hard enough for long enough you get it.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:04, Reply)

Nobody is saying that they aren't legitimate. What we are saying is that he has been modded for a post that isn't offensive, purely because he has been offensive to this particular mod in the past.
Regardless of his past behaviour, mods mod on a post by post basis, or they're supposed to.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:05, Reply)

He wasn't behaving badly in this post. He wasn't fucking asking for anything.
Disproportionate response.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:11, Reply)

( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:19, Reply)

The question is whether or not this post was really worth a stepping. It's obviously his own fault that these things are watched closely.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:06, Reply)

But I don't think this was really a stepping offence.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:53, Reply)

since when did it have to make sense or be logical. it was predictable enough.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:05, Reply)

According to his FB post it's a "last warning" trip to the step - be intrigued to see what they ban him for. Fifty quid says it won't be worth it.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:00, Reply)

( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:06, Reply)

I mean - and again, am unaware of the process, and shit with all forms of IT - say they delete his account, obviously he can just create another one and carry on. Or is it done by IP address or some such?
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:09, Reply)

You come into a site from an IP range, your actual address as far as the site sees it is actually an address within the range your ISP uses. You remember Bou? In order to get rid of her permanently they had to block the entire IP range of South Africa because she kept getting in via a different IP.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:12, Reply)

His current incarnation is sandboxed there, but appears to be allowed to post everywhere else.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:13, Reply)

So how exactly do they propose to get rid of Battered if he misbehaves again? They delete his account, he creates a new one. Called, I dunno, Batt3red.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:18, Reply)

which IPs each accounts have logged in from and ban those, or ban an entire range. In the latter case anyone who happens to be in that range will be unable to reach the site.
They're more likely to just ban individual accounts if they come from Battered's IP range than do an outright IP ban, at least to begin with.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:21, Reply)

but he's got an iPad, presumably a home laptop as well as whatever he "works" off, same as the rest of us. Although I suppose a ban on one of them, if they could manage it, would at least narrow down his options.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:24, Reply)

it'd still come from the same IP range as his computer.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:25, Reply)

Sorry, I need these things pointing out to me. I'll be happy to return the favour if you ever want to know anything about football, or very specific periods of history
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:27, Reply)

Right now I'm on my phone using Opera Mini, which routes via servers in Sweden or somewhere which compress the data to save my 3G being used up, so what IP that comes up as is anyone's guess.
For instance, it used to let me vote hundreds of times in polls by shutting it down and opening it again, although that seems to have stopped working, pity as it made the "worst person on b3ta" poll most amusing.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:20, Reply)

When am I going to be allowed to get my l back?
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:06, Reply)

didn't you see this coming when you changed your name?
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:07, Reply)

I did see this coming, so I used a spare account to reserve my name.
Then the suits up at City Hall banned my spare account, I assume for the crime of being a spare account.
Although apparently it is ok for just about everyone else to have a spare account.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:12, Reply)

then someone else nicks said name in an act of petty twattery, and they get let off scot free.
Hang on - if the name "tangledupinblue" is ban-worthy whilst there's also a "Hark The Herald Tangles Sing" once, why not twice? Surely by that logic anyone signing up under that name should get the hammer?
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:15, Reply)

SURELY nicking someone's account in order to impersonate them is worse than bagsying your own name in order to get festive?
I mean, this arsewipe could be out there right now on /Talk, besmirching your good name!
Well, you know.
( , Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:21, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread