Retroactive Banning for Legal Threats: Case One, Bot

[_lulu]

It was also homosexual, a deep, dark sin.

Could we see the OCP on that?

[_beastie]

Jersey Girl wasn't banned merely for threatening a lawsuit. Acting on her outlined plan in the threat in such a way that could disrupt board functioning played a role in the decision. Jskains made a frivolous legal threat against the board recently and he wasn't banned for it; rather he received a longish suspension.

So the real issue is acting in some way that disrupts the board functioning?

Why wasn't the one person who not only made the threat but actually acted on it and shut down the board for several days banned? SeattleGhostWriter?

[_beastie]

Jersey Girl wasn't banned merely for threatening a lawsuit. Acting on her outlined plan in the threat in such a way that could disrupt board functioning played a role in the decision. Jskains made a frivolous legal threat against the board recently and he wasn't banned for it; rather he received a longish suspension.

What went down with LDSFAQS, getting a three week break then is posting hours later?

Can you link the relevant thread?

[_beastie]

By the way, I wasn't really trying to get Bot banned. As much as I dislike him and find the negative descriptions of him posted by others on this thread accurate, I put him on ignore long ago so he doesn't bother me.

I'm still just trying to figure out exactly why Jersey Girl was banned. I originally thought it was the legal threat, but apparently I was wrong.

There is a problem with retroactive banning, of course, which is part of what this thread was meant to demonstrate.

[_Drifting]

I think retroactive banning is a thing of the past...











(sorry)

[_Kishkumen]

By the way, I wasn't really trying to get Bot banned. As much as I dislike him and find the negative descriptions of him posted by others on this thread accurate, I put him on ignore long ago so he doesn't bother me.

I'm still just trying to figure out exactly why Jersey Girl was banned. I originally thought it was the legal threat, but apparently I was wrong.

There is a problem with retroactive banning, of course, which is part of what this thread was meant to demonstrate.

I know exactly why you are doing it, and I agree with you. I wonder why Jersey Girl received the special treatment she got. Of course someone like bcspace will jump all over this kind of thing, because this is exactly the kind of brush he wants to use to paint the group. But no one is seriously asking that Bot or Peterson be banned. The question is this: why is Jersey banned while Bot, Peterson, and SeattleGhostWriter were not?

It makes no sense to me. I usually trust Shades, but I can't figure this one out.

[_LDSToronto]

The point is, he's gone after LDST here and on MD&D for having an avatar of Harvey Milk and made some insidious suggestions

I initiated that and I stand by it. Anyone who sees fit to have Harvey Milk for an avatar without other explanation is a sexual predator either implicitly (Romans 1:32) or explicitly.

As I've said before, if an avatar of Harvey Milk says something about my sexual proclivities, what does an avatar of an vaguely Asian, girly-boy say about your bedroom habits?

H.

[_Chap]

Bob,
Face it, you are a professional bully. You get paid more money than you are worth to defend cults like NXIVM (where more charges from women who left NXIVM claim you tried to outright intimidate them). You leap to defend child molesters for the Church

Well, well, well... Bob Crockett sympathizes with child molesters. Pedophiles, even.

H.

From one of the legal documents:

Mr. Crockett is a senior partner at [in real life removed] and is an experienced deposition-taker. Screaming and shouting and refusing bathroom breaks are not part of his skill-set.

Of course not.

[_Kishkumen]

As I've said before, if an avatar of Harvey Milk says something about my sexual proclivities, what does an avatar of an vaguely Asian, girly-boy say about your bedroom habits?

H.

Thanks for bringing the subject up. I need a brain shower.

[_SteelHead]

Bc,
Would an avatar of Warren Jeffs be more palatable?