Howdy, Stranger!

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

Subscribe to our newsletter

Advertise on LowEndTalk.com
What's with those recent bans at LET?
New on LowEndTalk? Please read our 'Community Rules' by clicking on it in the right menu!

What's with those recent bans at LET?

SpiritSpirit Disabled
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.

«13

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.

  • SpiritSpirit Disabled

    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 Disabled
    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.

  • SpiritSpirit Disabled

    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 Disabled
    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 :)

  • SpiritSpirit Disabled

    @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 Disabled
    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.

  • DanielMDanielM Disabled

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

    Doesnt seem that way...

    Thanked by 1Akira
  • @charliecron said: I think they are trying to encourage the calm, cool, helpful, non-abusive style of the new "Chief", Joel Theodore.

    This

  • debugdebug Member

    @Daniel said: I preferred V2 of LET since it was community-moderated.

    +1, it lets the community basically run itself.

  • SpiritSpirit Disabled
    edited April 2012

    @debug said: +1, it lets the community basically run itself.

    And use administrative privileges when there's really need to step in (evident heavy spam, extremely rude insultive posts, etc..)

    Thanked by 1Liam
  • @Spirit said: And use administrative privileges when there's really need to step in (evident heavy spam, extremely rude insultive posts, etc..)

    In V2 privileges were assigned by karma. I can only speak for myself but I know others with high karma probably had the same powers, but we could delete, close and edit threads, but couldn't ban.

    But it was better.

    Thanked by 1Liam

    The Original Daniel.

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider

    @Spirit said: when there's really need to step in (evident heavy spam, extremely rude insultive posts, etc..)

    That's what I aspire to, and I'm sure Chief and the others will agree.

    Thanked by 1Liam
  • Yes, V2 was way better, really community driven. The only thing i did not like about it was the very strange ordering of the replies - made it really hard to follow the longer threads.

    -

  • @Daniel said: others with high karma probably had the same powers, but we could delete, close and edit threads

    The downside to v2 was that one particular user with a very high karma was abusing that privilege. Not to mention the karma farming sessions.

    Thanked by 1Steve81
  • SpiritSpirit Disabled

    @Daniel said: But it was better.

    Yeah, I remember only one excess (when doc edited thread to make fun from poster) and one LEA intervention when someone start to massive spam LET with spam threads.

  • MrAndroidMrAndroid Member
    edited April 2012

    @Aldryic said: The downside to v2 was that one particular user with a very high karma was abusing that privilege. Not to mention the karma farming sessions.

    Oh what user?

    The Original Daniel.

  • SpiritSpirit Disabled
    edited April 2012

    It happened only once and I think that I was the one who condemned it first and then community expressed disagreement with his act, cedric re-dedited post back so everything ended ok (I think).

  • @Spirit said: It happened only once. And community expressed disagreement with his act so everything ended ok (I think).

    Aah, ok. I was under the impression this was something of a regular, if sneaky, occurrence. Though at the time I was spending far more time over on Hostloc.. Fran hadn't gotten me completely addicted to LET just yet <_<

  • @Aldryic said: Fran hadn't gotten me completely addicted to LET just yet <_<

    Nah, your addicted.

    The Original Daniel.

  • Oh, I am now without a doubt. Sorry, that was an 'at the time' statement.

  • @Aldryic said: Oh, I am now without a doubt. Sorry, that was an 'at the time' statement.

    Didn't realise the past tense. I failed English.

    The Original Daniel.

  • AsimAsim Member

    hmm, my personal views... banning is not the way especially when both of the mentioned users were not exactly trolls.

    by the way, how did we knew they were banned?

  • @Asim said: hmm, my personal views... banning is not the way especially when both of the mentioned users were not exactly trolls.

    by the way, how did we knew they were banned?

    You click on their profile and it says banned?

    LEA never banned anyone unless they were a spammer.

    The Original Daniel.

  • ZettaZetta Member

    LEA is gone and the golden age of LET is over.

    When you find that perfect VPS, KEEP IT.

  • I never saw V2, what software was it using?

  • Its not the same without DrMike.

    I know many of you hated him, but he was hardly a bad member of the community, and was here for a very long time (even before me!!!)

    The Original Daniel.

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider

    @bijan588 said: I never saw V2, what software was it using?

    OSQA.

    Thanked by 1bijan588
Sign In or Register to comment.