New Rule Forbidding Banning

martin said:
Cowardice should be checked not given a license. It sullies the forum.
Click to expand...
JPP is a sewer. you (collective) cant stop trolling and derailing most every thread as it is.
Creating threadbans of multiple members are just some dude using the forum for mental masturbation.
Ignore it and he'll quit . Thats the one thing that saves JPP from being mush
Members can ignore shitty worthless threads, and they sink quickly.
 
The Ban option here is a joke.

The idea of banning, is to stop trolling, personal attacks, and to prevent civil discourse. In other words, should another member follow you around in the forum just to troll your every comment, the option to ban them personally should be available.

In a properly managed forum, the ban would prevent the one banned from being able to even see the comments or threads of the Banning member. And of course, the banning member would no longer be able to see the comments or threads created from the one they banned either.

Fair is fair right? BUT THIS FORUM HAS A STUPID AND USELESS BANNING RULE THAT, WHEN UTILIZED, THE ONE YOU BANNED CAN CONTINUE TO SEE YOUR EVERY COMMENT AND THREAD, AND CAN CONTINUE TO COMMENT ON YOUR COMMENTS- EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE THAT CANNOT SEE THEIR COMMENTS. THAT IS LIKE BACK-ASS-WARDS TO WHAT YOU WANT. The one you just banned will continue to troll your every comment, and you cannot even see what was even said.

I am now and have been a member of various Forums- Political- Guitar related- Musician related- Movie and Music review forums- Health Related- Fly-fishing- Singles Site forums- etc. and NO OTHER FORUM I have ever belonged to has stupid and asinine banning policies like JPP.

Now, I know this thread is of a concern about THREAD-BANNING and I am commenting about the personal ban feature here in the forum.

But, here is the point I am trying to make here- THERE WOULD NEVER BE A NEED TO HAVE AN OPTION TO THREAD BAN OTHER MEMBERS IF JPP UTILIZED THE PERSONAL BAN POLICY PROPERLY IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Because, if JPP used the personal banning feature properly in the first place, members such as EARL, who wants to ban others from his threads, could just personally ban the other members individually and be done with them.

I find JPP's thread-banning option to be insulting, unnecessary, ambiguous, childish, hateful, and contributes to civil discourse here in the forum.

And I find their personal banning option to be totally useless.

Perhaps that is the mission of this FORUM AND IT'S ADMINISTRATION.
 
Last edited:
Hawkeye10 said:
The apparent lack of ability to properly use English is a clue.
Click to expand...

It's a mistake to assume a person's language skills are solely based upon the occasions when they PUI.

Ms. BP is highly emotional but she does have her moments of clarity providing an upper limit of education and maturity.
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
The Ban option here is a joke.

The idea of banning, is to stop trolling, personal attacks, and to prevent civil discourse. In other words, should another member follow you around in the forum just to troll your every comment, the option to ban them personally should be available.

In a properly managed forum, the ban would prevent the one banned from being able to even see the comments or threads of the Banning member. And of course, the banning member would no longer be able to see the comments or threads created from the one they banned either....
Click to expand...

This gets into the vbulletin software and programming, which is above my level of expertise.

My advice is to make the recommendation to block people who are threadbanned from seeing the thread. ....but since the forum allows sock accounts, that's easy to get around. LOL

As for the misuse of the rule, that's the problem with making rules; there'll always be someone who exploits it for personal gain. :)
 
Dutch Uncle said:
This gets into the vbulletin software and programming, which is above my level of expertise.

My advice is to make the recommendation to block people who are threadbanned from seeing the thread. ....but since the forum allows sock accounts, that's easy to get around. LOL

As for the misuse of the rule, that's the problem with making rules; there'll always be someone who exploits it for personal gain. :)
Click to expand...

Exactly! Couldn't have said it any better meself'!

What is the purpose of JPP's banning of rule violators when they are permitted to return as a sock account? Doesn't make sense!

JPP uses a popular forum software package that comes with a very user-friendly shell interface with a lot of variables and parameters. Every option for banning is available, and as easy to set up as just by clicking on certain parameters to bring about the desired result.

Some quick fixes could resolve all the problems and could probably be applied dynamically where you may not have to even take the system down to apply them. Some changes may be zapped in while others may require a Down/Up for them to be able to become effective.
 
Last edited:
Dutch Uncle said:
Dude, this forum is designed exactly for these types of questions. Why are you so reluctant to "call on Damo"?

Or do you think Damo is too stupid to know the answer since it's his forum and he's the one who has been working the software for over a decade?
Click to expand...

He thinks that since he donated that Damo owes him and should do his bidding, but it doesn't work that way and his cries of anguish go unanswered? :laugh:
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I would like it if we were more snarky about it, making sure that it is clear that the thread banners are inferior.
Click to expand...

You mean to say that you believe Minty/LIG is inferior? I agree with you for once. The Crybully Queen has an extensive ban list on her crowning achievement here -- The Thumb-Sucking Safe House thread. :rofl2:
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
Exactly! Couldn't have said it any better meself'!

What is the purpose of JPP's banning of rule violators when they are permitted to return as a sock account? Doesn't make sense!

JPP uses a popular forum software package that comes with a very user-friendly shell interface with a lot of variables and parameters. Every option for banning is available, and as easy to set up as just by clicking on certain parameters to bring about the desired result.

Some quick fixes could resolve all the problems and could probably be applied dynamically where you may not have to even take the system down to apply them. Some changes may be zapped in while others may require a Down/Up for them to be able to become effective.
Click to expand...

JPP does have a rule about evading bans as a sock....as Mason has found out several times. However, in this case I was referencing the blocking of thread-banned members from viewing the thread.

