Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that
have been "instabanned!". A new classification?
Jeff Reid tallies 'instabanned' RSC members
Jeff Reid kept posting counts of members banned at RSC and suggested that people were being banned simply for asking about the warning system or being suspected of being him. RSC moderator Scirocco argued back, and others told Reid to get over it. Larry Lindstrom asked why people bothered with private forums at all.
community/meta
Automated summary.
"Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:n%SQe.150653$E95.8802@fed1read01...
> Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that
> have been "instabanned!". A new classification?
Out of hand would also describe your incessant whining of late. Are you
trolling or just having an extended tantrum?
Cowboy up and get over it...
> Out of hand would also describe your incessant whining of late.
> Are you trolling or just having an extended tantrum?
Neither, I just think their policy is wrong. Not only that, but
one person here (zx12rcr) was banned for following sirrocco's
advice and asking about the public forum in the RSC rules
section.
RSC also deleted the thread that sirocco referred to that
also discused the warning system (and how some players
with longer history's got preferential treatment).
A few of us here would truly like to know what the purpose
of RSC's public warning system is, as they are the only
racing forum to use it at all, and the only forum of any
kind to use it for a first warning, based on the list
of forums provided by sirocco's search.
I think the real issue is that the warning system is RSC's
way of punishing people, (inflicting harm), but are unwilling
to admit it because it's an undocumented policy and they
are afraid of being sued.
> Neither, I just think their policy is wrong. Not only that, but
> one person here (zx12rcr) was banned for following sirrocco's
> advice and asking about the public forum in the RSC rules
> section.
Make that 4 people so far. Apparently just a reference to
rec.autos.simulations is enough to get you banned from a thread
in the Grand Prix Legends section.
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 23:27:16 -0700, "Jeff Reid"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that
>have been "instabanned!". A new classification?
Geez...
I'm Afraid of Americans.
>>Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that
>>have been "instabanned!". A new classification?
>
> Geez...
>
> I'm Afraid of Americans.
Their site is in denmark I think.
Make that count 5 member now. RSC is accusing all of them
being me.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]>
> A few of us here would truly like to know what the purpose
> of RSC's public warning system is, as they are the only
> racing forum to use it at all, and the only forum of any
> kind to use it for a first warning, based on the list
> of forums provided by sirocco's search.
>
ROFL, you make it sound like you've never received a warning via PM before.
"Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:n%SQe.150653$E95.8802@fed1read01...
> Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that
> have been "instabanned!". A new classification?
>
So what? If a banned member makes another account and posts, why shouldn't
they be banned? Afterall, it's the same person....
Scirocco wrote:
Well, what if this person has a Multiple Personality Disorder, then
physically it would be the same person, but mentally it would be a
totally different person ?
Bet you never considered that ....
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"When two or more people are gathered together in my name,
they shall perform the Parrot Sketch..."
--Our Lord John Cleese--
Quoted text (9 lines)
> > "Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:n%SQe.150653$E95.8802@fed1read01... > > Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that > > have been "instabanned!". A new classification? > > > > So what? If a banned member makes another account and posts, why shouldn't > they be banned? Afterall, it's the same person....Goy Larsen wrote:
> Well, what if this person has a Multiple Personality Disorder, then
> physically it would be the same person, but mentally it would be a
> totally different person ?
>
> Bet you never considered that ....
Yes we did... :)
"Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
We did.
Elrikk(s)
Quoted text (11 lines)
> Scirocco wrote: > > Well, what if this person has a Multiple Personality Disorder, then > physically it would be the same person, but mentally it would be a > totally different person ? > > Bet you never considered that .... > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy>> Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that
>> have been "instabanned!". A new classification?
>
> So what? If a banned member makes another account and posts, why shouldn't they be banned? Afterall, it's the same
> person....
Well none of those instanbanned members were me, so if that
was the reason RSC banned them, then they were wrong to do so.
By my count, I see at least 4 instanbanned members, and 1
banned member. How many of those banned members were accused of being me?
Did anyone bother to check the ip's of my so called duplicates?
From one of the threads, a RSC moderator is just assuming these
members are me because they have posted about the warning system.
Get a little more proof next time, because RSC was wrong this
time.
However, you've proven my point, RSC's banning is getting out
of hand.
Quoted text (8 lines)
>> So what? If a banned member makes another account and posts, why shouldn't >> they be banned? Afterall, it's the same person.... > > Well, what if this person has a Multiple Personality Disorder, then > physically it would be the same person, but mentally it would be a > totally different person ? > > Bet you never considered that ....Jeff Reid wrote:
> Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that
> have been "instabanned!". A new classification?
