Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


What's with those recent bans at LET?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

What's with those recent bans at LET?

SpiritSpirit Member
edited April 2012 in General

I feel sorry to start this thread.. but this is just crazy what's happening lately at LET.

Naruto... some people liked him, most people didn't but well... he was really annoying on moments, but this should not be a reason for BAN. He wasn't really respectful towards some people here, so ok... some temp ban or warning would be understandable, but complete removal? Just because he maybe wasn't nice to "you" or your "friends"?

And what's now with this Maounique guy? What he did to deserve ban?
Ok, he could be really annoying in argumenting but that's just personal opinion. Or atleast it should be personal opinion. Annoying or no... It's not like he would be insultive or atleast not like some more known/popular LET members (I don't need to name them) are on daily basis, so why ban?
Is new LET policy to remove everyone who express disagreement with something and use board for expressing own arguments? He didn't do anything, I repeat ANYTHING, to deserve ban.

Just because me, you.. or anyone don't agree with someone this doesn't mean that person should be silenced with ban. As I said already I feel really sorry for this what LET/LEB became... because this surely isn't lowendtalk which LEA built. Boards are built for discussion, it's completely natural that everyone won't share same opionion, that some people won't like each other however the way how is dealed on LET with those completely natural community board occurences simply isn't the right way! Ban should be punishment for something bad and/or tool to prevent community from bad things not tool to silence someone who annoys you or your friends.

«1345

Comments

  • ZettaZetta Member
    edited April 2012

    You'll be next if you don't stop expressing your opinion and insulting our totalitarian dictators.

    Thanked by 2Mon5t3r GM2015

    When you find that perfect VPS, KEEP IT.

  • Yes, Sir!

  • @Spirit said: Is new LET policy to remove everyone who express disagreement with something and use board for expressing own arguments? He didn't do anything, I repeat ANYTHING, to deserve ban.

    I agree. I liked it much better when LEA was running things...

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider
    edited April 2012

    Maounique only has a 48 hour ban to 'cool off'.

  • SpiritSpirit Member
    edited April 2012

    No, seriously.. Maounique had very strong opinion about some things and he took every oportunity to express it, with other words, he was active member of community however this should not be a reason for ban!
    Cool of from what?

  • @Infinity said: Maounique only has a 48 hour ban to 'cool off'.

    >

    Hes no Naruto /:

    I know, I'm Dale Maily.

  • ZettaZetta Member
    edited April 2012

    @Infinity said: Maounique only has a 48 hour ban to 'cool off'.

    Then Naruto must be on fire.

    When you find that perfect VPS, KEEP IT.

  • I think the bans are wrong too. We just need an "ignore this user" function, then anybody can just choose to not see someone's comments. Bans accomplish nothing.

    Thanked by 2miTgiB Mon5t3r

    -

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider

    @Spirit said: Cool of from what?

    I did not issue the ban and have been away for a few days, I'll wait for someone to fill you in properly, but I know that he did go a little too far in his views and some of it extended to lying and derailing quite a few threads.

  • ZettaZetta Member
    edited April 2012

    So what, we're becoming like WHT now? >_>

    Thanked by 1Amfy

    When you find that perfect VPS, KEEP IT.

  • I think they are trying to encourage the calm, cool, helpful, non-abusive style of the new "Chief", Joel Theodore.

  • No matter how many threads he potentialy derailed he won't be ever match in this with people he criticized. No need to name them...

    @charliecron said: calm, cool, helpful, non-abusive style of the new "Chief", Joel Theodore.

    That's sarcasm, correct?

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider
    edited April 2012

    Joel is actually pretty lenient with regards to LET, but recently things have slipped a little beyond the limits.

  • prometeusprometeus Member, Provider

    @Infinity said: Maounique only has a 48 hour ban to 'cool off'.

    I don't think he deserved any ban. Nor Naruto BTW.

    IperWeb & Prometeus, Hosting Provider since 1997. iwStack cloud infrastructure
  • SpiritSpirit Member
    edited April 2012

    @Infinity
    What limits? If you take this as argument people like Aldryic would be perm banned here long time ago. Maounique was not match for them in any aspect except persistence (the thing which annoyed us the most - but this should not be a reason for ban).

  • ZettaZetta Member

    Today's April 2nd, just putting that out there.

    When you find that perfect VPS, KEEP IT.

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider
    edited April 2012

    @Spirit said: What limits?

    The limits of what's acceptable in Chief's eyes.

    @liam said: LET should have a better set of rules, including a first warning to the person in the wrong before any bans happen.

    I'm sure something like that will happen soon :)

  • @Infinity said: The limits of what's acceptable in Chief's eyes.

    You said all...

  • ZettaZetta Member

    Joel/Chief needs to worry less about LET and more about LEB.

    Thanked by 3Jack Spirit Akira

    When you find that perfect VPS, KEEP IT.

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider
    edited April 2012

    @Spirit said: You said all...

    The decision wasn't based out of thin air, there were many members that flagged his posts and same with Naruto etc, if that's what came across to you, that's not what I meant.

    After all it's only a 48 hour ban and he was warned by email too if I remember correctly.

  • SpiritSpirit Member
    edited April 2012

    @liam said: maounique was pretty vunerable he hasn't got any friends/people who would stick up for him on here.

    Exactly my thoughts. He didn't have much chances in argument from beginning... but please, allow me to correct you a bit. @aldryic can be nice guy but he isn't always. Infact he can be more offensive than maounique ever was. And those double standars in new lowendtalk are main reason why I opened this thread at all.

  • Shouldn't everyone be treated fairly?

    If two people break a rule, both should get the same punishment. Not one person get banned and the other not because "loads of people like him"

    Thanked by 2Liam bijan588

    The Original Daniel.

  • @rds100 said: We just need an "ignore this user" function,

    This is much more important to enable than using bans. I know I'm down right rude with @Maounique but do not support a ban. I wouldn't want to be banned, and see no reason for these people to be banned without an ignore feature on the forum. That is the true meaning of Freedom of Speech, not to protect popular speech, but to insure you have the freedom to voice unpopular speech.

    Hostigation High Resource Hosting - SolusVM KVM VPS / Proxmox OpenVZ VPS- Low Cost Comodo SSL Certificates
  • I preferred V2 of LET since it was community-moderated.

    Thanked by 1Steve81

    The Original Daniel.

  • innyainnya Member
    edited April 2012

    Do you know what is the reason they got banned and who banned them?
    Though this is still community site.

  • AldryicAldryic Member
    edited April 2012

    @liam said: he hasn't got any friends/people who would stick up for him on here.

    I stuck up for him, actually, in mentioning that I hoped things would calm down. When he's not trolling us (I'm still not sure why), he provides rather valuable input and advice, him leaving would be a loss for the community.

    @Spirit said: What limits? If you take this as argument people like Aldryic would be perm banned here long time ago.

    Agreed.

    @liam said: Both @aldryic and @maounique exchanged comments which I think both parties regret and the post did get out of hand however maounique intention was a question as he couldn't see how x could be possible.

    To be 100% honest, I'm at a loss there. He brought up very valid points, though quite a few flat-out lies were mixed in. You might have noticed that whenever one point was answered without question (ie - He states his opinions on TOR, we decide to give TOR a try), he simply moved on to another topic and continue his attacks. We were communicating without issue for some time, I even asked for his advice via PM concerning differentiating between exit and non-exit nodes to try and address his concerns in that area, but things quickly went south from there.

    I did ask the team to speak with him, as he refused any meaningful discourse with myself (and several others not nearly as abrasive as me). I did not ask for a ban, all I wanted was the obvious libel against BuyVM (or anyone, really, though I haven't seen him target anyone else) to stop. I have no problem defending our reputation, but things get out of control all too quickly, and too many threads were being derailed from an issue that honestly should've come directly to us to begin with. My only guess is that he responded to them in much the same manner that he responded to my initial polite requests to cease (with more rudeness/etc).

    @Spirit - I could understand very well if it were some personal vendetta against me; I know full well I'm not always the most agreeable chap. But his vendetta was against the company as a whole, and he wasn't even a client. That's where I'm confused.. aside from possible jealousy, @Francisco is a very hard man to dislike.

    @Spirit said: Just because me, you.. or anyone don't agree with someone this doesn't mean that person should be silenced with ban.

    I do agree 100% with that. And while I think that the mods only resorted to the temporary ban as a last resort (and I'm very much hoping that it doesn't become any more than that), I can pretty much guess at why they were forced into that hand. If you look at his prior posts concerning us, it's been nothing but a solid stream of unfounded hate, insults, and libel (against other providers as well during the oh-so-fun TOR discussions). They likely had no alternative, given as he was very unlikely to stop on his own.

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider

    @Daniel said: community-moderated

    That is the idea that Chief is trying to put across with flagging posts etc.

  • @Infinity said: That is the idea that Chief is trying to put across with flagging posts etc.

    Doesnt seem that way...

    Thanked by 1Akira
Sign In or Register to comment.