b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Off Topic » Post 1820041 | Search
This is a question Off Topic

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)
Pages: Latest, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832, ... 1

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Whoever is modding this forum is fucking pathetic.
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 a child fiddler and a adulterer and a gay

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 9:57, Reply)
It's the lack of consistency that I object to.
And all the dog-bumholery and kid-finglerisation.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:00, Reply)
Oh, there's consistency alright.
Be somebody a modwhosenameIwon'tmentionbecausepeopletendtodisappear doesn't like and get heavy-handed treatment.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:09, Reply)
To be fair to Scaryduck,
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 was under the impression that infant children were time-consuming
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)
Yeah, god knows taking the piss and bullying is definitely frowned on here.

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:29, Reply)
Here is one thing
Elsewhere on the internet is a bit harsh.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:35, Reply)
That's a pretty good reason to not like him.
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)
Yeah I can't argue with that
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)
It's the age old problem of being identified as a troublemaker.
The naughty kid at school always received harsher treatment than everyone else.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:39, Reply)
We can hardly argue that we should be treated like adults either

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:40, Reply)
It's that age old problem of being a mouthy little shit
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)
The difference being is that he didn't do that this time.
Which is what makes it unreasonable.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:53, Reply)
The reason he was given was 'repeated, deliberate trolling across boards with multiple accounts. Last warning'.
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)
At a stretch, it's trolling the mods
but yeah, they're pushing the definition to victimise him. IMHO.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:57, Reply)
I'm not even sure putting one post on three sub boards is even spamming
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)
I still reckon his crime is impersonating a mod
Well, that and being a cunt.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:01, Reply)
*sigh*
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)
He was merely being all cool and edgy or something.

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:00, Reply)
Yes but was this particular post step-worthy?
Or was he anticipating he'd be stepped because the mods have got it in for him?
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:01, Reply)
yeah, and they have it in for him for no reason at all?
you ask for it hard enough for long enough you get it.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:04, Reply)
No, one guy has it in for him for pretty specific reasons.
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)
*shrug*
I can only repeat: ask for it long enough, you get it.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:10, Reply)
If only this rule was observed at Platinum Lace

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:10, Reply)
He wasn't attacking scaryduck in this post.
He wasn't behaving badly in this post. He wasn't fucking asking for anything.

Disproportionate response.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:11, Reply)
That's a good name for a band

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:14, Reply)
if I agree with battered will you start asking for him to be banned?

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:19, Reply)
I see your point, don't get me wrong
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)
see below
www.b3ta.com/questions/offtopic/post1820124
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:10, Reply)
I'm not saying that Battered is not a cunt.
But I don't think this was really a stepping offence.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:53, Reply)
their site, their rules
since when did it have to make sense or be logical. it was predictable enough.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 11:05, Reply)
I reckon Battered's got a massive target painted on his back in the eyes of the mods
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)
Don't mods have targets on their backs anyway?

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:05, Reply)
Oh this is very good indeed
*doffs cap*
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:07, Reply)
Also - correct me if I'm being thick here - what's to stop Battered joining up with another account?

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

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:06, Reply)
Isn't that why he has been stepped?

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:07, Reply)
Well yes, good point
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)
It's all done with voodoo mind control.

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:10, Reply)
Yeah, I thought it'd be something like that

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:12, Reply)
IP banning is an imprecise science.
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)
They also seem to be having fun deciding what to do with Frank over on /talk.
His current incarnation is sandboxed there, but appears to be allowed to post everywhere else.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:13, Reply)
Bou was before my time but I've heard the tale
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)
If they decide to IP ban him, they'll have to either have a way of tracking
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)
Yeah I assumed something similar
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)
If he's on an iPad connecting over his home or work connections
it'd still come from the same IP range as his computer.
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:25, Reply)
Oh yeah
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)
IP block would only work for a home or work address
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)
I didn't know that, that's pretty interesting.

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:24, Reply)
I think we are all overlooking a more serious issue here.
When am I going to be allowed to get my l back?
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:06, Reply)
A more pertinent question might be
didn't you see this coming when you changed your name?
(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:07, Reply)
I guess you missed my pathetic tale.
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)
So they banned the account you created in order to preserve your name whilst being festive
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)
Some lollard still has 'Monty Boyce' which is apprently fine.

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:19, Reply)
This is exactly what I mean
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)
it's a subtle hint that xmas names are well bent

(, Thu 3 Jan 2013, 10:21, Reply)

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Pages: Latest, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832, ... 1