Recommended Posts

Member has been suspended for general belligerence towards other board members. The length is to be determined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suspension has been set at one week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One week? If he didn't do anything serious enough to warrant a serious suspension, is he seriously deserving of a suspension at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gordie said:

One week? If he didn't do anything serious enough to warrant a serious suspension, is he seriously deserving of a suspension at all?

 

How is a one week suspension not "serious?" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rams80 said:

Ehh...he was slipping over the line a little in the Super Bowl thread.

 

I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

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

 

Exactly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Vet will be back in a few days, and not too far behind him? You guessed it:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DDR said:

So Vet will be back in a few days, and not too far behind him? You guessed it:

 

 

 

Spoiler

Now, we can use spoilers for a little while. 😉

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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!

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removed because we're bogging down the thread and neither one of us are adding anything to the conversation. 

Edited by infrared41

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.