Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
E-newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 21, 2014, 10:21:45 PM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
  • Total Members: 23515
  • Latest: Sevans
Stats
  • Total Posts: 639721
  • Total Topics: 48559
  • Online Today: 210
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online

Welcome


Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and others concerned about HIV/AIDS.  Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning:  Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

  • The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own physician.

  • All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

  • Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

  • We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are true and correct to their knowledge.

  • Product advertisement—including links; banners; editorial content; and clinical trial, study or survey participation—is strictly prohibited by forums members unless permission has been secured from POZ.

To change forums navigation language settings, click here (members only), Register now

Para cambiar sus preferencias de los foros en español, haz clic aquí (sólo miembros), Regístrate ahora

Finished Reading This? You can collapse this or any other box on this page by clicking the symbol in each box.

Poll

Your 2 cents please

Permanent bans would suck
Sometimes they're necessary
I'm on the fence

Author Topic: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK  (Read 4020 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline allopathicholistic

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,258
WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« on: November 05, 2006, 12:38:43 AM »
WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK, generally speaking

Even if a controversial member has 1 tiny grain of helpful wisdom to share, a permanent ban ensures that that 1 grain of wisdom will never be shared with anyone, ever.

That's pretty much it.

___________________________________


The rest of this post is me in Dr. Phil mode. Read it, skip it, whatever.

___________________________________

In the "time out" thread, a poster said nine times out of ten a controversial member needs to have someone to listen to them and understand what they are saying.

I understand what matty was saying. He is saying he is physically sick and he does not want FAKE support in the form of private messages from people who don't even know *their own* identity

Fake support is the worst kind in the world - it can contribute to making a sick person even sicker! Most of the time, when a sycophant gives his/her "support", it's fake. Even if it's not fake, it's *always* temporary.

THERE WAS A REASON WHY MATTY LASHED OUT AT THE SYCOPHANTS *FIRST*. He does not appreciate them, and rightfully so. He sees right through them.

I further accused the sycophants of deep down *NOT* wanting Matty to recover from illness and triumph over negativity. If that happened, the sycophants would no longer have an icon they can relate to. I, on the other hand, would DANCE, yes DANCE to Mendelssohn's Symphony No. 4 in A major if Matty steps into the *LIGHT* and his HEALTH follows suit!!!!!!!

I've been trying to tell Matty for the longest time that love and sweetness are GOOD FOR PHYSICAL HEALTH, and when a person merges with vibes of love and tenderness, they can see their health improve and amaze themselves. Normally it's not an overnight thing. Many people place so much daily energy on love because consistency is like this: Seeds that turn
into good fruit. If anyone wants to call me a sugar slopper, go ahead. It's true. But I request you rephrase it to "healthy sugar slopper" instead (Anything except the Dali Lama LOL)

And another poster wisely shared this: "Hurting people hurt other people" - Many people in pain simply don't know what other actions to take (subliminal message: forgiveness = freedom)

___________________________________


In conclusion, I reiterate the raison d'être of this post:

Even if a controversial member has 1 tiny grain of wisdom, a permanent ban ("perma-ban"? LOL  :D) ensures that that 1 grain of wisdom will never be shared with anyone, ever.

End of post! Digest it, don't digest it. Respond to it, don't respond to it. I said what I had to say.

Offline skeebo1969

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,705
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2006, 12:42:58 AM »


  Bravo!!   Very well said ;D
I despise the song Love is in the Air, you should too.

Offline Eldon

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,664
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2006, 12:53:05 AM »

In the "time out" thread, a poster said nine times out of ten a controversial member needs to have someone to listen to them and understand what they are saying.


Hey Alex,

I agree, it is about listening and understanding.

Make the BEST of each and every Day!

Offline skeebo1969

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,705
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2006, 12:54:39 AM »


  Eldon is that you?
I despise the song Love is in the Air, you should too.

Offline Eldon

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,664
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2006, 01:16:08 AM »
Hey Skeebo1969,

Yes, it is me.



Make the BEST of each and every Day!

Offline fearless

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,191
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #5 on: November 05, 2006, 02:28:00 AM »
But, if the price to pay for that one tiny grain of wisdom is that a thousand other grains of wisdom get blown away in the storm, nah, I say it's not worth it.

I'm all for banning.

In the particular case at hand, I sincerley hope that John and Trish (sorry, I'm not going to beat around the bush here) will sit back and realise that their participation here is no longer useful, not for them, and not for anyone here. It can't be doing them any good, and turns every discussion into a venomous war of words. Only one person here knows my reason for being so intolerant to John, in particular. And, that is the way it will stay. Just stay away, for everyones good. Go and enjoy life, direct all your positive energy to your local community and forget about here. You will be better off and we will be better off.

