Started by dr e, May 02, 2008, 08:33 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

dr e

Devia has used up her last warning.  She is now suspended.  I know that some of you would like to keep her around and some of you would like to see her gone for good.  I said in my warning post to her that I would leave it up to the board what should be done.  Tell me what you think and why.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.


Why don't you kids just kiss each other and get it over with.

Just kidding....

I tend to ignore her either way. 
"To such females, womanhood is more sacrosanct by a thousand times than the Virgin Mary to popes--and motherhood, that degree raised to astronomic power. They have eaten the legend about themselves and believe it; they live it; they require fealty of us all." -- Philip Wylie, Generation of Vipers

Cordell Walker

we gotta  have the snowback
Doc, Ive expressed this before, it was a heated thread about a very sensitive subject and some people  cant see the difference between excusing it on some level and looking  for causitive behaviour
its not like she was running around the board calling people cocksuckers, or flaming like FIB was
devia is the sole "oppisitioin  party" at SYG and  despite her sometimes arrogant attempts at pointing out other peoples flaws, I dont  think she should be  banned
"how can you kill women and children?"---private joker
"Easy, ya just dont lead em as much" ---Animal Mother


I vote no ban. Besides, she was one of the founding fathers here. Well, at least in the group of initial posters.


as much as i hate when she doesn't reply to my answers to HER questions-she is part of this board-would hate to see her go.  no-ban


I saw her taking a disagreeable position, but I missed the part with the direct attack.

I'm not going to tell you how to moderate, but if it's independent confirmation you're looking for, then I would say that I could accept that devia was not making a personal attack.

It would be diplomatic of Devia at this stage to clarify her statements and her position, if you were to unlock her and she were to come back.


I have not seen all her posts but she should be allowed her opinion.

I vote no-ban.


I vote no ban. Many of her insights are candid and from the hip. Everyones entitled to a little kneejerk now & then. I hope she stays.
'It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.' George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Mr. Bad

May 02, 2008, 09:53 AM Last Edit: May 02, 2008, 09:58 AM by Mr. Bad
I personally believe that bans should be based not just on the number of warnings, but also the frequency of violations.  For example, a while back you granted 'amnesty' in the sense that people had their warning totals cleared.  I personally thought that was a good move, and believe that warnings over a year old should be cleared.  In other words, people get three warnings per year.  Furthermore, once banned, I believe that the ban should have an expiration date, for example, 6 months, one year, or other. 

Using a system like the one described above would get rid of the chronic and serious troublemakers and at the same time acknowledge that we all make mistakes in the heat of the moment.  Now I don't know if devia is a habitual rule violator but I must say that I appreciate her input here - she keeps us honest and avoids the 'echo chamber' phenomenon seen so often at the forums of our opponents. 

So, to add my vote, I vote no ban if any of her other warnings were over a year old, and support a 6-week ban if she had three in the last year.   I believe that the majority of us responding here want to have her around, including me.  However, I also believe that we need to hold ourselves to standards of decorum, and bans are an integral part of that process.
"Men in teams... got the human species from caves to palaces. When we watch men's teams at work, we pay homage to 10,000 years of male achievements; a record of vision, ingenuity and Herculean labor that feminism has been too mean-spirited to acknowledge."  Camille Paglia

Men's Rights Activist

I believe in just and fair rules that are followed.
Life, Liberty, & Pursuit of Happiness are fundamental rights for all (including males), & not contingent on gender feminist approval or denial. Consider my "Independence" from all tyrannical gender feminist ideology "Declared" - Here & Now!


Dr. E., I don't know why you even need to ask what we think.  You are the admin -- the owner, more accurately -- and you need to show some leadership.  Just make a decision because you have judged fairly.  The opinions of others are advice, not votes.  If 90 percent of people here say they oppose a ban, are you then bound by their "decision?"

Ban her if you know it's right!


I vote no ban as well.
I will stop staring at your boobs when you stop staring at my paycheck!

The Gonzman

No, no ban.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am the MEANEST son-of-a-bitch in the valley.


I will admit at one point, I wasn't sure if she was a troll or not. That being said, we're all big boys around here...

No ban.

Cordell Walker

May 02, 2008, 11:56 AM Last Edit: May 02, 2008, 12:05 PM by Rusty Shackleford

"how can you kill women and children?"---private joker
"Easy, ya just dont lead em as much" ---Animal Mother

Go Up