board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

The one week ban on sf and CG

Post Reply   Page 4 of 9  [ 172 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 69 »
Author Message
Riverthalos
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Fri 21 Nov , 2008 2:29 am
bioalchemist
Offline
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 2:10 am
Location: at a safe distance
 
Everyone, please read my opening post. Pay special attention to the bolded bit. I've split this thread twice and that's two times too many.

_________________

"He attacks. And here I can kill him. But I don't. That's the answer to world peace, people."
-Stickles Shihan


Top
Profile Quote
LalaithUrwen
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Fri 21 Nov , 2008 4:12 am
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
Offline
 
Posts: 21755
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
 
I do want to clarify that I didn't insert anything into the actual charter itself. I put my thoughts on a possible course of action for dealing with a board-wide disruption into the How to be a Ranger thread; I based it on certain parts of the charter but only offered it as a suggestion.

(I still think it works, and, perhaps, we do need to look into adding it or something like it into the actual charter.)


Lali

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Fri 21 Nov , 2008 6:27 am
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Oh, thanks for clarifying that, Lali.

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Sat 22 Nov , 2008 4:42 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
I have a question. Why was my post, which was SF's PM to me concerning this situation with none of my thoughts, removed to the Bike Racks? I appreciate the Rangers trying to handle this situation, but holy hell... a little common sense. My post did not go against the request that banned members not be spoken about since I my post was reposting a PM that SF asked me to to post on his behalf.

I would like my post re-inserted into this thread. Baby and the bath water indeed.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Riverthalos
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Sat 22 Nov , 2008 6:14 am
bioalchemist
Offline
 
Posts: 5205
Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 2:10 am
Location: at a safe distance
 
Okay, I took a look. I think what happened was your post went up as I was splitting the thread and as a result it went with the rest of the split. Anyway, it's back in place now. Right where you put it last time, believe it or not.

ETA: I'd like to reiterate, however, that there will be no discussion regarding people not here to defend themselves.

_________________

"He attacks. And here I can kill him. But I don't. That's the answer to world peace, people."
-Stickles Shihan


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Sat 22 Nov , 2008 3:14 pm
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Thank you, River.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 6:39 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Riverthalos wrote:
This morning, as announced in the Bike Racks, sauronsfinger and Cenedril_Gildinaur were banned from Board77 for one week.
In a thread that was safely locked to prevent your lies from being exposed at the time of the suspension. Do you have the integrity to unlock that thread?
Riverthalos wrote:
This evening (my time), CG emailed one of my fellows demanding a Hearing against me for abuse of power. I am posting this here and now because I, and the other Rangers, feel that the board deserves to know what is going on.
What I actually wrote was that I wanted the hearing against myself that the Charter GUARANTEES all members, and that if I didn't get it then upon my return I'd ask for a hearing against Riverthalos for both abusing her authority AND violating the rules, specifically the rule against suspensions without hearings.

That puts an entirely different light on what Riverthalos wrote. It makes her look less like a poor abused Ranger being persecuted for doing her job and more like a rule breaker trying to cover her traicks. Is there some reason she wrote it the way she did? And why was this heavily edited verson posted under the pretext of the board needing to know what's going on? If the board needed to know what is going on shouldn't they have the full story?
Riverthalos wrote:
While the Rangers do not at present feel that a Hearing is necessary, we should put together a committee to discuss the 9/11/08 ruling and make it permanent or make it go away.
The hearing should take priority since you are going to use the committee to retroactively cover up your abuses.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 6:40 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Holbytla wrote:
I believe he has the means of emailing the admin account and I would suggest that he make his choice known via that route. Not that I don't believe that is the case, but to be fair to him he should say so himself. And he may have done so already.
Yes, I emailed the unmonitored admin email account. I found out that nobody ever replies to emails sent to the admin account, which is why I wrote a separate email to elfshadow.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 6:40 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Rebecca wrote:
I don't think sf or CG should be on a committee about a ruling that was imposed on them. Just doesn't seem quite right to me.
Since it was my argument with you that led to my suspension (and if Riverthalos was honest she'd agree), of course you feel that way.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 6:40 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Jnyusa wrote:
The temporary ban on sf and CG was put into effect this week, based on a prior ruling made on September 11, correct? And that ruling was the result of a negotiation between sf, CG and the rangers, correct?
No, it was unilaterally imposed without negotiation.
jnyusa wrote:
In this case your hearing about the ban will be going on long after the ban is over. The charter also specifies that contestants be confined to the Bike Racks/Jury Room for the duration of a hearing, so in this case the hearing actually prolongs the ban rather than reversing it. Do CG and sf really want to do that under those circumstances?
I'm not calling a hearing against sauronsfinger, I'm calling one against Riverthalos. While unfortunately it will confine me to the juryroom, it will also prevent Riverthalos from absuing her authority even more than she has already done so during the time she is so confined. I'm making a sacrifice for the betterment of the board by calling Riverthalos on her abuse.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 6:40 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Holbytla wrote:
SF and CG have a right to contest the temp ban, but it is futile to try and reverse it as the temp ban will have expired before it can be contested.
It will clear my name, which means that every honest Ranger will view any future offense by me as my first offense, and Riverthalos will view it as my second offense.

Of course the hearing should have taken place before the ban, but it appears that all Rangers are unconcerned with that little technicality.

Riverthalos will not have Ranger powers during the hearing, so Riverthalos will not be able to abuse anyone during the hearing. The board will only have lazy or timid rangers instead of lazy or timid rangers and a malicious ranger.
Holbytla wrote:
If either or both wish, a hearing can be brought against the ranger or rangers involved in this, but two rangers have to agree that a hearing is warranted.
So it comes down to whether or not rangers think rangers are above the rules.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 6:41 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Jnyusa wrote:
If I were still serving as a Loremaster here, I think what I would recommend would be to convene an independent review - two rangers and one juror - to just consider whether the ban was justified. That can be done in 24 hours, and makes more sense in terms of mitigating the effect on sf and CG if the independent review decides in their favor.
I wonder why Riverthalos didn't think that was a good idea. Perhaps because implementing it would actually lead to the question of whether or not Riverthalos did something wrong, and she doesn't allow that question? Perhaps because not implementing it delays the inevitable hearing that will strip her of her rank and suspend her for breaking the rules?

You're welcome to suggest that in my call for a hearing against Riverthalos.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 6:41 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Holbytla wrote:
So you are looking at a 3 week ban to overrule the decision which will already be expired.
It will already be expired because the Rangers (and I notice your name is in Ranger color) refused to do the appropriate thing at the time of the suspension being given. Your text makes it look like your hands are tied, your color indicates otherwise.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
LalaithUrwen
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:05 pm
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
Offline
 
Posts: 21755
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
 
I do not see why you are singling River out for your hatred, CG. She acted on behalf of all of the current Rangers, enforcing something that us former Rangers put into action. Would you like to call a hearing against all of us? If so, are you willing to step up and be a Ranger then once you're done vilifying and driving everyone away?


Lali

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:07 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
So are you saing that all former and current rangers think the charter is rubbish?

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
LalaithUrwen
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:08 pm
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
Offline
 
Posts: 21755
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
 
Why, yes, that's exactly what I said in my post. The words are right there for all to see.


:roll:


Lali

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Rebecca
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:09 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 10:34 pm
Location: Fall River, MA
Contact: Website
 
Seriously.


River didn't even have a part in making that ruling (not that I disagree with it, just saying).

River acted in accordance with that ruling.

Due to disrupting the boards again with another spat between you and sf, you were banned for a week.

Any Ranger could have and would have done the exact same as she did.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:11 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
When you say she didn't have a part in making that ruling, are you talking about the "stick your head in the sand" rule Lalaith made up, or some debate that took place in the Ranger forum last week which resulted in a ruling which River implemented?

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Rebecca
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:13 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 10:34 pm
Location: Fall River, MA
Contact: Website
 
She didn't make the ruling to force you two to stop talking.

There was no other ruling or Ranger debate about it. We all agreed that it should be enforced as written.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject: Re: The one week ban on sf and CG
Posted: Wed 26 Nov , 2008 7:15 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
Just clarifying what you meant by "ruling".

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 4 of 9  [ 172 posts ]
Return to “Business Room” | Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 69 »
Jump to: