Jump to content

BringBackTheVet


Recommended Posts

  • Atomic unlocked, locked and unlocked this topic

Ehh...he was slipping over the line a little in the Super Bowl thread.  I'd say a week seems right as a warning shot.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

How is a one week suspension not "serious?" 

 

Not to say that a suspension shouldn't be taken seriously, but the length of suspension, one week, seems like the shortest possible that can be effectively imposed and still be realistically considered a suspension. Sure, you could suspend someone for a day, an hour, or a minute, but to what practical purpose? I don't know if this suspension is intended to be a deterrent or a punishment, but it doesn't seem long enough to be either, effectively.

 

If BBTV did something significant enough to deserve a suspension, then he deserves a significant suspension. If the length of suspension isn't meaningful, then the suspension itself is meaningless. It seems pointless to suspend someone for so short a period that it serves as little more than a demonstration of your ability to suspend them. If the point is to give someone a warning, then give them a warning. Tell them they have one strike, and next time they'll be suspended for a significant amount of time.

 

One week is next to nothing, and a one week suspension is practically pointless, not serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Gordie said:

 

Not to say that a suspension shouldn't be taken seriously, but the length of suspension, one week, seems like the shortest possible that can be effectively imposed and still be realistically considered a suspension. Sure, you could suspend someone for a day, an hour, or a minute, but to what practical purpose? I don't know if this suspension is intended to be a deterrent or a punishment, but it doesn't seem long enough to be either, effectively.

 

If BBTV did something significant enough to deserve a suspension, then he deserves a significant suspension. If the length of suspension isn't meaningful, then the suspension itself is meaningless. It seems pointless to suspend someone for so short a period that it serves as little more than a demonstration of your ability to suspend them. If the point is to give someone a warning, then give them a warning. Tell them they have one strike, and next time they'll be suspended for a significant amount of time.

 

One week is next to nothing, and a one week suspension is practically pointless, not serious.

Can’t speak for the mods but I think Rams  hit it right on the head. I think this is a warning shot. 

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2019 at 9:47 PM, Gordie said:

 

Not to say that a suspension shouldn't be taken seriously, but the length of suspension, one week, seems like the shortest possible that can be effectively imposed and still be realistically considered a suspension. Sure, you could suspend someone for a day, an hour, or a minute, but to what practical purpose? I don't know if this suspension is intended to be a deterrent or a punishment, but it doesn't seem long enough to be either, effectively.

 

If BBTV did something significant enough to deserve a suspension, then he deserves a significant suspension. If the length of suspension isn't meaningful, then the suspension itself is meaningless. It seems pointless to suspend someone for so short a period that it serves as little more than a demonstration of your ability to suspend them. If the point is to give someone a warning, then give them a warning. Tell them they have one strike, and next time they'll be suspended for a significant amount of time.

 

One week is next to nothing, and a one week suspension is practically pointless, not serious.

 

You don’t have access to the process and you weren’t involved in any of the conversations. You have no idea if one week was the proper call.  I was there. Based on the infraction and all the other factors the conversation that went into the decision, I can assure you that a one week suspension was the proper amount of time. 

 

Also, we don’t suspend people “just to show we can do it.” We don’t take disciplinary actions lightly. 

 

BB52Big.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

You don’t have access to the process and you weren’t involved in any of the conversations. You have no idea if one week was the proper call.  I was there. Based on the infraction and all the other factors that went into the decision, I can assure you that a one week suspension was the proper amount of time. 

 

Also, we don’t suspend people “just to show we can do it.” We don’t take disciplinary actions lightly. 

Note, also, the votes that determine the length of a suspension.  The length isn't chosen arbitrarily, it is chosen based on the votes of the mods.

FAKE EDIT - I probably should have quoted Gordie, not infrared. Sorry

It's where I sit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2019 at 10:45 PM, infrared41 said:

 

You don’t have access to the process and you weren’t involved in any of the conversations. You have no idea if one week was the proper call.  I was there. Based on the infraction and all the other factors conversation that went into the decision, I can assure you that a one week suspension was the proper amount of time. 

 

Also, we don’t suspend people “just to show we can do it.” We don’t take disciplinary actions lightly. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the call to suspend him. I simply believe that one week isn't long enough to serve as either an effective punishment or an effective deterrent. Seems kind of like a way to say you suspended him without really suspending him. If you really think somebody deserves a suspension, then you ought to really suspend them. If you don't think they deserve a significant suspension, then maybe they don't deserve a suspension at all. Perhaps there's a more fitting alternative, like a stern warning and the promise that continued misbehaviour will result in a meaningful suspension.

 

I'm surprised to hear you say that you made the decision to suspend him based on factors other than the infraction. In all fairness, wouldn't you say that the decision to suspend somebody should be made strictly and solely based on the infraction or infractions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

BBTV went off in the Super Bowl thread. He needed some time off, but nothing too heavy.

 

Fair enough. One week seems meaninglessly short to me, but I respect that you guys reached a different conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BBTV was just mad that no one was respecting the Eagles enough in the heat of a live game thread. When he gets back, there won't be a live game thread. The system works!

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who complains that message board discipline against someone else is not strong enough but hasn't been, like, personally threatened by that person is a NEERRRRRRRRRRRRRD

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the admiral said:

Anyone who complains that message board discipline against someone else is not strong enough but hasn't been, like, personally threatened by that person is a NEERRRRRRRRRRRRRD

 

Wanna go for a swim in the hydration chamber? :devil:

 

ICS - if Dean Corll targeted vermin instead of young boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.