Additionally, by logging out, you can see all the threads except those in the War Zone....AFAIK.

You and I are agreed that some tweaks are necessary, but those tweaks must benefit the forum (AKA Damo) not just individual desires.

IMO, if possible, limiting the number of threads by users containing thread-bans is one idea (2 per day IMO). Another is to limit the number of thread bans (5 per thread IMO).

When a person lists a dozen or more people, they are censoring, not blocking trolls. There's a difference between a defensive move and an offensive one. IMO, the thread ban rule was intended to be a defensive measure, not a weapon.

Do these thread bans seem reasonable or not? Defensive or offensive? https://i.imgur.com/fgwVbj8.png

fgwVbj8.png
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Yep, poor Minty will be slathered with ellipses and emojis!
Click to expand...

I'm guessing Lig cleans up better than she thinks. :)

Better for her, IMO, to get out of the cesspool, clean herself up in both mind and body by minimizing contact with toxic substances.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
JPP does have a rule about evading bans as a sock....as Mason has found out several times. However, in this case I was referencing the blocking of thread-banned members from viewing the thread.

Additionally, by logging out, you can see all the threads except those in the War Zone....AFAIK.

You and I are agreed that some tweaks are necessary, but those tweaks must benefit the forum (AKA Damo) not just individual desires.

IMO, if possible, limiting the number of threads by users containing thread-bans is one idea (2 per day IMO). Another is to limit the number of thread bans (5 per thread IMO).

When a person lists a dozen or more people, they are censoring, not blocking trolls. There's a difference between a defensive move and an offensive one. IMO, the thread ban rule was intended to be a defensive measure, not a weapon.

Do these thread bans seem reasonable or not? Defensive or offensive? https://i.imgur.com/fgwVbj8.png

fgwVbj8.png
Click to expand...

The weirdest thread-ban lists seem to contain a lot of ppl you never heard of or who haven't posted here in years. Talk about snowflakes!
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
She gets a tingle out of wallowing in them, from all appearances. lol
Click to expand...

My guess is that the "tingle" is fellowship. If one side shits on her all the time and the other side opens the door for her to go inside, most people will take the path of least resistance.

OTOH, there's also personality traits which often dictate desires. IMO, she's the sanest one in the KKK, and that includes Mason and those who love to regularly participate with the group.

FWIW, I think APL is only there to mess with their heads. Like me with certain posters, I think he's playing for a thread ban. LOL
 
Dutch Uncle said:
My guess is that the "tingle" is fellowship. If one side shits on her all the time and the other side opens the door for her to go inside, most people will take the path of least resistance.

OTOH, there's also personality traits which often dictate desires. IMO, she's the sanest one in the KKK, and that includes Mason and those who love to regularly participate with the group.

FWIW, I think APL is only there to mess with their heads. Like me with certain posters, I think he's playing for a thread ban. LOL
Click to expand...

Minty had her chance. She posted many times in the Nice Thread, where ppl were civil and interactive with her. Then when COgoat got her thread shut down by Damo, she switched back to the Dark Side where she's been ever since. If she's the "sanest one" of the bunch, they're in big trouble. Her giving me 100% of the blame for that is not logical, rational, nor true. She is more than welcome to ask Damo either publicly or privately if I had a single thing to do with that, or if I even ever requested him to close it. The answer in both cases is no, but she's not interested in truth, only in vendettas. Why blame me, rather than Mason or COgoat or someone else? Because she did the same back-stabbing thing to Toxic in 2019 when Toxic refused to say a peep to USF about his dog abuse. She's terrified because she revealed a LOT about herself in PMs to me, as well as about her erstwhile gf Toxic. She desperately wants to paint me as a psycho liar, lest people believe me if I reveal who the real Minty is. Hint: Nothing like the public version she tries to display here.

APL loves fucking with them. It's hilarious! It's fun to watch Minty and Toxic twist in rage after publicly stating that thread-bans are wrong. Will they revert to their usual hypocrisy and thread-ban Lefty, or let him continue to mock them? Stay tuned for the next episode of As The Weirdos Turn, here exclusively on JPP. :laugh:
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Minty had her chance. She posted many times in the Nice Thread, where ppl were civil and interactive with her. Then when COgoat got her thread shut down by Damo, she switched back to the Dark Side where she's been ever since. If she's the "sanest one" of the bunch, they're in big trouble. Her giving me 100% of the blame for that is not logical, rational, nor true. She is more than welcome to ask Damo either publicly or privately if I had a single thing to do with that, or if I even ever requested him to close it. The answer in both cases is no, but she's not interested in truth, only in vendettas. Why blame me, rather than Mason or COgoat or someone else? Because she did the same back-stabbing thing to Toxic in 2019 when Toxic refused to say a peep to USF about his dog abuse. She's terrified because she revealed a LOT about herself in PMs to me, as well as about her erstwhile gf Toxic. She desperately wants to paint me as a psycho liar, lest people believe me if I reveal who the real Minty is. Hint: Nothing like the public version she tries to display here.

APL loves fucking with them. It's hilarious! It's fun to watch Minty and Toxic twist in rage after publicly stating that thread-bans are wrong. Will they revert to their usual hypocrisy and thread-ban Lefty, or let him continue to mock them? Stay tuned for the next episode of As The Weirdos Turn, here exclusively on JPP. :laugh:
Click to expand...

People can change. IMO, it's always best to leave a door open somewhere.
 
martin said:
That we permit threads with wholesale bans on participation is asinine. One member does it repeatedly. Today the member launched five new threads each banning dozens of members who typically express political views at odds with his own.

Put an end to this.
Click to expand...

I agree! TDS thread in War Zone blocks a group then uses the thread to attack the very people that are thread banned
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top