Cotterik?

[my porsche]

Cotterik would like to know if the Islamic thread is why he is banned, and how long his ban is for?

From him on MSN:
i understand its a sensitive situation and its obviously not the place for me to display my views on the matter


Thank you.

[The_Canuck]

He didn't get a PM or anything?

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

Pwnt. :p

I thought he didn't want to see it anymore? Oh well. Never mind.

[MadMax13]

Who cares if this "isnt the place", this may be an auto forum but most of us are adults, and some of us even EDUCATED adults, capable of independent and abstract thinking, we should be able to talk about current events and whatnot...

[ripper46]

you get banned for that?
not exactly freedom of speech.
or perhaps there was an other reason....

[baddabang]

you get banned for that?
not exactly freedom of speech.
or perhaps there was an other reason....


:rolleyes:<---You can get banned for using this guy the right way nowadays...

[Mr.Tiv]

And yet I compared a mod to a used femine product and only got an infraction...

[Niko_Fx]

you get banned for that?
not exactly freedom of speech.
or perhaps there was an other reason....

Forum guidelines:

7. Racism, xenophobia and any other cultural and social segregationist messages are not tolerated and lead to severe moderation.

Pretty straight forward and easy to understand if you ask me.

[The_Canuck]

Forum guidelines:

7. Racism, xenophobia and any other cultural and social segregationist messages are not tolerated and lead to severe moderation.

Pretty straight forward and easy to understand if you ask me.

Although IMO it was hard to judge whether or not he was being a racist...

[NuclearCrap]

Cotterik was Trotsky, if you know what I mean.

[my porsche]

Cotterik was Trotsky, if you know what I mean.
You mean he was a revolutionary that the old school communists (The Mod-Squad) needed to get rid of so they had him executed whilst on vacation in Mexico?

(That was Trotsky, right?)

[Zytek_Fan]

And yet I compared a mod to a used femine product and only got an infraction...

I got an infraction for pwning sicilian-whatever. Beat that :p

[NuclearCrap]

You mean he was a revolutionary that the old school communists (The Mod-Squad) needed to get rid of so they had him executed whilst on vacation in Mexico?

(That was Trotsky, right?)

Not communism anymore, but stalinism.

If this thread gets closed I want a good reason for it. Nobody's getting off-topic or breaking any rules here.

[Niko_Fx]

Although IMO it was hard to judge whether or not he was being a racist...

Decision was already taken by the time that I found out about it. Cotterik's behavior has not been the best one lately, so I didn't even bother in getting into the whole thing too much and getting my own resolution, much less overriding another mod.

He had it coming.

If this thread gets closed I want a good reason for it. Nobody's getting off-topic or breaking any rules here.

You and MP are already insulting us for taking a step towards making this forum fair for everybody. I don't appreciate being called a Communist or a Stalinist.

[baddabang]

You and MP are already insulting us for taking a step towards making this forum fair for everybody. I don't appreciate being called a Communist or a Stalinist.

I think it was an analogy. :p

[Cyco]

In one of his post Cotterik stated violence will be used to get Asian Muslims out of the UK. As several members of this forum are of that group I raised the question with the mod team if this was a threat of physical violence against other members of the forum.

Obviously it was also interpreted that way by them too.

[my porsche]

Decision was already taken by the time that I found out about it. Cotterik's behavior has not been the best one lately, so I didn't even bother in getting into the whole thing too much and getting my own resolution, much less overriding another mod.

He had it coming.



You and MP are already insulting us for taking a step towards making this forum fair for everybody. I don't appreciate being called a Communist or a Stalinist.
Oh please...

I was just trying to interpret his analogy to Trotsky.

[NuclearCrap]

You and MP are already insulting us for taking a step towards making this forum fair for everybody. I don't appreciate being called a Communist or a Stalinist.

I do not appreciate being accused of insulting either. Please ask for clarification before you give your final judgment, and I'm directing this to the entire moderating team.

Oh please...

I was just trying to interpret his analogy to Trotsky.

I don't think we have the right to speak our minds anymore. No, not even a joke.

[Viper007]

I think the banning of cotterik may have made some of us overly sensitive. I believe we can all be adults and let the mods take care of the site as their title describes.

[Niko_Fx]

Nobody has closed anything nor will if everything stays in subject... However, there's always a reason, (which is usually discussed thoroughly in the Moderator's Forum) to hand out a Ban, and making a thread asking "Why?" doesn't make a lot of sense as most of the time everything is self-explanatory. It only takes going back and reading over the last posts of the person who was banned to understand why.

These kind of threads are usually answered to the satisfaction of the creator and then closed or deleted... But if you guys will take it THAT bad, then I'll make sure it stays open just FFS.

[NuclearCrap]

For clarification purpose: Was the banning solely your decision and did you override another moderator?

[Niko_Fx]

For clarification purpose: Was the banning solely your decision and did you override another moderator?

As I said, he was banned already by the time I found out. I had a busy weekend partying and drinking :D

[NuclearCrap]

As I said, he was banned already by the time I found out. I had a busy weekend partying and drinking :D

By who? Whoever he is needs to come to this thread and clarify. This isn't acceptable, Cotterik clearly wasn't using racial comments, and it seems if that moderator is abusing his powers to win a debate.

[baddabang]

As I said, he was banned already by the time I found out. I had a busy weekend partying and drinking :D

Memorial Day FTMFW.

[shockwaveracing]

FFS some of you are children pretending to act like adults, when really you are just children acting like spoilt pretentious little toddlers... who gives a toss if someone was banned, it has been done now and whatever the penalty, should not have to be rectified, because a couple of users don't like it...

at the moment this thread appears to be being left open by the mods solely to humour the banalities that you children seem to enjoy pursuing time and time again... the mods saw a user breaking one of the simplest rules and acted accordingly...

quit your bitching and get on with using UCP responsibly...

[The_Canuck]

yes sir...

Sorry, I absolutely had to.

[NuclearCrap]

FFS some of you are children pretending to act like adults, when really you are just children acting like spoilt pretentious little toddlers... who gives a toss if someone was banned, it has been done now and whatever the penalty, should not have to be rectified, because a couple of users don't like it...

at the moment this thread appears to be being left open by the mods solely to humour the banalities that you children seem to enjoy pursuing time and time again... the mods saw a user breaking one of the simplest rules and acted accordingly...

quit your bitching and get on with using UCP responsibly...

I'm not complaining about one's banning, but rather questioning the morality of the moderating team. They banned a person who did not break the rule. If they can do it to one person they might as well do it to any other in the future. I would still do what I'm doing if it was anybody else. Your flaming is only going to worsen the situation.

[Viper007]

What you have to understand is that tolerating, what may have been interpreted as attacks or racism, will simply lead to the down fall of UCP. By allowing a user to voice his opinion in a way which demeans a race or population, will simply show other users that they too are able to get away with such antics. Thus, by banning TTek they have reinforced the idea that such behavior will not be tolerated and the rules must be obeyed. Although you may see this banning as an infringement on your basic rights, no one forces you or cotterik to stay here and thus they are able to execute the rules at their own discretion.

[Zytek_Fan]

The banning of Cotterik is certainly a questionable action taken by a mod. I believe he was merely speaking his mind on the matter, and all of us here at UCP should be allowed to state our opinion fairly. Nobody said anything about his statements being offensive toward them. His comments didn't necessarily point toward racism.

I believe we have reason to question the action taken by mods sometimes. I've had posts of mine deleted for no reason, never being offered an explanation.

UCP used to be a really fun forum to belong to, but over the past year (after Summer 06) the atmosphere totally changed, it started becoming more serious, I do like serious discussions, but come on, everyone wants to have some humourous discussions every now and then don't we?

I believe some people don't speak their mind on something because of fear of moderation, me included.

I know there has to be rules on a forum to keep people in line and to avoid flame wars like crazy (just look at the SomethingAwful forums :p)

I think some change needs to be implemented.

[NuclearCrap]

What you have to understand is that tolerating, what may have been interpreted as attacks or racism, will simply lead to the down fall of UCP. By allowing a user to voice his opinion in a way which demeans a race or population, will simply show other users that they too are able to get away with such antics. Thus, by banning TTek they have reinforced the idea that such behavior will not be tolerated and the rules must be obeyed. Although you may see this banning as an infringement on your basic rights, no one forces you or cotterik to stay here and thus they are able to execute the rules at their own discretion.

It was misinterpreted as a racial comment. Cotterik stressed that he would've said the same if it was anybody else other than the Muslim people, but in this case the Muslims were in question. If anything that is to lead to the downfall of UCP, it would be the attitudes of some of our moderators acting as if they're of a superior race. This isn't only my opinion, but I've heard the same from many others. I understand that nobody is forcing me to stay, but I'm not about to walk away from an arising problem when I can help it. I have the right to speak my mind as long as I'm not breaking the rules.

[Zytek_Fan]

Something I want to add:

As members of a forum, at times we have the right to question the action(s) taken by our moderator(s)

[IBrake4Rainbows]

As the Banning Moderator, I would like to say that his ban was as much to do with his current behaviour as one select moment in time.

The racist elements involved in some of his comments, coupled to his attitude in recent threads, was a huge catalyst.

FYI the ban is for 1 week. as per forum policy. if he wishes to take it up with me after the ban is lifted he's more than welcome to do so.

[SlickHolden]

I think he said many things wrong and went over the top i was just reading away, He basically was judging a whole when he hardly knew a few. But it was based on such a small section. It's like saying because one member on this forum is a C**T.. All members are. This is wrong 1 2 100 1000-30,000 don't make 200-900 million that way.

[NuclearCrap]

As the Banning Moderator, I would like to say that his ban was as much to do with his current behaviour as one select moment in time.

Are you inferring that a behavior in which the moderating team does not like would get a member banned?

The racist elements involved in some of his comments, coupled to his attitude in recent threads, was a huge catalyst.

FYI the ban is for 1 week. as per forum policy. if he wishes to take it up with me after the ban is lifted he's more than welcome to do so.

He said that he would've said the same thing if the subject was of another religion/race, but in this case it was the Muslims. Apparently you took action before considering that factor.

And how would his "attitude" get him banned? That statement makes me believe that the moderating team can ban anyone if the moderating team does not favor his/her attitude, and that is exactly what I'm going after. Maybe now some of you can understand why I brought up stalinism. The moderating team should not expect a peaceful, friendly community if they can't provide the same and are taking sides. It seems as if since you don't like one's attitude, you would bait that person so you can get rid of him. Isn't that pretty much what Stalin did to Trotsky? That led to totalitarianism, and I'm not about to give up my rights here as a free man. If you can do it to him, you might as well do the same to anybody else including me.

And FYI, Cotterik did not tell me to take it up with the moderating team. I'm expressing my very own opinions here. Forum policy did not say I can't do so, and if anyone is to change the policy so that nobody can, then the supporters of which hold no merit in the freedom of speech and that UCP is no place for those who want to express their opinions.

[clutch-monkey]

And how would his "attitude" get him banned? That statement makes me believe that the moderating team can ban anyone if the moderating team does not favor his/her attitude
oh this is true no doubt. in fact, it's worse than you think. i've been banned for not upholding the 'picsorban' rule. :rolleyes: :D ZOMG NAZIMODS!!!

i can find little fault in what the moderators do. Unless it's rockefella. :D:p

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Are you inferring that a behavior in which the moderating team does not like would get a member banned?

Yes. if that behaviour is circumvent to forum policy.



He said that he would've said the same thing if the subject was of another religion/race, but in this case it was the Muslims. Apparently you took action before considering that factor.

Apparantly not. if you've read the thread properly you'll see we're also criticizing another member (MadMax13, off the top of my head) for an anti-christian stance.

apparantly you haven't considered the possibility that the moderation staff actually work damned hard and are fair.

And how would his "attitude" get him banned? That statement makes me believe that the moderating team can ban anyone if the moderating team does not favor his/her attitude, and that is exactly what I'm going after. Maybe now some of you can understand why I brought up stalinism.

This forum is not a democracy.

The moderating team should not expect a peaceful, friendly community if they can't provide the same and are taking sides. It seems as if since you don't like one's attitude, you would bait that person so you can get rid of him. Isn't that pretty much what Stalin did to Trotsky? That led to totalitarianism, and I'm not about to give up my rights here as a free man. If you can do it to him, you might as well do the same to anybody else including me.

The only side that was taken by the moderating staff was one of self preservation. A moderator who is also a member of the community another member is attacking is perfectly within his/her rights to retort and defend it. Moderators are members first.

I repeat - UCP is not a democracy.

And FYI, Cotterik did not tell me to take it up with the moderating team. I'm expressing my very own opinions here. Forum policy did not say I can't do so, and if anyone is to change the policy so that nobody can, then the supporters of which hold no merit in the freedom of speech and that UCP is no place for those who want to express their opinions.

That is not what i said. Cotterik HIMSELF is perfectly within his rights to question me when his ban is lifted.

this is not about you - never was. stop using any opportunity to push your own agenda.

UCP is a place for the expressing of opinions and the exchange of ideas. however there are limits as to how that can be done. being violent, racist (As we believe Cotterik was being) or just idiotic does not cut it as proper conversation.

We're covering old ground RE freedom of speech on the forums etc. Opinions have not changed in regards to that issue.

Honestly as an individual i find it very difficult to ban someone - this person has come here at their own free will and may not return if they've been chastised. However these people and their actions spoil it for the great majority of members who are happy to accept the rules and abide by them.

It's not difficult.

[fpv_gtho]

If this thread gets closed I want a good reason for it. Nobody's getting off-topic or breaking any rules here.

Oh boo hoo hoo. I'd have had this thread closed if i got to it early enough. This "issue" is between the UCP mods and Cotterik, and NO ONE else. If Cotterik requires a reason to his banning, he can contact the mods outside of UCP, or failing that with the PM system.

You guys had no right to "demand" IB4R to come forward. If he was so cowardly in his actions as you have been alluding to by banning Cotterik, he certainly would not have come forward about it.

[SlickHolden]

If i was muslin i would have been offended by his comments..
I don't even have a religion but that doesn't mean i complain or insult someone else's or demand change or tell them to go back to where they came from..
Out of all his words i found that the most offending "go back to the middle east where it came from" 3 years ago i meet a man who was Muslim he was dating someone i knew, He was born here he was dating a blue eyed blonde haired Aussie girl, He married a Asian girl in the end, But through all this he is still muslim who is born Australian he goes to the footy eats meat even bacon he is a funny bloke i had no issues with him at all. Send him back home? He is home.

[Ingolstadt]

Ain't it peculiar that everytime it's Drakkie that brought Cotterik to deep shit? haha.... :D

Anyway, I think Cotterik's comments should be brought into reasoning at the Muslim thread before he was banned. He left himself out of the discussion when many finds it being overtly offensive. I think he's quite mature in that sense to not further the flaming. Banning him thereafter is actually an act out of furiority i guess.

And to the mods, the reason he got banned, shouldn't be an accumulated 'recent-behavioral-infringement'. It should be treated independantly.

What he did recently? Challenging the forum to have a 'modding general comp' and expressing his anger on the changing living environment. He did not meant to insult moderate and modern muslims i have to say. Just that it's easier to 'frame' him by linking what he said to Paula Abdul, than to Osama Bin Laden.

[Matra et Alpine]

I don't appreciate being called a Communist or a Stalinist.
It's better than "Republican" or "New Labour" :D :D :D :D

[henk4]

It's better than "Republican" or "New Labour" :D :D :D :D

or "Liberal"

[Cyco]

So, cyco?

i've been reported by my friends on ucp that you taddle-taled to the
moderators to try and get me banned by claiming I was stating 'violence will
be used to get Asian Muslims out of the UK'. What the ****. Firstly I dont
give a shit if its a muslim, a christian, a jew, whatever. I'm proud of my
country. This is what its all about. It just happens to be Muslims in this
instance, and you obviously have a sensitive spot about that don't you? I've
never suggested violence, not to any other member or islam itself. You are
****ing weak to jump on the bandwagon and claim I am threatening physical
violence on other members. I never NEVER intended to insult or threaten
other members. What people think of others opinions is their own to react
to, but my opinion is just as threatening to you as yours is to me. Yes. I
pinpoint a problem that is arising in the country. And I do ****ing study
history. So dont go ****ing posting rants once I've been banned to try and
take the upper hand over what I've said.

You manipulative twat. Don't ever try to effect my position at a forum that
i've contributed to for over 3 years. The mods will be oversensitive about a
religious debate. I wouldn't have been banned if it wasn't for you claiming
I'm a ****ing racist. If i was, i would come out and say so. But I am just
as proud of the worlds many cultures as I am of my own.
And that is exactly what I am protective of. So don't ever call me a ****ing
racist. And don't ever try to use the moderators as a means of winning a
debate. You weak person.

xxx
f my own.

All in all, england is not the place for Muslims to build themselves a new home. I guarantee this will turn into a violent situation in this century alone. Because the british civilian will not let his/her country be infiltrated

This was an e-mail I have been sent and also the quote I most objected to.

If the 2nd quote is not a threat of violence that I don't know how much more explicitly it has to be stated. This threat is not against me. I am neither Islamic, Asian, or having any desire to live in the UK.

As to the delay in the posts that came after the ban was put in place: I wrote the replies over several hours in different windows so that I could post them all together. This was started pre-ban and I am somewhat disappointed you can't reply in the thread atm, as most other have failed to read the full text of what you have written, and what I have posted. I think all your further replies will continue to display your myopic, possibly racist views and their extremist nature.

If you think no Islamic Asian post here, and therefore are not attacked by statements like:
In the society that I live in. Muslims are not friends. They are not friendly. They are not beneficial to our society. They are not even part of our community. Infact they insist on creating they own and demoralising british society.and
I invite you to come to england. Visit Blackburn. Visit Bradford. Birmingham maybe. You need to search heavily for an english civilian. They have been forced out by the wave of muslim immigrants. Plaguing the city irreversably. People who used to live there are disgusted. And they should be. These immigrants are not even moral.
then you are sadly mistaken. I will not point out those I know who are part of this group as anonymity is one of the features many like, or hide behind on boards such as this.

I have no particular sensitivity to this attack being on Islamic Asians, I just think ANY attack on any group being singled out by their skin colour, religious beliefs, or language is weak, small minded and deplorable. I will always try to defend the rights of those such oppressed by those such as yourself, for in societies that people don't stand up to bullies like you and your beloved BNP will end up in a situation like Nazi Germany, or the KKK in the 1960s Southern US.

I don't believe my short refutations and questioning of many of your points are considered 'rants', but even if they are then that would have to be the classification put on your posts as well.

Is your 3 years here more valuable than my three years of contributions here?

Are you upset that some people can have have friendships amongst some of the mod community? As it was when I discussed this with one, prior to the reporting of the post their response was they would not do anything about it as they thought that it was much better to have your voice heard, but then once you started posting about using violence to get Islamic Asians out of the UK I used the report post function.

I am also e-mailing this to you as a politeness measure, but I thought as you have no issues reading here, others should also see your rants and abhorrence that I defend a group I am not a member off.

[clutch-monkey]

^ lol at email. any normal person would have copped the ban and/or explained the reasoning behind his statements, but i guess whingeing seems to be his thing maybe?
By who? Whoever he is needs to come to this thread and clarify. This isn't acceptable, Cotterik clearly wasn't using racial comments, and it seems if that moderator is abusing his powers to win a debate.
i lol'ed. i don't recall when the mods suddenly became answerable to you?

[SlickHolden]

This was an e-mail I have been sent and also the quote I most objected to.

If the 2nd quote is not a threat of violence that I don't know how much more explicitly it has to be stated. This threat is not against me. I am neither Islamic, Asian, or having any desire to live in the UK.

As to the delay in the posts that came after the ban was put in place: I wrote the replies over several hours in different windows so that I could post them all together. This was started pre-ban and I am somewhat disappointed you can't reply in the thread atm, as most other have failed to read the full text of what you have written, and what I have posted. I think all your further replies will continue to display your myopic, possibly racist views and their extremist nature.

If you think no Islamic Asian post here, and therefore are not attacked by statements like:
and

then you are sadly mistaken. I will not point out those I know who are part of this group as anonymity is one of the features many like, or hide behind on boards such as this.

I have no particular sensitivity to this attack being on Islamic Asians, I just think ANY attack on any group being singled out by their skin colour, religious beliefs, or language is weak, small minded and deplorable. I will always try to defend the rights of those such oppressed by those such as yourself, for in societies that people don't stand up to bullies like you and your beloved BNP will end up in a situation like Nazi Germany, or the KKK in the 1960s Southern US.

I don't believe my short refutations and questioning of many of your points are considered 'rants', but even if they are then that would have to be the classification put on your posts as well.

Is your 3 years here more valuable than my three years of contributions here?

Are you upset that some people can have have friendships amongst some of the mod community? As it was when I discussed this with one, prior to the reporting of the post their response was they would not do anything about it as they thought that it was much better to have your voice heard, but then once you started posting about using violence to get Islamic Asians out of the UK I used the report post function.

I am also e-mailing this to you as a politeness measure, but I thought as you have no issues reading here, others should also see your rants and abhorrence that I defend a group I am not a member off.
I think you said it best when you said Australia was taken over by the brits, But how many religions or country's have the brits taken and changed over the years?..
Also our priminsiter tells us we have to honer our queen? Isnt that moving in and removing everyone from there ways changing who they are and what they are etc?. I think the indigonas people of many country's can have a bigger whine then Cotterik.

[Ingolstadt]

seriously ... i think Drakkie brought Cotterik to deep shit many times... :p








sorry... couldn't help LOLing when i came to this conclusion..

[clutch-monkey]

seriously ... i think Drakkie brought Cotterik to deep shit many times... :p

haha it is a bit coincidental now that you mention it ..:D

[Matra et Alpine]

or "Liberal"
You taken delivery of a Diesel Lincoln Continental Limo by any chance ?? :) :)

( advance apologies FLeet, take it in the humour it was intended :) )

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

Wow. What a nice guy. I hope he doesn't come back, to be honest.

I think, knowing quite a few of the mod team, that the right thing was done. Cotterik's hideously xenophobic comments made my hackles rise, particularly his stupidly sweeping statements- i.e. "all the white British want them gone". I'm white, I'm British, and I certainly don't want them gone.

Cotterik, if you ever get back to read this- think about what you're posting before you offend several people. Did it ever occur to you that some people on this forum may a part of the "problem" that you speak of? You have done no more than make me ashamed to be British, and realise that it's not the ethnic minorities that are the problem in Britain, it's people like you.

Embrace change. Or you could go join the BNP.

Your shout.

[henk4]

You taken delivery of a Diesel Lincoln Continental Limo by any chance ?? :) :)

( advance apologies FLeet, take it in the humour it was intended :) )

as a matter of fact I did and I was appalled by the built quality....

[McReis]

For clarification purpose: Was the banning solely your decision and did you override another moderator?
No ban is a sole decision. They are all a consequence of a set of rules which were made by a team.

By who? Whoever he is needs to come to this thread and clarify. This isn't acceptable, Cotterik clearly wasn't using racial comments, and it seems if that moderator is abusing his powers to win a debate.
Noone has to justify. Keep that in mind.

the mods saw a user breaking one of the simplest rules and acted accordingly...
As simple as that.

Are you inferring that a behavior in which the moderating team does not like would get a member banned?
If his behaviour affects the quality of the forum, sure.
Cotterik is constantly challenging and questioning the rules. Less than a week ago he went well above what is usually accepted by insulting me, and I asked fellow moderators not to ban him.

And FYI, Cotterik did not tell me to take it up with the moderating team. I'm expressing my very own opinions here.Forum policy did not say I can't do so.
Yes it does. Read this:


1. A forum is a space for debate and opinion exchanging. Any post that goes beyond the limits of a sane sociability, whether they are rude, insulting, personal attacks or intended to fire up a conversation, can be moderated and its author hold responsible.
When the moderated member disagrees or wants to be informed about the reasons that lead to the moderation act, he shall contact a moderator by PM.

This issues should be discussed privately. It's too easy to come out here and create a team of young rebels to support some radical attitude that lead to a ban, but it seems to be much harder to have the mature attitude to confront the moderating team, alone and directly. Maybe that's because deep inside, the moderated member usually knows he's done something wrong, and therefore needs support.

[Matra et Alpine]

If the 2nd quote is not a threat of violence that I don't know how much more explicitly it has to be stated. This threat is not against me. I am neither Islamic, Asian, or having any desire to live in the UK.
ANd yet it's NOT a "threat" of violence by an individual.
It is a recognition that it will happen if things conintue.

Let me repeat .... these points are VERY uppermost in UK poloticians moinds. They realise it. The British government is trying to resolve this positively.
Suppressing debate and labelling those who are vocal with extremist titles will only accelerate this.

I think everyone needs to draw breath and review their own assumptions and bias in reading posts and in this case ignoring a posters comments about their views not being taken wrongly.
I have no particular sensitivity to this attack being on Islamic Asians, I just think ANY attack on any group being singled out by their skin colour, religious beliefs, or language is weak, small minded and deplorable.
So no attack on Al Quaeda ? No attack on BNP ?? Or is "attack" only when it happens to "our" group ?
I will always try to defend the rights of those such oppressed by those such as yourself, for in societies that people don't stand up to bullies like you and your beloved BNP will end up in a situation like Nazi Germany, or the KKK in the 1960s Southern US.
Having experienced Southern Alabama then let me assure you the parallels with Bradford are shockingly familier :(

In the case of "opression" then consider how "oppressed" someone feels to have to obey social norms whilst others denigrate them ? ie 'freedom of speech' .... can't say anything bad about the Prophet or an Immam but can drag priests into court over their wrong-doings.

IMO neither here nor there. Same holds true for someone who's been here only ONE day.
[quote]Are you upset that some people can have have friendships amongst some of the mod community?
From the outside, there is a look of a clique about it :(
We had thisd issue before with MSNers "plotting".
Best advice is DONT. If you disagree then walk away, dont' try to garner support as that is often false as it is inevitably one-sided :)
once you started posting about using violence to get Islamic Asians out of the UK I used the report post function.
ie like that.
Violence was not THREATENED it was PREDICTED there is a difference.
Especially when it's part of a DEBATE to try to prevent iot happening.
I am also e-mailing this to you as a politeness measure, but I thought as you have no issues reading here, others should also see your rants and abhorrence that I defend a group I am not a member off.
WHich group are you defending ?
MOderate Muslims ? All of Islamic faith ? Immigrants ? Illegal Immigrants ? Immigrants who isolate and demand social inclusion ?? Which ????

