The Official "Ban Joseph?" Poll

[_Polygamy-Porter]

what is going on?



Did Joseph report some image links again?

[_jon]

GTFO

Simon, what do these letters stand for?

[_jon]

So far it's 16 to 2 in favor of banning the village idiot...

This is and will continue to be a very powerful statement!

Coincidently the same proportion of people that think Joseph should be banned also think the Church should apologise for the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Perhaps both polls 'will continue to be a very powerful statement(s)'...

After all Simon, if you think a poll that shows 80% agreement on this board is definitive, you must also agree that the MMM vote is equally definitive. No?

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

It is no secret that I have been the number one advocate of banning Joseph for a long time now (pretty much since about a month after I started posting here). Many in the community didn't agree with me, though some did. The question we now face is this: in light of everything that's happened since MDB was temporarily taken down, should the MDB member "Joseph" be banned?

Why is it always one troublemaker trying to get rid of another troublemaker?

[_Chap]

I voted 'No". The man seems to be a little unbalanced, and he is often boring, but that is easily dealt with by putting him on ignore.

Further, banning him is not likely to diminish the likelihood of his attempting to cause problems for the board by pursuing his self-conferred role of Lone Ranger of copyright law, since he will still be able to see everything posted here. I think he is banned from the Mormon Curtain, but despite that he continues to harass Infymus.

Lastly, I dislike seeing this board turn into anything remotely resembling the MADboard. I am unconvinced that Belmont is making this proposal with the best interests of this board in mind. He has already made it plain that he finds it a very uncongenial place, and I fail to understand why he would want to do anything to make it more likely to survive and flourish.

So I hope that Shades will stand firm on this. If of course Joseph persistently breaks the rules of the board (which so far I think he has not), that would be a different matter.

[_gramps]

I voted "no."

I don't trust Simon Belmont's motives at all.

Just put Joseph on ignore, if you must.

I have also stopped sending any pm's to members of the board as of today. When someone overreacts and starts publishing pm information, despite the rules, I get more than a little worried.

[_Dr. Shades]

When someone overreacts and starts publishing pm information, despite the rules, I get more than a little worried.

The PM has been deleted.

[_jon]

Perhaps the methodology used in apologetic circles to discuss Grant Palmer can be applied here:

Simon is neither an 'official' of the board nor is he qualified to be an 'official' pollster. Pollsters need to have backgrounds of integrity and honesty and so perhaps we might question Simon's credentials.

A better thread title might be "an insiders view on banning joseph"

[_Some Schmo]

I disagree. He needs to know that this behavior is unacceptable.

How are we to teach you that your behavior is unnacceptable?

Rocks and glass houses come to mind, here.

[_Some Schmo]

I have to admit that I don't want to see Joseph banned for the simple reason that he drives Simon nuts. Clearly, Joseph adds value to the board. At the very least, we can hope that Simon finally takes responsibility for his reaction to Joseph. He's always preaching about personal responsibility, and yet he fails to walk the talk.

I say we keep Joseph around for as long as it takes to get Simon to grow up.