I say again, if the price to pay for that one tiny grain of wisdom is that a thousand other grains of wisdom get blown away in the storm, nah, I say it's not worth it.

Steve
Be forgiving, be grateful, be optimistic

Offline J.R.E.

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,162
  • Joined Dec-2003 Living positive, since 1985.
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2006, 03:05:36 AM »
Hello Alex,

I also do not like the"permanent"  banning of any member of these forums. However, as was mentioned in the other thread, sometimes these actions need to be taken. If a person doesn't want to be banned, then play by the rules. If the rules are unclear, then it is time to modify the rules and "make them clear".

I also believe many people, that play by the rules, have something to offer, but these same people will not offer anything, if they feel uncomfortable being here. Everyone should feel relatively at ease here. When that feeling of being at "ease" disappears, good people will go away, and the only one's left, will be those that are breaking the rules.




Just my thoughts---Ray
« Last Edit: November 05, 2006, 03:07:18 AM by J.R.E. »
Current Meds ; Viramune, Epzicom, 40mg of simvastatin, 12.5mg of Hydrochlorothiazide.
Metoprolol tartrate 25mg



http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=40802.0

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=45159.0

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=39722.msg495621;topicseen#msg495621

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=46806.0

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=39414.msg491701#msg491701


 In October of 2003, My t-cell count was 16, Viral load was over 500,000, Percentage at that time was 5%. I started my first  HAART regimen  on October 24th,03.

 As of 8/2514,  t-cells are at 402, Viral load <40

 Current % is at 11%

  
 62 years young.

Offline OzPaul

  • Member
  • Posts: 410
  • a very blessed 29 year ltnp
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2006, 03:41:17 AM »
We all have to live by the rules, that's how life works for adults living in the real world. There are consequences of not living by the rules. There is a multi step process of warnings and time outs here at the Forums. Folks will have plenty of time and opportunity to live by the rules as stated.

A permanent ban would suck on many levels but without abiding by rules and agreeing to play by these rules we have chaos (as we've seen/read). I think that the rules as laid out are fair and succinct. Live by them, follow them, or don't. If you don' or can't, being asked to leave (or being banished) is the logical and appropriate outcome.

Offline DanielMark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,475
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #8 on: November 05, 2006, 05:12:47 AM »
Quote from: OzPaul
We all have to live by the rules, that's how life works for adults living in the real world. There are consequences of not living by the rules. There is a multi step process of warnings and time outs here at the Forums. Folks will have plenty of time and opportunity to live by the rules as stated.

I agree.

If someone is unable to rein in their emotions, if they stoop to the level of arguing on the internet (Oy!) or lashing out at people on a personal level, then why shouldn't they be made to take responsibility for altering their behaviour? Would you allow someone to act that way in your home? I doubt it.

Although this is the Internet and not the real world, it is the only world many folks have for communicating with others living with HIV. I really don’t believe civility between members is too much to ask.

Daniel
MEDS: REYATAZ & KIVEXA (SINCE AUG 2008)

MAY 2000 LAB RESULTS: CD4 678
VL STILL UNDETECTABLE

DIAGNOSED IN 1988

Offline joemutt

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,042
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #9 on: November 05, 2006, 05:13:53 AM »
This should be a site for all people with hiv,
not for those who politick or write well only.

Offline Cliff

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,645
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #10 on: November 05, 2006, 07:11:57 AM »
I'm with Lil Steve, Ray, et al on this one.  The price paid for that one grain of selfless advice, is not worth it.  Excluding the Am I Infected forum, I can only remember two bannings.  One was DynamicDavid.  This guy hated the world, but particularly women and blacks.  You would come in and he would launch into one of his I hate blacks and I hate women tirades.  Finally he got the boot and good riddance.  Sure he offered some advice from time to time, but half the stuff we discuss in this forum ain't rocket science (let's face it).  Anyone can provide guidance and we have a wide enough audience that someone is going to know something about a subject.  We didn't need his one grain to keep things running around here.  But worse, I invited several folks that I knew were HIV positive from another site (non-hiv but focused primarily african americans).  They gave me a chewing cause they would come and check out the site, only to stumble on DD's posts (an easy find, cause they almost always generated the most hits/responses).

So that one grain he gave from time to time was worth the loss of potential HIV positive people in need?  I don't think so.

P.S. - It seems like some people come to the forums drunk or high (or both) and that's usually when they tend to jump all over other members.  That sort of behaviour wouldn't be tolerated in a support group and I don't think it should be tolerated here.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2006, 07:14:38 AM by Cliff »

Offline wellington

  • Member
  • Posts: 508
  • Don't sweat the little things.
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #11 on: November 05, 2006, 07:24:40 AM »
Just because this place is on the internet in a virtual space does not make it any less public or at arms length from society. Without the rule of law there would be chaos and anarchy. I am all for fairness, but when I see other people being personally lambasted by contributors, I shake my head. While banning may not be seen the most just for the individual, at some point you have to amputate to save a body. I am certain that those affected were consulted numerous times prior to this drastic a measure and they must have made a choice to proceed as they did. Who am I to argue with that choice?

Offline Peter Staley

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,337
  • Founder & Advisory Editor, AIDSmeds.com
    • AIDSmeds.com
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #12 on: November 05, 2006, 07:27:27 AM »
But, if the price to pay for that one tiny grain of wisdom is that a thousand other grains of wisdom get blown away in the storm, nah, I say it's not worth it.

I'm all for banning.

In the particular case at hand, I sincerley hope that John and Trish (sorry, I'm not going to beat around the bush here) will sit back and realise that their participation here is no longer useful, not for them, and not for anyone here. It can't be doing them any good, and turns every discussion into a venomous war of words. Only one person here knows my reason for being so intolerant to John, in particular. And, that is the way it will stay. Just stay away, for everyones good. Go and enjoy life, direct all your positive energy to your local community and forget about here. You will be better off and we will be better off.

I say again, if the price to pay for that one tiny grain of wisdom is that a thousand other grains of wisdom get blown away in the storm, nah, I say it's not worth it.

Steve


Steve -- consider this a warning.  If you flame bait again, like this one does to John & Trish, you will be given a Time Out.

Peter Staley
Founder
AIDSmeds.com

Offline J.R.E.

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,162
  • Joined Dec-2003 Living positive, since 1985.
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #13 on: November 05, 2006, 08:17:32 AM »

P.S. - It seems like some people come to the forums drunk or high (or both) and that's usually when they tend to jump all over other members.  That sort of behaviour wouldn't be tolerated in a support group and I don't think it should be tolerated here.


I absolutely agree with this statement !! And I thought I was the only one that could pick this out in a post, I guess it is more obvious then I thought.

As a former drinker, and an alchoholic,/a former pot and hashish smoker, and crystal meth user, it is not difficult for me to see, when someone is "legally drunk and posting" or cranking away.

Its even easier to see when someone has done up a line of crank... They burn those letters right off the keyboard, they can't go fast enough...



Ray
Current Meds ; Viramune, Epzicom, 40mg of simvastatin, 12.5mg of Hydrochlorothiazide.
Metoprolol tartrate 25mg



http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=40802.0

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=45159.0

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=39722.msg495621;topicseen#msg495621

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=46806.0

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=39414.msg491701#msg491701


 In October of 2003, My t-cell count was 16, Viral load was over 500,000, Percentage at that time was 5%. I started my first  HAART regimen  on October 24th,03.

 As of 8/2514,  t-cells are at 402, Viral load <40

 Current % is at 11%

  
 62 years young.

Offline David_CA

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,246
  • Joined: March 2006
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #14 on: November 05, 2006, 08:22:46 AM »
You know, why does somebody think that they should get to choose their support system (individuals) when 1) it's on the public internet and 2) it's free; they're not paying for customized support. 

When I first joined this site back in March, I had many 'welcome aboard' type of replies to my initial post.  Were these replies sincere?  I think so.  If not, big deal.  If I'm going to stand up and speak, I'm going to have to expect to hear people's comments.  The problem arises when I only want certain people's support.  I can get it, but not by publically posting here. 

The fact that any of us can come here, at any time, and seek help and support is something not to be taken for granted.  We need to realize that this is something for our benefit, something good.  If one grain keeps several others from benefitting, what's the cost of that grain?

Cliff's got it right about coming on here high or drunk.  Sober up and don't show your ass to the world.  Mostly, it's just as simple as being mature and courteous.

David
Black Friday 03-03-2006
03-23-06 CD4 359 @27.4% VL 75,938
06-01-06 CD4 462 @24.3% VL > 100,000
08-15-06 CD4 388 @22.8% VL >  "
10-21-06 CD4 285 @21.9% VL >  "
  Atripla started 12-01-2006
01-08-07 CD4 429 @26.8% VL 1872!
05-08-07 CD4 478 @28.1% VL 740
08-03-07 CD4 509 @31.8% VL 370
11-06-07 CD4 570 @30.0% VL 140
02-21-08 CD4 648 @32.4% VL 600
05-19-08 CD4 695 @33.1% VL < 48 undetectable!
08-21-08 CD4 725 @34.5%
11-11-08 CD4 672 @39.5%
02-11-09 CD4 773 @36.8%
05-11-09 CD4 615 @36.2%
08-19-09 CD4 770 @38.5%
11-19-09 CD4 944 @33.7%
02-17-10 CD4 678 @39.9%  
06-03-10 CD4 768 @34.9%
09-21-10 CD4 685 @40.3%
01-10-11 CD4 908 @36.3%
05-23-11 CD4 846 @36.8% VL 80
02-13-12 CD4 911 @41.4% VL<20
You must be the change you want to see in the world.  Mahatma Gandhi

Offline Peter Staley

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,337
  • Founder & Advisory Editor, AIDSmeds.com
    • AIDSmeds.com
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #15 on: November 05, 2006, 09:09:07 AM »
Please read my recent posting in the TOs thread:

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=5407.msg60913#msg60913

Peter

Offline DanielMark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,475
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #16 on: November 05, 2006, 09:17:50 AM »
Quote from: J.R.E.
I absolutely agree with this statement !! And I thought I was the only one that could pick this out in a post, I guess it is more obvious then I thought.

Obvious it is Ray,

I also agree with David that most of the problems could be avoided if people just behave more courteously toward one another. One major concern I have is that someone newly diagnosed might show up here and miss out on potential support if bickering and immaturity are the first thing they see. That was in fact my own experience,  until I took the time to search for more rational things to read.

Daniel



MEDS: REYATAZ & KIVEXA (SINCE AUG 2008)

MAY 2000 LAB RESULTS: CD4 678
VL STILL UNDETECTABLE

DIAGNOSED IN 1988

Offline Teresa

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,753
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #17 on: November 05, 2006, 09:53:38 AM »
I would be sad to see anyone banned permantently from this site, but sometimes it is probally necessary.



 
  Re: WELCOME to the Living With HIV Forum!
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2006, 07:14:29 AM » 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


To all Forum members;

We have found it necessary to begin giving time-outs to people when things get heated and here is how it will work:

For a first offence, a time-out of two days will be given.

For a second offence, a time-out of one week will be given.

For a third offence, a permanent ban will be enacted.

Offences include abusive language, personal attacks, threats, and starting threads or posting comments that are designed to start arguments - a practice known as flame-baiting.

I copied and pasted that from the very first thread in the "Living with" section.
Seems pretty clear to me.

Teresa
 
Hubby HIV+ 5/5/06
CD4:320
  %: 26.7
 VL: <20
Atripla (started it 8/24/06)
 

Offline Val

  • Member
  • Posts: 938
  • Praxitèles -- Satyre au repos
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #18 on: November 05, 2006, 10:38:00 AM »
I am absolutely against any kind of ban!
 We are all carrying the same bug and we all need support, love and understanding.  Being a very honest and direct person, I'd rather have someone tell me what's on their mind straightforward so I can change my ways of dealing with them.  Period. I will not change myself, though!
Besides, I have learned a long time ago that the written word is so much more prone to misconception than the spoken word that I always think twice when reading --- and answering ---  a post.   I also have a very dry sense of humour myself and do understand other people who behave the same way!  In these forums, for example, I joke as little as I possibly and humanely can, for I do realize that there is a gargantuan gap between the two ponds in this sense.
In addition, it seems to me that Americans in general are so much more oversensitive and quarrelsome  than Europeans and/or Latin Americans regarding  just about any subject.  There also  seems to be a cultural thing about getting the upper hand and/or having the last word over someone... Something like a childish behaviour.
Take for example, our meeting in Amsterdam.  There were for sure disagreements, misunderstandings  and discussions about little things that some people wanted to call our attention to.  In the end, everything worked out just fine.  Did you guys notice  any kind of flame war, heated debate and name calling or insults going on?  
Furthermore, when I wrote one of the articles about our meeting, I received several PMs asking me to delete certain details and observations from my post! And that's exactly what I did  without any hesitation and/or remorse, because I respect all of my friends immensely!  But, what I really liked about these posts was that they were straight to the point, respectful and tactful!
So, I have no idea what the solution would be  for posters who keep fighting all the time.  I would never ban them on a permanent basis, though! We also  have acknowlegded the fact  that the "ignore" buttom is not working...
Would it really be too much to ask some members just to grow up?

Val
___
___
Arthus Bertrand
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?reference=TVDC%20YABFR084&pais=France
Ali Mahdavi
http://asyoudesireme.online.fr/index.htm
Richard de Chazal
http://www.richarddechazal.com/
Daniel Nassoy
http://www.danielnassoy.com/pages/galeries_portraits_2.html
Photography:
The word comes from the Greek words φως phos ("light"), and γραφίς graphis ("stylus", "paintbrush") or γραφή graphê, together meaning "drawing with light" or "representation by means of lines".

Offline david25luvit

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,409
  • Member since March 2005
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #19 on: November 05, 2006, 10:45:46 AM »
We've had members in the past that had to be permanently banned and rightly so.........
In my way of thinking we all make mistakes and we all say things that are how shall we say unpleasant
or unkind but there are some people out there who thrive on anarchy.  I for one believe the moderators
protect us from a great number of "threats" .....at the same time I have seen certain members get
"special treatment" that others are not allowed.  I think rules should be administered fairly across the board
irregardless of how long you've been a member or how popular you are.   That's my opinion anyway!

(Now don't jump on me all at once) ::)
In Memory of
Raymond David McRae III
Nov. 25, 1972- Oct. 15, 2004
I miss him terribly..........

Offline carousel

  • Member
  • Posts: 821
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #20 on: November 05, 2006, 11:01:46 AM »
.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2007, 10:54:32 AM by carousel »

Offline Life

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,388
  • Member 2005
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #21 on: November 05, 2006, 11:18:05 AM »


As long as the rules are clear and equal across the playing field,  there should not be an issue..

Offline Val

  • Member
  • Posts: 938
  • Praxitèles -- Satyre au repos
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #22 on: November 05, 2006, 11:26:08 AM »
Charles,
Be warned that this type of behaviour is not acceptable in these forums!  It is called flame bait. :-\

Val
___
___
P.S.If you persist, I swear I'll hit teh "ignore" eff button! ;D
Arthus Bertrand
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?reference=TVDC%20YABFR084&pais=France
Ali Mahdavi
http://asyoudesireme.online.fr/index.htm
Richard de Chazal
http://www.richarddechazal.com/
Daniel Nassoy
http://www.danielnassoy.com/pages/galeries_portraits_2.html
Photography:
The word comes from the Greek words φως phos ("light"), and γραφίς graphis ("stylus", "paintbrush") or γραφή graphê, together meaning "drawing with light" or "representation by means of lines".

Offline Jeffreyj

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,403
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #23 on: November 05, 2006, 11:31:53 AM »
Hey Alex, Is this your version of the 1% percent doctrine? I respect your opinion, but I must disagree.
There must be a certain level of respect. I think we all know where that line is. It is clearly stated. If there are no consequences, all hell usually breaks out ( Not to bring politics into this, but look at IRAQ)
If this was your websight, would you still have no bans? Just my opinion. Whatever that is worth.
Positive since 1985

Offline ademas

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,151
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #24 on: November 05, 2006, 12:08:38 PM »
Teresa brought up a good point.
The rules seem to be in place and posted for all to see.
Three strikes...you're out.
So why the debate?
« Last Edit: November 05, 2006, 12:30:20 PM by ademas »

Offline allopathicholistic

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,258
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #25 on: November 05, 2006, 12:29:35 PM »
Thanks Teresa and everyone. my point was that we all have diamonds in our "rough" but i guess if you need to go through mountains of exhausting "rough" just for one or two diamonds, well ....  :-\

 :-\
« Last Edit: November 05, 2006, 08:35:06 PM by allopathicholistic »

Offline RapidRod

  • Member
  • Posts: 15,288
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #26 on: November 05, 2006, 12:48:50 PM »

Offline allopathicholistic

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,258
Lock this (an apology to everyone here)
« Reply #27 on: November 06, 2006, 02:18:52 PM »
OKAY so I'm moved by this whole Ted Haggard male escort fiasco, therefore I must come clean myself and ask for this to be LOCKED.

Subconsciously I wasn't objective i.e. I orchestrated the results. The first choice is extreme in tone, the second choice sounds more like the voice of reason.

To those that didn't vote, "good for you."

To everyone here I apologize.

I feel Ted Haggard likely got away with tons of little things over the course of his life, and those smug "highs" snowballed - Now he has to face the music. As his fiasco gets crazier, and politicians from coast to coast playing all sorts of games last week into today, I stop to reflect on my own ethos, my motives, heck - my LIFE. Simply stated, I don't like what I did. Please lock the thread. Over and out.

Offline red_Dragon888

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,811
  • Love and Be Love in Return
Re: WHY PERMANENT BANS WOULD SUCK
« Reply #28 on: November 07, 2006, 04:28:52 AM »
to err is human...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I3ba3lnFHik

“Neither look forward where there is doubt nor backward where there is regret. Look inward and ask not if there is anything o

 


Terms of Membership for these forums
 

© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved.   terms of use and your privacy
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.