[Gt1Street]

I'm not sure if the ban was rightful but then again I got lazy in the middle of the racism thread and stopped reading since they rambled on 5 pages in huge answers, but then again its not for me to decide users fate...

My own oppinion regarding the subject is that it was a bit hasty to ban him, especially for a week, especialy since he did not promote any violance that others interpreted as one...

[Matra et Alpine]

Cotterik's hideously xenophobic comments made my hackles rise, particularly his stupidly sweeping statements- i.e. "all the white British want them gone". I'm white, I'm British, and I certainly don't want them gone.
Which "them" do you mean nad do you know which "them" cotterik meant ?
No ? Well there's the rub in this issue :(

Find me ONE British white/black/catholic/budhust/whatever who does not want fundamentalists intent on forging THEIR image of the society through force ? I think we can all agree all of "them" we all want rid of.

OK, now .... the BNP extremists want all of "them" to go --- all of them sadly.

IN the middle ground is where everyone else lives. SOme of "them" who refuse to integrate, learn language, accept social norms then some of the British want those "them" to go.

So ... whcih ones do ytou defend and which ones do you accept ?

COtterik - imho - was voicing a valid point that IS present in British society and NOT at the extremes. I've not seen ANY response to the point that Britain is considering citizenship testing and "allegiance" .... are all teh House of Commons and government officials BNP members ? NO ... so your "attack" is as deplorable as the perceived one you atrtribute to Cotterik.

THere is right and worng, good and bad on both sides and by LISTENDING we're better for it. WHen intransigence is encountered then accept that a point ahas been put over, not embraced and move on.
Cotterik, if you ever get back to read this- think about what you're posting before you offend several people. Did it ever occur to you that some people on this forum may a part of the "problem" that you speak of? You have done no more than make me ashamed to be British, and realise that it's not the ethnic minorities that are the problem in Britain, it's people like you.
Well if anyone IS a "Part of the problem" then I'd like to hear that side.
WHY isolate and require seperate schooling for example ?
We've spent hundreds of years trying to remove catholic and protestant seperate schooling WHY should we add another ?

The sweeping "ethnic minorities" comment is the real issue.
THere are SOME Problems in SOME areas of SOME ethnic minorities.
WHen words are spoken against those then they neatly expand it out so that they can play the card to have the silent majority on their defence.
The writer should try to be more specific but if agreived then the reader shoudl also consider if they are biassing the content and seek clarification.
It's THIS aspect of Britishness I abhor the loss of the most in recent years :(

Embrace change. Or you could go join the BNP.

Your shout.
are you joining all quaeda as you don't suggest ANY defiance of those (ab)using the Prophet's teachings in those comments ?
no ? did that "hurt" ?? Then what about the BNP comment ????

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

Which "them" do you mean nad do you know which "them" cotterik meant ?
No ? Well there's the rub in this issue :(
It's quite obvious that he was talking about the people who are 'taking over his community', who are in fact just forging a life for themselves, living the equivalent of the American Dream.

Find me ONE British white/black/catholic/budhust/whatever who does not want fundamentalists intent on forging THEIR image of the society through force ? I think we can all agree all of "them" we all want rid of.
I don't understand this point very well, please can you clarify it? Too early in the morning...
OK, now .... the BNP extremists want all of "them" to go --- all of them sadly.
Yes, and they also want a privacy law, which may well be coming into action. How long before a neo-Nazi thinly disguised as a politician decides to "Send 'Em Back Where They Came From!"?

IN the middle ground is where everyone else lives. SOme of "them" who refuse to integrate, learn language, accept social norms then some of the British want those "them" to go.

So ... whcih ones do ytou defend and which ones do you accept ?

I do realise that there are some of 'them', as they're so tastefully referred to, that do not make an effort to be British and are trying to change society here- but that is a very small minority. Think of it as a classroom. There are about 90% of a class that are good, exceptional and content with being who they are. However, the 10% that is always noticed is the bad side, and this reflects poorly on the rest of the class, so to speak. Hope that analogy makes sense. Having dealt in my area with a lot of people who happily embrace the British culture (eating fish and chips, drinking Stella and beating up their wives :rolleyes: ), you can rest assured that the majority are as British in mindset as you or I. I have friends from college who have renounced their faith in order to fit in with the British lifestyle, and out of 13 friends at college off the top of my head who should belong to a strict religion, only one still *loosely* follows the conduct of his religion. The up-and-coming generation that I see are different to many of the people that you have brought up. I remember I went on holiday in 2004 with practising Sikhs who, I quote, "couldn't be bothered" to be strict with their religion!

COtterik - imho - was voicing a valid point that IS present in British society and NOT at the extremes. I've not seen ANY response to the point that Britain is considering citizenship testing and "allegiance" .... are all teh House of Commons and government officials BNP members ? NO ... so your "attack" is as deplorable as the perceived one you atrtribute to Cotterik.

You think what he wrote was actually valid? Blimey. I always thought you had a better head on your shoulders than that. To be honest, the way the current government is I'm not surprised that an allegiance is being considered. In some ways, New Labour has really become New Tory. The last 10 years have been an era of tightly-controlled information and spin. I resent that remark, also- having always been pretty broad-minded and welcoming of change, I just find what he has been suggesting to be utterly vile. Do you want to send them back to where they came from?

THere is right and worng, good and bad on both sides and by LISTENDING we're better for it. WHen intransigence is encountered then accept that a point ahas been put over, not embraced and move on.
Through personal experience, I could find nothing to agree with in Cotterik's pathetic excuse for an argument. It was a multipage rant that degenerated into how Britain should be left to those who are pure, flaxen-haired Saxons. Sod that for a game of soldiers.

Well if anyone IS a "Part of the problem" then I'd like to hear that side.
Give it a minute. I'm not sure if they're happy with posting about their views in case Cotterik decides to boot them back to "where they came from".

WHY isolate and require seperate schooling for example ?
We've spent hundreds of years trying to remove catholic and protestant seperate schooling WHY should we add another ?
And look where we are. Many schools blend religious views now, and the up and coming generation in this country who have grown up here and work with it will probably see no need for separate schools. Of the friends at college previously mentioned, 4 of them thought the matter was completely petty and trivial.

The sweeping "ethnic minorities" comment is the real issue.
THere are SOME Problems in SOME areas of SOME ethnic minorities.
WHen words are spoken against those then they neatly expand it out so that they can play the card to have the silent majority on their defence.
The writer should try to be more specific but if agreived then the reader shoudl also consider if they are biassing the content and seek clarification.
It's THIS aspect of Britishness I abhor the loss of the most in recent years :(
Again, please can you clarify here? I'm a little lost there.

are you joining all quaeda as you don't suggest ANY defiance of those (ab)using the Prophet's teachings in those comments ?
no ? did that "hurt" ?? Then what about the BNP comment ????
Well, as I'm not actually part of the ethnic minorities I'm defending (just a good friend of a lot people who belong to them), I don't think I'll be joining the Al Qaeda any time soon, but thanks for your kind offer. :)

Not.