Hi Jeff:
You have helped me with setups before, and I have
the greatest respect and appreciation for you.
But who gives a shit?
Why are people going to these private forums anyway?
Why not bring whatever you are talking about in there
to RAS? Nobody gets banned here, and we can have some
discussion about racing for a change.
I participated, as a back marker, in RASF1 last
year, and this was a great forum for discussing our
activity.
Larry
Quoted text (7 lines)
>> Just a short visit and I already found 3 members that >> have been "instabanned!". A new classification? > You have helped me with setups before, and I have > the greatest respect and appreciation for you. > Why are people going to these private forums anyway?
Jeff Reid wrote:
Maybe they though you were all annoying gits and decided to ban you just
in case ?
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"
"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/
"A man is only as old as the woman he feels"
--Groucho Marx--
Quoted text (13 lines)
> > >> So what? If a banned member makes another account and posts, why shouldn't > >> they be banned? Afterall, it's the same person.... > > > > Well, what if this person has a Multiple Personality Disorder, then > > physically it would be the same person, but mentally it would be a > > totally different person ? > > > > Bet you never considered that .... > > Well, what if RSC was just plain wrong in assuming that every > member that posts a question about the warning system is me? > Apparently RSC never considered that.
elrikk wrote:
Funny
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"
"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/
"A man is only as old as the woman he feels"
--Groucho Marx--
Quoted text (18 lines)
> > "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Scirocco wrote: > > > > Well, what if this person has a Multiple Personality Disorder, then > > physically it would be the same person, but mentally it would be a > > totally different person ? > > > > Bet you never considered that .... > > > > > > Beers and cheers > > (uncle) Goy > > We did. > > Elrikk(s)Yeah, the site was founded and run by 2 Europeans, the server is based
in Europe, and the vast majority of admins and moderators are european.
But hey, lets not let facts get in the way of anything here, vigilant
wants to get it out of his system regardless.
On 31 Aug 2005 06:14:15 -0700, [email hidden] wrote:
>Yeah, the site was founded and run by 2 Europeans, the server is based
>in Europe, and the vast majority of admins and moderators are european.
>But hey, lets not let facts get in the way of anything here, vigilant
>wants to get it out of his system regardless.
Hahahah, touchy. And I wasn't referring to RSC with my Bowie quote.
Just saving these while browsing RSC. The count is up
to 8 victims so far (not including me, but I chose
to be banned rather than agree to special rules that
violated RSC's original agreement).
3 people instanbanned in just one thread, the implication
from RSC moderators is that they are all me (none of them are
me).
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737
2 in this thread although 1 is a duplicate from the above
thread, no explanation for why the bans in this thread.
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=220900
1 each in these threads, no explanation in the threads.
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=218787
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=216028
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=99377
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=70910
I don't quite understand what you are trying to point out here. Some of
those bannings are now quite old. I can understand your consideration for
recent ones but the rest is just raking up old stuff. As I said in a
previous post, I don't agree with their system but you are doing yourself
and your cause a disservice trying to find old bannings.
Argue your point and refer to recent bannings but leave the old ones out.
"Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:hPtRe.156124$E95.8292@fed1read01...
Quoted text (28 lines)
> Just saving these while browsing RSC. The count is up > to 8 victims so far (not including me, but I chose > to be banned rather than agree to special rules that > violated RSC's original agreement). > > 3 people instanbanned in just one thread, the implication > from RSC moderators is that they are all me (none of them are > me). > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 > > 2 in this thread although 1 is a duplicate from the above > thread, no explanation for why the bans in this thread. > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=220900 > > 1 each in these threads, no explanation in the threads. > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=218787 > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=216028 > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=99377 > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=70910 > > >> I don't quite understand what you are trying to point out here. Some of those bannings are now quite old. I can
> understand your consideration for recent ones but the rest is just raking up old stuff. As I said in a previous post,
> I don't agree with their system but you are doing yourself and your cause a disservice trying to find old bannings.
I thought the bans only lasted a week for most people. Most of the
ban victims seem to have posted somewhat recently. I wasn't paying attention
to how old the bans were, this information isn't readily available at
RSC. Just started noting them as I was browsing RSC.
There are 3 or 4 recent ones where RSC seems to be claiming all of these
are new accounts created by me. Not sure why they aren't checking the
ip's or maybe they are just choosing to ignore the fact that some here
at RAS, other than me decided to try Sirocco's suggestion and ask
about the public warning system.
"Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:hPtRe.156124$E95.8292@fed1read01...
LOL Which post implies that we think all new members are you???
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > 3 people instanbanned in just one thread, the implication > from RSC moderators is that they are all me (none of them are > me). > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 >Quoted text (7 lines)
>> 3 people instanbanned in just one thread, the implication >> from RSC moderators is that they are all me (none of them are >> me). >> >> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 >> > LOL Which post implies that we think all new members are you???
"Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TJLRe.3466$mH.2372@fed1read07...
What, no link?? Also, you obviously couldn't have read that thread. Well,
either that or your reading comprehension and ability to figure things out
just plain sucks. The 1st banned member there, "philippe charuest", was
banned OVER 1 YEAR AGO. If you bothered to view his other posts, you
could've easily inferred this. Out of the other 2, one openly admitted to
be using a duplicate account. That leaves 1, yep, just 1 member left there
that's banned. Again, where's the link that implies anyone thinks it's
you??
It'd be nice if you could come up with something, anything at all, to back
up whatever point it is you're trying to make.
Quoted text (10 lines)
>>> 3 people instanbanned in just one thread, the implication >>> from RSC moderators is that they are all me (none of them are >>> me). >>> >>> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 >>> >> LOL Which post implies that we think all new members are you??? > > Did you check the ip addresses? >
"Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:L0zRe.2048$mH.291@fed1read07...
> There are 3 or 4 recent ones where RSC seems to be claiming all of these
> are new accounts created by me. Not sure why they aren't checking the
> ip's or maybe they are just choosing to ignore the fact that some here
> at RAS, other than me decided to try Sirocco's suggestion and ask
> about the public warning system.
>
Where are all these claims you keep mentioning?
>>> LOL Which post implies that we think all new members are you???
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737
Last post in the thread, Dan Murray:
"Yes, when a particular banned member insists on creating several new
accounts in order to troll and malign, a similar number of bannings
typically occur."
I just assumed this was a reference to me. So Dan is implying it's
yet another banned member from RSC and not me? Did anyone at RSC
bother to check the ip's to see if it really is the same person?
> That leaves 1, yep, just 1 member left there that's banned.
I had a friend do a search for threads by member. That 1 member
only had 4 posts, none of them even worthy of a warning, yet
RSC instabans him, why?
That instabanned same member and another instabanned member in
this thread. This was this other members only post, why was
this member banned?
> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=220900
Based on just these two victims of instanbanning, I'd say RSC
banning is getting out of hand.
"Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:IEPRe.3507$mH.2052@fed1read07...
>
> I just assumed this was a reference to me. So Dan is implying it's
> yet another banned member from RSC and not me? Did anyone at RSC
> bother to check the ip's to see if it really is the same person?
Sorry to have to break the news to you, but you're not the center of the
universe and all comments aren't actually about you.
I'd say you have clue what the hell you're talking about by making
assumptions when you don't know all the facts.
Quoted text (14 lines)
> > I had a friend do a search for threads by member. That 1 member > only had 4 posts, none of them even worthy of a warning, yet > RSC instabans him, why? > > That instabanned same member and another instabanned member in > this thread. This was this other members only post, why was > this member banned? > >> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=220900 > > Based on just these two victims of instanbanning, I'd say RSC > banning is getting out of hand. >>> I just assumed this was a reference to me. So Dan is implying it's
>> yet another banned member from RSC and not me? Did anyone at RSC
>> bother to check the ip's to see if it really is the same person?
> Sorry to have to break the news to you, but you're not the center of the universe and all comments aren't actually
> about you.
As usual you never answer the questions. One more time, is there
really one banned member creating new account just to troll and
malign as claimed by Dan? Did anyone check the ips of these
accounts?
Again, you don't answer the question. What facts am I missing?
What was wrong with the post made in this by the member that Dan
responsded to? Dan states that RSC doesn't ban members for
protesting a warning, yet the member he's responding to is
instanbanned. I don't think I'm missing any facts here.
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737
and in my case, which of my PM's were impolite.
Quoted text (15 lines)
>> I had a friend do a search for threads by member. That 1 member >> only had 4 posts, none of them even worthy of a warning, yet >> RSC instabans him, why? >> >> That instabanned same member and another instabanned member in >> this thread. This was this other members only post, why was >> this member banned? >> >>> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=220900 >> >> Based on just these two victims of instanbanning, I'd say RSC >> banning is getting out of hand. >> > > I'd say you have clue what the hell you're talking about by making assumptions when you don't know all the facts."Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:nO5Se.157764$E95.37883@fed1read01...
>
> As usual you never answer the questions. One more time, is there
> really one banned member creating new account just to troll and
> malign as claimed by Dan? Did anyone check the ips of these
> accounts?
>
It's none of your damn business how many members may or may not be doing it.
Regardless of whether or not I know, or if I even cared to find out in the
first place, I wouldn't post it. As or checking an IP address, geeee, I
doubt anyone ever thought of that.....
Try reading the whole post by Dan that you keep on referring to, mainly the
1st 2 sentences and try to figure out how it might correspond to the person
he quoted...
Quoted text (12 lines)
> > Again, you don't answer the question. What facts am I missing? > > What was wrong with the post made in this by the member that Dan > responsded to? Dan states that RSC doesn't ban members for > protesting a warning, yet the member he's responding to is > instanbanned. I don't think I'm missing any facts here. > > http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 > > and in my case, which of my PM's were impolite. >>> As usual you never answer the questions. One more time, is there
>> really one banned member creating new account just to troll and
>> malign as claimed by Dan? Did anyone check the ips of these
>> accounts?
> It's none of your damn business how many members may or may not be doing it.
Dan's claming it's just one member, I suspect it's zero members
creating new accounts, as RSC could ban members by IP.
What do my posts at RAS have to do with what a member posts at RSC?
Again, what rule was violated by the member the Dan is responding to?
You have yet to answer this question.
Quoted text (14 lines)
>> Again, you don't answer the question. What facts am I missing? >> >> What was wrong with the post made in this by the member that Dan >> responsded to? Dan states that RSC doesn't ban members for >> protesting a warning, yet the member he's responding to is >> instanbanned. I don't think I'm missing any facts here. >> >> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 >> >> and in my case, which of my PM's were impolite. >> > > Try reading the whole post by Dan that you keep on referring to, mainly the 1st 2 sentences and try to figure out how > it might correspond to the person he quoted..."Jeff Reid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:mT6Se.157776$E95.157626@fed1read01...
> Dan's claming it's just one member, I suspect it's zero members
> creating new accounts, as RSC could ban members by IP.
>
That's right, there are zero members creating new accounts. When a new
account is created, it's magically done be elves.
WTF? Where did I mention anything at all about posts at RAS vs. RSC? Can
you not find the only post by Dan in the following thread you keep linking
to? http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 Here ya go,a direct
link to the post:
http://forum.rscnet.org/showpost.php?p=2596352&postcount=25 Now, try
reading the 1st 2 sentences that Dan Murray typed.... The 1st time I read
it and saw that abbakus was banned, it seemed pretty obvious to me that he's
a previously banned member. If so, there are rules about having duplicate
accounts and posting on behalf of a banned member....
Quoted text (20 lines)
>>> Again, you don't answer the question. What facts am I missing? >>> >>> What was wrong with the post made in this by the member that Dan >>> responsded to? Dan states that RSC doesn't ban members for >>> protesting a warning, yet the member he's responding to is >>> instanbanned. I don't think I'm missing any facts here. >>> >>> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=138737 >>> >>> and in my case, which of my PM's were impolite. >>> >> >> Try reading the whole post by Dan that you keep on referring to, mainly >> the 1st 2 sentences and try to figure out how it might correspond to the >> person he quoted... > > What do my posts at RAS have to do with what a member posts at RSC? > Again, what rule was violated by the member the Dan is responding to? > > You have yet to answer this question.>> Dan's claming it's just one member, I suspect it's zero members
>> creating new accounts, as RSC could ban members by IP.
> That's right, there are zero members creating new accounts. When a new account is created, it's magically done be
> elves.
I meant the same player couldn't create a new account, as a
forum could just check for a duplicate IP.
> reading the 1st 2 sentences that Dan Murray typed.... The 1st time I read it and saw that abbakus was banned, it
> seemed pretty obvious to me that he's a previously banned member. If so, there are rules about having duplicate
> accounts and posting on behalf of a banned member....
Ok, there's no way I could know this. Just wondering what standard of
proof RSC uses for their accusations of a previously banned member. Did
the IP match one of a previously banned member?
It just seems suspcicious that it was just after that post that abbakus
was banned.