The BNP comment I actually find to be valid, have you read their manifesto? I certainly did, and it corresponds with everything Cotterik said.

[man 430gt]

How has this conversation ended up on BNP? The question was simple and this is just useless BS that sparks these problems. I think this thread has passed it's sell by date..

[Matra et Alpine]

It's quite obvious that he was talking about the people who are 'taking over his community', who are in fact just forging a life for themselves, living the equivalent of the American Dream.
WHat like Mormons 50 years ago ? Branch Davidians ? Many others who isolate and live life without embracing some law or neighbours ? You are confusing being a part of and apart from :(
People who "take over" by changing it by force or resistance to change in themselves are "invading" not immigrating.
I suspect you don't understand the difference given your other comments and I'm not here to waste time on such issues. Talk to your MP :)
I don't understand this point very well, please can you clarify it? Too early in the morning...
Well let's wait till you wake up and have time to review the comments and read the statement and grasp the multiple refernces to "them" withtout really know who they are in anyoens mindset .....
Yes, and they also want a privacy law, which may well be coming into action. How long before a neo-Nazi thinly disguised as a politician decides to "Send 'Em Back Where They Came From!"?
Yeah all fine for the BNP.
BUT we're talkign mainstream politicians and local and national level !
We're NOT talking weirdo stuff but the embracing of the US method which has worked better ( in their opinions ) than NOT having a citizenship program. UK just assumes everyone will work for the common good and doesn't remind them it's a responsibility. Of course getting it to apply to many of those chavs living here for the last 100 generationts will be difficult to :)
DOn't drag the point away from the issue. Sensationalising it only cause friction. Please try to not drift too far from the point
I do realise that there are some of 'them', as they're so tastefully referred to, that do not make an effort to be British and are trying to change society here- but that is a very small minority. Think of it as a classroom.
Your analogy is a good one.
So in an ideal classroom what happens when someone refuses to pull their weight in a team task ?
Ideally it is explained about common work and the person is coaxed into helping.
Now ... what if that DOESN'T happen ?
Should the other team members "complain" about the isolation of an individual - of course they should or they risk a low mark.
Should the teacher and school try to ensure workign TOGETHER in the classroom ?
Should one individual who say doesn't believe in math prevent everyone else in the class from studying math ?
See your analogy IS very good for bringing the issue to the surface.
THe classroom is TRYING to find a way forward whilst it does have a disruptive element present and sadly an element that many are unwilling to point the finger at for fear of what happens.
There are about 90% of a class that are good, exceptional and content with being who they are. However, the 10% that is always noticed is the bad side, and this reflects poorly on the rest of the class, so to speak.
100% and so .... who needs to "change" ? the 90 or the 10 ?? Who needs to adapt ? the 90 or the 10 ? CLearly the answer is BOTH ... but the 10 has more to move than the 90 :) for complete harmony.
the majority are as British in mindset as you or I.
Now you are using your example to jsutify your opinion. So is that ALL of your friends and all of theirs and of everyoen in the UK ? No ? So do you think SOME friends have friends with the opposite views ? Yes ? So where do you draw the line at calling one racist/fundamentalist/hanger-on and not the others ???
You think what he wrote was actually valid?
Yes, because I was lookgin at what he WROTE and not "what I think he wrote that woudl upset me if I interpret it that way and worse that I didn't seek clrification of".
Blimey. I always thought you had a better head on your shoulders than that.
ROFLMHO :)
To be honest, the way the current government is I'm not surprised that an allegiance is being considered. In some ways, New Labour has really become New Tory.
Wait .... WHY is a thought to bring all British together with a common thread a problem worthy of labelling a Thatcherism ?? :)
May I suggest because your picture of it is manifest to match your mias ? Perhaps you can explain why....
I just find what he has been suggesting to be utterly vile. Do you want to send them back to where they came from?
Classic ... which "them" do YOU Mean ? Perhaps if you'd simply asked that question a few days back you'd have avoidded this whole debacle ????
I answered that in my post if you'd read it ... the "them" I'd "send back" are those who refuse to accept a common goal and legal system and social responsibility and any organisation of violence. So lets start with the last one first and WHY are communities not denouncing those who proclaim violence ??
Through personal experience, I could find nothing to agree with in Cotterik's pathetic excuse for an argument. It was a multipage rant that degenerated into how Britain should be left to those who are pure, flaxen-haired Saxons. Sod that for a game of soldiers.
Wow ... that's not what happened.
But if it's what you think happened then clearly we have an issue.

Give it a minute. I'm not sure if they're happy with posting about their views in case Cotterik decides to boot them back to "where they came from".
Farily pitiful manipulation attempt :)
And look where we are. Many schools blend religious views now, and the up and coming generation in this country who have grown up here and work with it will probably see no need for separate schools.
What country are you living in ?
We are getting requests for seperate religious schools funded by the state NOW.
How much of the real world situation - beyond a few friends - are you aware of ?
Well, as I'm not actually part of the ethnic minorities I'm defending (just a good friend of a lot people who belong to them), I don't think I'll be joining the Al Qaeda any time soon, but thanks for your kind offer. :)
We're debating a point. You need to be capable of grasping the point of the sentence in teh context of the stance you take on attacking another pov.
The BNP comment I actually find to be valid, have you read their manifesto? I certainly did, and it corresponds with everything Cotterik said.
Yes .. and I've discussed it with BNP members and an organiser.
I've also had discussions with white supremicists in souther US and Afrikanners at the height of apartheid. I tihnk the real problem now is we've lsot the ability to know how far right a political/religious view can be and confuse the tensino caused by the extreme versus the concept - be it religious or political.
"Labelling" someone as a racist is a personal abuse. If the abused objects to it and tries to explain then the offendor should receive infractions.
At the moment a guy with views voiced by mainstream politicians in the UK has received a ban for saying them here. :(

BTW it was Enoch Powell in the 60s who suggested sending immigrants home "or we will be drenched in a sea of blood". He was a VERY well respectged person and many opponents understood what he meant and why he said it. Sadly the PC brigade of the day sensationalised it

[IBrake4Rainbows]

It's difficult to get a point across like moderation without it becoming sensationalised.

however i honestly don't believe that is what originally happened with Cotteriks comments. they come out of frustration, pride (for one's country) and anger. and i think he really should have known better.

the week ban gives him a chance to learn from this experience.

if no one else has anything more to say on the actual issue (Cotterik being banned) the thread will be closed.

[SlickHolden]

Whats BNP? British national propaganda??:p

[Ferrer]

Whats BNP? British national propaganda??:p
LOL :D

[SlickHolden]

I'm a slow learner i failed kindergarden:D.

[Ingolstadt]

I'm a slow learner i failed kindergarden:D.

It's a 'T'. Not your usual garDen. :) You definitely failed it.




This comes to me now.... do they teach kindergarten children the word 'KINDERGARTEN' ? Cos it's obviously a difficult word for em 4 yr olds.

[Matra et Alpine]

Whats BNP? British national propaganda??:p
British National Party.

Was orignally a bunch of loonie skinheads but is now less civilised :)

Usual "nation" focussed policies about retainng an independant non-changing Britian. Within it they have their own "fundamentalists" who really do want to send everybody back - including us Scots/Irish :) - and also the more conservative with a small c who really only want to see the British ideals not lost in the future.

Just as "some people" have been lambasted for quoting a reasonable position and being labelled racist, many moderate BNPers hate getting labelled scum.

http://www.bnp.org.uk/ .... just dont' press the Join buton please :)

[john14]

Originally Posted Matra et Alpine
including us Scots/Irish -

Matra, they are just jealous of us. They secretly wish they were Scottish or Irish. :D

[Gt1Street]

I'm a slow learner i failed kindergarden:D.

you can choose your favorite out of 83 options - http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=bnp&string=exact

[drakkie]

It's better than "Republican" or "New Labour" :D :D :D :D

Alwasy better than being a Dutch politician :D

Anyway I didn't mean to create this kind of uproar with my thread, just to get that straight. I have no idea what happened in there, I'm still not finished reading everything :rolleyes:

Im at post #30 by now and I absolutely have no idea about why he is banned. Actually so far others would deserve a ban much more for getting personal and insultive personally. So far he isn't really racist, he just explains the situation as many native people see them. Almost exactly like it is here...

I spend about half of my time in a city that has a percentage of foreigners of about 60%, because I study in it. I have no problem with the people themselves, but the general attitude is different and they DO create problems because of it.

Some of our foreign friends here that don't really know this problem, should realise that the rapid increase of them, their influence and "problems" create a kind of fear or perhaps better described as suspicions or unrest.. A party over here led by the murdered (thx environmentalists) Pim Fortuijn, described the feeling very well and got a large number of votes !! Many of the people I know find it a big problem as well, even (some of) my muslim friends say so..

And offcourse being beaten up (again) pretty damn badly five weeks ago by some doesn't exactly help in trying to stay un-biased. My jaw still hurts a little bit from that incident and my friend especially has really been traumatised. :o

To conclude my rather unusally serious (:rolleyes: ) post... Let's all keep friendly and change our attitudes away from all the personal attacks that happen lately, even if the person involved deserved it !!! Let's make it as nice of a forum as it was when I joined.

[Mr.Tiv]

Alwasy better than being a Dutch politician :D

Anyway I didn't mean to create this kind of uproar with my thread, just to get that straight. I have no idea what happened in there, so I'm off to read it now :rolleyes:

The most amazing part is it happened without you, go figure... :D

[my porsche]

Ain't it peculiar that everytime it's Drakkie that brought Cotterik to deep shit? haha.... :D .
Because his life revolves around agitating other people.

[SlickHolden]

It's a 'T'. Not your usual garDen. :) You definitely failed it.




This comes to me now.... do they teach kindergarten children the word 'KINDERGARTEN' ? Cos it's obviously a difficult word for em 4 yr olds.
No as you can see that is why when it was on i was to busy looking up the teachers dress outside:D.
British National Party.

Was orignally a bunch of loonie skinheads but is now less civilised :)

Usual "nation" focussed policies about retainng an independant non-changing Britian. Within it they have their own "fundamentalists" who really do want to send everybody back - including us Scots/Irish :) - and also the more conservative with a small c who really only want to see the British ideals not lost in the future.

Just as "some people" have been lambasted for quoting a reasonable position and being labelled racist, many moderate BNPers hate getting labelled scum.

http://www.bnp.org.uk/ .... just dont' press the Join buton please :)
We had them meat heads also, If you spoke different they wanted you bashed or shipped back to where you came from, Only problem was a taxi ride back to where most came from was not in there selection for go home.

The scots are the rightful owners of the UK:D Well that's what i say:p scots are less annoying and nicer:p I pressed Report spam to there email:p
you can choose your favorite out of 83 options - http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=bnp&string=exact
I only found 23? That could be because i can only count to 23:D.

[Rockefella]

There is actually a really funny joke that came to my mind while reading this thread.*

In the words of George Carlin : UCP is not a democracy.

*Slaps thigh in laughter

Ok, sorry. I don't know what's going on in the forums right now because it was Memorial Day in the states (FTMFW) and I haven't been on my computer for 4 days I think. If Cotterik was banned, I assume it was for the right reasons, and I can guarantee that my fellow moderators discussed the situation before taking action. Also, to NuclearCrap and whoever else refers to ALL of us as some righteous/we hate everyone team, I'd like to point out that I have talked a few of the other mods into reducing/lifting a ban if I felt it didn't fit with forum guidelines on penalizing members, on several occasions.

Regardless, a one-week timeout for C-rik could teach him a lesson on not being a punk to all of the moderators every other day. :)

[drakkie]

The most amazing part is it happened without you, go figure... :D

Indeed ! I went enjoying the rest of my hangover...;)

[my porsche]

Matra, they are just jealous of us. They secretly wish they were Scottish or Irish. :D

Irish > all others.

[Mr.Tiv]

Irish > all others.
I'll drink to that

[Rockefella]

Irish people are too proud of themselves. When I was in middle school, there'd be kids who CLEARLY weren't Irish (i.e Spanish or Asian) whom painted their faces with the colors of the Irish flags on St. Patrick's day, probably because they were friends with an Irish lunatic that told them to do so.

But, I went to NYC on St. Pat's and have to admit, the environment was awesome, as were the Irish bars.

[Matra et Alpine]

You can't beat the Irish craik .... unless you go to the highlands and experience a "lock in" :)
The cities and towns have too many rules preventing the traditional Scots ways !!!!

[crisis]

Irish > all others.

And they are all peacefull too!


http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/05-30-2007/0004598231&EDATE=

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

You can't beat the Irish craik .... unless you go to the highlands and experience a "lock in" :)
The cities and towns have too many rules preventing the traditional Scots ways !!!!

Before our headquarters cracked down at work, we had some fabulous lock-ins that used to start straight after a shift and finish just before the cleaners came in- good times! I miss those days. :(

[McReis]

Indeed ! I went enjoying the rest of my hangover...;)
You're the first person I heard that enjoys his hangovers.
Are you sure you know what a hangover is?

[my porsche]

And they are all peacefull too!


http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/05-30-2007/0004598231&EDATE=

This is actually true, last time I went there I was surprised at the lack of honking and rudeness amongst drivers. :p

[Clivey]

After reading the discussion between Peter and Sam (MetA and IWAARS6), I have to say I agree with Peter, and this:

It's difficult to get a point across like moderation without it becoming sensationalised.

however i honestly don't believe that is what originally happened with Cotteriks comments. they come out of frustration, pride (for one's country) and anger. and i think he really should have known better.

the week ban gives him a chance to learn from this experience.

if no one else has anything more to say on the actual issue (Cotterik being banned) the thread will be closed.

Yes, there are a minority of immigrants causing a massive problem and trying to "invade", just as there are a minority of white, British people causing another problem by being "chavs". The British people, of all races, have to work together to solve these problems IMO.

As for the moderation "debate"; I think the "issue" is:

If I made comments that have no possibility (if we're being reasonable) of offending anyone but for some reason the moderation team didn't like them, would I be banned?

- Just to add that I'm not questioning any decisions made by mods or standing-up for Cotterik, NC or Zytek, nor am I sticking-up for the mods against them either. I'm just interested to see the answer to the above question. The reasons for that, if anyone is wondering, will be given AFTER the question is answered.

[fpv_gtho]

As for the moderation "debate"; I think the "issue" is:

If I made comments that have no possibility (if we're being reasonable) of offending anyone but for some reason the moderation team didn't like them, would I be banned?

Issues such as those arent as rare as you might think, and quite often theres alot of dialoque between some moderators before the big decisions are made. If we were satisfied there was no target for the comments, we'd probably just delete them and give a warning.

[Rockefella]

After reading the discussion between Peter and Sam (MetA and IWAARS6), I have to say I agree with Peter, and this:

Yes, there are a minority of immigrants causing a massive problem and trying to "invade", just as there are a minority of white, British people causing another problem by being "chavs". The British people, of all races, have to work together to solve these problems IMO.

As for the moderation "debate"; I think the "issue" is:

If I made comments that have no possibility (if we're being reasonable) of offending anyone but for some reason the moderation team didn't like them, would I be banned?

- Just to add that I'm not questioning any decisions made by mods or standing-up for Cotterik, NC or Zytek, nor am I sticking-up for the mods against them either. I'm just interested to see the answer to the above question. The reasons for that, if anyone is wondering, will be given AFTER the question is answered.

Since I'm too lazy to go back and re-read what Cotterik stated and his reasons for being banned, I'll go along with fpv and say this.

Moderation isn't necessarily a black and white issue. If it were, Wouter and/or the vBulletin team would have created moderation robots that automatically filter/delete/ban members and posts. Sadly, like life, that isn't possible. It's not that we ban users for statements that we 'didn't like', otherwise I would have banned NuclearCrap a bunch of times for calling me a poor example of a moderator. I know he still hates me to this day, but whatever, I find it fun.

As was stated on the bigger issues that have been brought up over the years, moderation of the instance has been discussed/debated by us, the mods before an individual of our team just lashed out. Along with that, decisions have been reversed or lessened after conflicting views have been brought up by different mods so it does resemble a bit of a parliamentary procedure.

To go to your original question at hand about making statements that mean no offense but could result in you being banned, it depends on what is said. Although something may or may not offend someone, if it violates the forum rules and regulations as set forth this past year (or whenever it was released) then by all means it can result in a ban. If it's a borderline issue but doesn't necessarily mean any rules are broken, you can probably expect a private message on the issue or the red/yellow card infraction warning, as is done for nearly all instances of forum misconduct.

Hope that clears things up. Cheers,
Damian

[drakkie]

If I made comments that have no possibility (if we're being reasonable) of offending anyone

You (and others) don't even need to type a single letter. Your avatar(s) do enough.

[Clivey]

Issues such as those arent as rare as you might think, and quite often theres alot of dialoque between some moderators before the big decisions are made. If we were satisfied there was no target for the comments, we'd probably just delete them and give a warning.

Bearing in mind I was just asking out of interest and in an attempt to help clear all this up, I can't actually think of an example off the top of my head that fits the situation I mentioned earlier :o.

Since I'm too lazy to go back and re-read what Cotterik stated and his reasons for being banned, I'll go along with fpv and say this.

I'm not personally questioning the reasons for Cotterik getting banned.

- I just want to make that clear before any assumptions about my posts in this thread are made :). I'm staying neutral there. I'm just wondering how far mods would realistically go to suppress something they "don't like".

Moderation isn't necessarily a black and white issue. If it were, Wouter and/or the vBulletin team would have created moderation robots that automatically filter/delete/ban members and posts. Sadly, like life, that isn't possible. It's not that we ban users for statements that we 'didn't like', otherwise I would have banned NuclearCrap a bunch of times for calling me a poor example of a moderator. I know he still hates me to this day, but whatever, I find it fun.

And I agree totally with what you say here. There has to be an allowance for banter, humour etc. before "mod-bot" comes in and infracts people for what everyone on the forum except the extremely easily offended amongst us might consider perfectly reasonable behaviour.

Personally, as I said to Peter, I'm of the opinion that people should expect to give and take a reasonable amount of "shit" from others, and those deserving of ownage should indeed get it. Otherwise we'll end-up with a no-fun nanny-forum.

As was stated on the bigger issues that have been brought up over the years, moderation of the instance has been discussed/debated by us, the mods before an individual of our team just lashed out. Along with that, decisions have been reversed or lessened after conflicting views have been brought up by different mods so it does resemble a bit of a parliamentary procedure.

To go to your original question at hand about making statements that mean no offense but could result in you being banned, it depends on what is said. Although something may or may not offend someone, if it violates the forum rules and regulations as set forth this past year (or whenever it was released) then by all means it can result in a ban. If it's a borderline issue but doesn't necessarily mean any rules are broken, you can probably expect a private message on the issue or the red/yellow card infraction warning, as is done for nearly all instances of forum misconduct.

Hope that clears things up. Cheers,
Damian

Yes, very well thanks. :) I actually came to this thread because I had a "funny" pic taken down by Peter - which I discussed as an adult with him (unless he wants to say otherwise! :p) and came to the conclusion that "some" people might be offended by it, and was just wondering how "far" is deemed to be "acceptable" within this forum with regards to that sort of thing.

You (and others) don't even need to type a single letter. Your avatar(s) do enough.

My avatar is simply in honour of your astounding tunneling achievements, and shows nothing "offensive" - just the CCTV footage of the high-speed run. Unless you want to tell me it didn't in fact happen...?;)

[Cotterik]

i would personally like to take over this thread and say HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME

(a day late ;))

[jediali]

happy birthday! your present is a thread with just your username as the title

[Cotterik]

(woo!) :rolleyes: