PDA

View Full Version : Should Believer be banned?


Frazod
01-30-2007, 01:02 AM
The charge - endless spamming of the BB with religious drivel.

Yes or No.

And yes, this is a public poll. IMO, if you're going to vote to ban somebody, you shouldn't do it anonymously.

Buck
01-30-2007, 01:03 AM
Poll??? I vote Yes

Count Alex's Losses
01-30-2007, 01:03 AM
Um, duh?

BTW, Kaeding, your sig is WAY too big. 600x200 or smaller please.

Buck
01-30-2007, 01:03 AM
Um, duh?

BTW, Kaeding, your sig is WAY too big. 600x200 or smaller please.

Yeah I got it, it was just restored.

SPchief
01-30-2007, 01:04 AM
Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.

SPchief
01-30-2007, 01:07 AM
If we're going to ban Believer for his threads. Might as well ban Gochiefs, or previously Phobia for their spam from WPI

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-30-2007, 01:07 AM
He's a douchebag, but probably only deserves the Hootie treatment.

Count Alex's Losses
01-30-2007, 01:07 AM
If we're going to ban Believer for his threads. Might as well ban Gochiefs, or previously Phobia for their spam from WPI

Apples and oranges my friend.

Direckshun
01-30-2007, 01:08 AM
How can you ban an instant source of entertainment?

Bastards.

|Zach|
01-30-2007, 01:08 AM
Phobia for their spam from WPI
Those articles about the Chiefs?

SPchief
01-30-2007, 01:09 AM
Those articles about the Chiefs?


Technically, they were spam

|Zach|
01-30-2007, 01:10 AM
Technically, they were spam
The articles about the Chiefs? How so?

Frazod
01-30-2007, 01:10 AM
How can you ban an instant source of entertainment?

Bastards.

You have some strange ideas about what's entertaining.

KChiefer
01-30-2007, 01:11 AM
Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.

I 2nd that.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-30-2007, 01:11 AM
If we do ban him, could we at least crucify him for irony's sake?

jidar
01-30-2007, 01:12 AM
Technically, they were spam


Chiefs articles on a Chiefs messageboard.
Technically your mother is hiding her head in shame at your reasoning.

|Zach|
01-30-2007, 01:13 AM
Chiefs articles on a Chiefs messageboard.
Technically your mother is hiding her head in shame at your reasoning.
I really...honestly...not trying to be obtuse...never did understand that Laz school of reasoning that WPI stuff was spam.

BWillie
01-30-2007, 01:22 AM
Um, duh?

BTW, Kaeding, your sig is WAY too big. 600x200 or smaller please.

I Charger fan gets a warning but I get mine permanently removed? What the ****.

SPchief
01-30-2007, 01:23 AM
I really...honestly...not trying to be obtuse...never did understand that Laz school of reasoning that WPI stuff was spam.


For months, they would try to get people to get people to come to thier message board and try out their magazine. They even went as far as giving away subscriptions to thier magazine.

jidar
01-30-2007, 01:23 AM
I really...honestly...not trying to be obtuse...never did understand that Laz school of reasoning that WPI stuff was spam.


Agreed. ESPN and SI are linked just as often and nobody thinks that is spam. It stands to reason that major sports sites are frequently going to be linked on a sports oriented messageboard, likewise it stands to reason that a Chiefs oriented news site will be linked on a Chiefs board.

The spam argument doesn't make any kind of sense except that it's people with a bias against WPI.

*I am not a shill. I never go to WPI

|Zach|
01-30-2007, 01:23 AM
For months, they would try to get people to get people to come to thier message board and try out their magazine. They even went as far as giving away subscriptions to thier magazine.
So you don't have a problem with the Chiefs articles they posted?

Reaper16
01-30-2007, 01:24 AM
Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.

SPchief
01-30-2007, 01:24 AM
So you don't have a problem with the Chiefs articles they posted?


With the articles, no. With the way they were whoring out thier site, yes.

FAX
01-30-2007, 01:26 AM
I was a little amazed at the number of threads on the subject of religion when I logged in this evening.

In my mind, Mr. Believer has some issues. He may be brainwashed, in fact. However, I hesitate to recommend banning. I would rather see his thread-making privileges curtailed somehow in order to derail his crusade to convert the Planet heathens.

I respect his views as well as his right to speak his mind (although I'm somewhat unconvinced of his sincerity), but I think he would find it more enjoyable posting religious subjects on a board suited to spiritual topics.

But, now that I think about it, perhaps a darn good scourging is in order. Then we can decide whether to ban him or Barabas.

FAX

|Zach|
01-30-2007, 01:27 AM
With the articles, no. With the way they were whoring out thier site, yes.
I guess I see your point? But not really aside from the whoring being very very minimal esp when you talk about the creation of threads.

Besides that, established members have always had leeway to pimp their own shit in a cases where if noobs did the same thing they would be squashed fast.

I guess I am a good example...if I had pushed all the stuff I do on ZachIsHere.com or my upcoming photography store and wasn't established as a contributor here it wouldn't go over. Ali Chiefs comes to mind...there are more examples...

Seems much ado about nothing. :hmmm:

SLAG
01-30-2007, 01:27 AM
With the articles, no. With the way they were whoring out thier site, yes.
I agree with you here



as far as the topic of the thread goes...

I love Jesus.

but no one will listen to the message as long as it is be force down their throat... if people have questions about religion and feel beliver can help with that then that should probably take place in a P.M or something

Extra Point
01-30-2007, 01:27 AM
His crusade is for naught.

Count Alex's Losses
01-30-2007, 01:30 AM
For months, they would try to get people to get people to come to thier message board and try out their magazine. They even went as far as giving away subscriptions to thier magazine.

Don't lump me in with Phil. I wasn't trying to get anyone to come over to Warpaint. And I gave away no subscriptions.

Frazod
01-30-2007, 01:30 AM
Thread posting restrictions would be better than nothing. But still, people like this don't get better; it's not like this guy is an enemy troll who'll one day get assimilated into the community. He's a crusader; he's here to crusade. That's all he'll ever do.

SPchief
01-30-2007, 01:30 AM
Besides that, established members have always had leeway to pimp their own shit in a cases where if noobs did the same thing they would be squashed fast.




If I'm not mistaken, the rule is to have a simple link in your sig. Getting back to the point, what is the reasoning behind banishment? I'm not defending the guy, but it would seem that taking away his thread making capablities would cure the problem.

I know you agree he shouldn't be banned, but why do others believe he should? Anybody.


SPchief,
just trying to figure it out.

Buck
01-30-2007, 01:33 AM
I Charger fan gets a warning but I get mine permanently removed? What the ****.

Mine was permanantely (sp?) removed a month or two ago, and I just asked for it back, someone thought I just put it up, but infact I had yet to remove it. Ask a mod for your privelages back.

FAX
01-30-2007, 01:36 AM
Thread posting restrictions would be better than nothing. But still, people like this don't get better; it's not like this guy is an enemy troll who'll one day get assimilated into the community. He's a crusader; he's here to crusade. That's all he'll ever do.

You may very well be right, Mr. frazod.

The main problem I have with him is his seeming lack of consideration for the other members who have clearly had enough. That seems extremely un-Christianlike to my mind. Faith isn't a test in public obstinance.

The way I see it is, if he can learn to respect other members, great. If not, make him eat raw slugs.

FAX

Baconeater
01-30-2007, 01:38 AM
After reviewing a fair number of his posts, it seems he has posted enough non-religious stuff for me to reluctantly vote no to banning. I am on the "losing his thread starting privileges" bandwagon though.

Halfcan
01-30-2007, 01:46 AM
YES

Demonpenz
01-30-2007, 01:50 AM
reminds me of when we banned jesus and let barabas stay

luv
01-30-2007, 01:52 AM
I Charger fan gets a warning but I get mine permanently removed? What the ****.
That's an awfully big sig you've got there.

Logical
01-30-2007, 01:53 AM
I would be satisfied if his thread creation privelages be removed. But banning certainly would make me happy as well.

ChiefFan31
01-30-2007, 02:23 AM
I was a little amazed at the number of threads on the subject of religion when I logged in this evening.

In my mind, Mr. Believer has some issues. He may be brainwashed, in fact. However, I hesitate to recommend banning. I would rather see his thread-making privileges curtailed somehow in order to derail his crusade to convert the Planet heathens.

I respect his views as well as his right to speak his mind (although I'm somewhat unconvinced of his sincerity), but I think he would find it more enjoyable posting religious subjects on a board suited to spiritual topics.

But, now that I think about it, perhaps a darn good scourging is in order. Then we can decide whether to ban him or Barabas.

FAX

Good point Mr. Fax about your doubts of his sincerity. He certainly has gotten the attention he desires.

I haven't read his latest ramblings, and I ain't gonna.

I have no problem with someone being religious, but to come on here and nail yourself to the cross and act so damn dysfunctional is disturbing to me. I voted for ban, but the thread revoking privileges seem to be a better option.

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 02:31 AM
I agree with you here



as far as the topic of the thread goes...

I love Jesus.

but no one will listen to the message as long as it is be force down their throat... if people have questions about religion and feel beliver can help with that then that should probably take place in a P.M or something


amen to that, brother

Logical
01-30-2007, 02:47 AM
Kill teh witch

SPchief
01-30-2007, 04:00 AM
bump

J Diddy
01-30-2007, 04:02 AM
bump

why

SPchief
01-30-2007, 04:07 AM
why


Believe or not, there is a precedent being set in this thread.

J Diddy
01-30-2007, 04:09 AM
Believe or not, there is a precedent being set in this thread.

believe it or not

no there isn't

it's been done before

with the same boring results

SPchief
01-30-2007, 04:10 AM
believe it or not

no there isn't

it's been done before

with the same boring results


link?

J Diddy
01-30-2007, 04:13 AM
link?

good luck with that

threads only date back a year

I know it was a pissing match between Iowian and some other dumbshit


Phil stepped in and declared what i believe to be true
when people can start voting someone off it becomes a popularity contest

Who the **** wants to be a part of a bb community that's ran like a yahoo chat room

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 04:15 AM
I've read through threads from 02, even bumped a few, one in particular looked like it would be fun to hear the storyline, and many people were mad. It was something to do with VDprez's parody of JDprez's website.

SPchief
01-30-2007, 04:16 AM
good luck with that

threads only date back a year

I know it was a pissing match between Iowian and some other dumbshit


Phil stepped in and declared what i believe to be true
when people can start voting someone off it becomes a popularity contest

Who the **** wants to be a part of a bb community that's ran like a yahoo chat room



I'm thinking you didn't read the whole thread. I've basically said the same thing.

J Diddy
01-30-2007, 04:17 AM
I've read through threads from 02, even bumped a few, one in particular looked like it would be fun to hear the storyline, and many people were mad. It was something to do with VDprez's parody of JDprez's website.

nope not really if it is still around then it would be in the romper room

J Diddy
01-30-2007, 04:17 AM
I'm thinking you didn't read the whole thread. I've basically said the same thing.

my point being the precedent was already set

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 04:28 AM
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=98188


I don't know where the romper room is, this is in hunt club.

J Diddy
01-30-2007, 04:31 AM
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=98188


I don't know where the romper room is, this is in hunt club.

I guess it doesn't exist anymore.

Database has had several problems throughout the years, many things have come and gone.

Learn a little, please.

Ask anyone who's been on here for more than 1 month

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 04:34 AM
I guess it doesn't exist anymore.

Database has had several problems throughout the years, many things have come and gone.

Learn a little, please.

Ask anyone who's been on here for more than 1 month


so did you cat die recently? Who pissed in your cheerios? I was asking someone who's been here more than one month, in an attempt to understand and learn.

J Diddy
01-30-2007, 04:38 AM
so did you cat die recently? Who pissed in your cheerios? I was asking someone who's been here more than one month, in an attempt to understand and learn.

several forums have come and gone
different concepts and if i remember correctly multiple threads

database has held up pretty consistently lately

RedandGold
01-30-2007, 06:18 AM
Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.

This seems like a reasonable compromise.

Bill Parcells
01-30-2007, 06:39 AM
Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.
Yep,I concur.

NewChief
01-30-2007, 06:44 AM
Neither ban him nor take away his thread making abilities. He's already got enough of a martyr complex. No need to fuel the flames.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-30-2007, 06:56 AM
I'm just not a fan of banning someone except in the most extreme of cases. If he's threatening members, then of course, but just proselytizing and aping the 700 Club on here, although incredibly moronic, is not worthy of a ban, IMO.

P.S. FWIW, I'm not a fan of the mob mentality of banning people either.

jjjayb
01-30-2007, 07:03 AM
Although highly irritated by Believer I say no ban. Eventually he'll tire of his schtick and go away. What irritates me most is some peoples belief that what Believer is doing is what Christianity is all about. It's not. There are a ton of Christians on this board. Myself included. We are not nutjobs who feel the need to cram things down your throat. Acting like Believer does more harm than good.

I question whether Believer is really a Christian or someone playing the role of a Christian in order to ruffle peoples feathers. But then again I've also questioned whether MeMe is a real left wing nut job or someone playing the role of one. Her schtick is sometimes too hard to believe also.

Either way, if you don't like the threads, ignore them. Simple enough. The same way you can ignore pooties irritating threads.

Chiefs_Fan
01-30-2007, 07:03 AM
no, His heart is in the right place.

kc rush
01-30-2007, 07:11 AM
Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.

That is my vote. Of course, if he starts hijacking threads after that, then he should be banned.

Kraut
01-30-2007, 07:11 AM
Just ignore his threads. Let him stay.

Phobia
01-30-2007, 07:13 AM
Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.

That's what I would like.

Ultra Peanut
01-30-2007, 07:14 AM
Does a cat just rip off a mouse's head from the very beginning? **** no. Play with it a bit.

King_Chief_Fan
01-30-2007, 07:35 AM
The charge - endless spamming of the BB with religious drivel.

Yes or No.

And yes, this is a public poll. IMO, if you're going to vote to ban somebody, you shouldn't do it anonymously.

If you want to ban someone for spamming and endless drivel, you should ban GoChiefs.

Dartgod
01-30-2007, 07:40 AM
No ban, but I agree with limited or no thread starting privileges.

ZepSinger
01-30-2007, 07:45 AM
He should lose his thread-making ability for awhile. Everyone here has a right to speak his mind, but half the threads on the first page is just too much. His incessant repetitiveness is having the opposite effect here- please don't think his over-the-top zealousness is shared by all of us Christian CP'ers.

That being said, there may indeed be enough talk about religion here to merit it's own sub-forum... Theological Planet? Has a nice ring to it... :)

Z

Chiefnj
01-30-2007, 07:51 AM
Use the ignore function.

It's the offseason. This board is going to be bombarded with annoying drivel for the next 2 1/2 months until the draft.

King_Chief_Fan
01-30-2007, 07:51 AM
He should lose his thread-making ability for awhile. Everyone here has a right to speak his mind, but half the threads on the first page is just too much. His incessant repetitiveness is having the opposite effect here- please don't think his over-the-top zealousness is shared by all of us Christian CP'ers.

That being said, there may indeed be enough talk about religion here to merit it's own sub-forum... Theological Planet? Has a nice ring to it... :)

Z

He shouldn't lose any rights on this board. I do like the idea of having a separate forum for that. However, it is off season and poop threads and all kind of ridiculous stuff is allowed. I say let the brother preach.
People can choose to read or ignore his threads.

MahiMike
01-30-2007, 07:53 AM
Can't believe what a collection of hethens we have here. 45% of you are going to Hell. And you know what that means? You'll be down there with Carl!

Bearcat
01-30-2007, 07:58 AM
I see one religious thread from him and many threads from others... plus many "Where's the best..." threads.

Then again, it's the offseason... :shrug:

the Talking Can
01-30-2007, 07:58 AM
just merge all his threads into one huge "Jesus Finger Bangs Me" thread...

Simply Red
01-30-2007, 08:02 AM
Bless his little heart...

No.

stevieray
01-30-2007, 08:03 AM
He shouldn't lose any rights on this board. I do like the idea of having a separate forum for that. However, it is off season and poop threads and all kind of ridiculous stuff is allowed. I say let the brother preach.
People can choose to read or ignore his threads.


I agree with this..otoh, it's fun watching everyone foam at the mouth over something they supposedly don't give any merit to.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-30-2007, 08:10 AM
I agree with this..otoh, it's fun watching everyone foam at the mouth over something they supposedly don't give any merit to.

There are a lot of things I don't give two shits about, as you probably do as well, but I have a feeling if some guy kept calling you up at dinner time, asking you about your long distance service, despite your own apathy, you might become a bit perturbed after a while...now, here do you have the option of not clicking on the link, but you can also screen your calls or use CID...nevertheless, it's a constant annoyance perpetuated by naivete and ignorance and that is what riles people's feathers.

wilas101
01-30-2007, 08:13 AM
I'm voting "Dont ban" but with the stipulation that thread making is revoked.

I don't believe it would be out of line to contact him/her and explain the reasons behind it. Also, I would keep an eye on their posts in other threads in case they take the crusade from the posts he/she starts and moves it into every post that is made. That seems like reason enough for a permanent ban at that point.

BigRedChief
01-30-2007, 08:15 AM
it's a constant annoyance perpetuated by naivete and ignorance and that is what riles people's feathers.
Purely religious posts should be in the DC or Romper room forum.
I personally having an issue with other people making moral judgements on my choices in life.

RJ
01-30-2007, 08:16 AM
I voted for banning because it's the best of only 2 options. I believe a better course would be a group shunning.

Bearcat
01-30-2007, 08:19 AM
I'm voting "Dont ban" but with the stipulation that thread making is revoked.

I don't believe it would be out of line to contact him/her and explain the reasons behind it. Also, I would keep an eye on their posts in other threads in case they take the crusade from the posts he/she starts and moves it into every post that is made. That seems like reason enough for a permanent ban at that point.

One thread every two days isn't ban-worthy, IMO. Close all of the parody threads & threads complaining about it.

His threads aren't filling the board... it's all those freakin' comedians...

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:21 AM
No, simply put him on "ignore". Chiefsplanet prides itself on being a sort of anything goes BB, and I'd hate to see the Planet turn into a board that endorses censorship based solely on an unpopular point of view.

stevieray
01-30-2007, 08:22 AM
I wonder if he was making threads advocating homosexuality, if the most ardent detractors of these threads would feel the same, or just call anyone who opposes them homophobes.

acesn8s
01-30-2007, 08:24 AM
Why can't Believer be warned of his actions and if he continues then suspend him for a month, a second offense, then 6 months? Then banning if it continues?
Plenty of warning and swift strong action that should apply to all.

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:25 AM
One thread every two days isn't ban-worthy, IMO. Close all of the parody threads & threads complaining about it.

His threads aren't filling the board... it's all those freakin' comedians...

I wonder if he was making threads advocating homosexuality, if the most ardent detractors of these threads would feel the same, or just call anyone who opposes them homophobes.


Good points.

RJ
01-30-2007, 08:27 AM
No, simply put him on "ignore". Chiefsplanet prides itself on being a sort of anything goes BB, and I'd hate to see the Planet turn into a board that endorses censorship based solely on an unpopular point of view.


I must admit to having forgotten the Ignore feature. It's been years since I thought anyone was worthy of ignoring. I can't actually remember the last one.

Iowanian
01-30-2007, 08:28 AM
He hasn't done anything other than be annoying.

He hasn't threatend anyone. He hasn't posted pics of men with a louisville slugger in their anus.

He's overzealous and annoying, but thats not illegal here. It would be nice if he'd choose to cut down on the threads, at least in number.

Bvr is not helping his cause here....its not the message, its the delivery that I find offputting, even as another religious person.

Its not unlike having some Mormons outside my door shouting at me all day after I've politely said "no thank you, I'm good here".....eventually, they're going to catch some wrath.

kepp
01-30-2007, 08:28 AM
I voted "NO"...if I allow this, what next? Pretty soon you won't let me view my online Bible :p

For the record, I am a Christian/believer and I *do* believe in proselitizing. IMO, however, 99% of proselitizing is done by setting an example with the way you live...not by semi-anonymously telling people that they are sinners. With that said, there have been times where I have asked people "out of the blue" to study the Bible or come to church, but it is by far the least effective method. So I can't fault Believer for his effort, however misguided some may believe it is.

...and that's all I gotta say 'bout that.

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:30 AM
I voted for banning because it's the best of only 2 options. I believe a better course would be a group shunning.


That can be accomplished by all those who are upset with him simply placing him on ignore. I'm convinced that people don't do this because the they themselves want to fuel the fire.

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 08:30 AM
I voted for banning because it's the best of only 2 options. I believe a better course would be a group shunning.



While I'm technically in line with Stevie and Greg, I have to say, the group shunning sounded funny.


Group: "YEAH!!!!! Let's turn him into an Ostrich!"


























You know, ostracize him..... Ok, ok I need more coffee.

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:31 AM
I must admit to having forgotten the Ignore feature. It's been years since I thought anyone was worthy of ignoring. I can't actually remember the last one.
Well, there ya go. :D

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:33 AM
He hasn't done anything other than be annoying.

He hasn't threatend anyone. He hasn't posted pics of men with a louisville slugger in their anus.

He's overzealous and annoying, but thats not illegal here. It would be nice if he'd choose to cut down on the threads, at least in number.

Bvr is not helping his cause here....its not the message, its the delivery that I find offputting, even as another religious person.

Its not unlike having some Mormons outside my door shouting at me all day after I've politely said "no thank you, I'm good here".....eventually, they're going to catch some wrath.
:clap: :clap: :clap:

Good post!

acesn8s
01-30-2007, 08:35 AM
He hasn't done anything other than be annoying.

He hasn't threatend anyone. He hasn't posted pics of men with a louisville slugger in their anus.

He's overzealous and annoying, but thats not illegal here. It would be nice if he'd choose to cut down on the threads, at least in number.

Bvr is not helping his cause here....its not the message, its the delivery that I find offputting, even as another religious person.

Its not unlike having some Mormons outside my door shouting at me all day after I've politely said "no thank you, I'm good here".....eventually, they're going to catch some wrath.
It's the reposting of the same thread. Was the last thread not good enough? Go spam Yahoo! with that crap and get a larger audience. What would happen if he were a Broncos fan continuing to post threads about how great Elway was? What ever happens to Believer should happen to others that do the same annoying crap.

DaFace
01-30-2007, 08:35 AM
I voted yes, though I think banning is a bit strong of a punishment. I'd definitely vote yes if asked if his thread-making capabilities should be revoked.

siberian khatru
01-30-2007, 08:36 AM
I voted yes, though I think banning is a bit strong of a punishment. I'd definitely vote yes if asked if his thread-making capabilities should be revoked.

Same here.

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:37 AM
It's the reposting of the same thread. Was the last thread not good enough? Go spam Yahoo! with that crap and get a larger audience. What would happen if he were a Broncos fan continuing to post threads about how great Elway was? What ever happens to Believer should happen to others that do the same annoying crap.


Ignore him; much like you're doing me right now. :D


















ingoring I mean.

Groves
01-30-2007, 08:37 AM
Exhibit A: Believer hasn't shown himself to be able to think outside of black and white terms.

Exhibit B: Believer hasn't (to my knowledge) even conceded that he's been a jerk or inappropriate in any way at all.


I think we've all known someone who can't "take the hint". Lump that in with A & B and you've got a recipe for someone who isn't listening to our (reasonable and) increasingly specific requests for him to change his method.

End Result: Words aren't getting through, time to utilize some technological tools. Give him 2 posts per day, and he can reply or start whatever he wants. Do we have that feature?

keg in kc
01-30-2007, 08:39 AM
He or she is a troll (and probably a regular in a halloween mask) and should be treated as such. It has nothing to do with religion.

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 08:39 AM
Exhibit A: Believer hasn't shown himself to be able to think outside of black and white terms.




man, uncool to bring race into this.





JK:p

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:40 AM
Exhibit A: Believer hasn't shown himself to be able to think outside of black and white terms.

Exhibit B: Believer hasn't (to my knowledge) even conceded that he's been a jerk or inappropriate in any way at all.


I think we've all known someone who can't "take the hint". Lump that in with A & B and you've got a recipe for someone who isn't listening to our (reasonable and) increasingly specific requests for him to change his method.

End Result: Words aren't getting through, time to utilize some technological tools. Give him 2 posts per day, and he can reply or start whatever he wants. Do we have that feature?

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3742751&postcount=94
Ahem, speaking of technological tools.

Baconeater
01-30-2007, 08:42 AM
It's the reposting of the same thread. Was the last thread not good enough?
That, along with the fact he was deceptive with one of his thread titles, is why I feel he should lose his thread starting privileges. Let him have his one thread for his preaching, he can bump it when he wants and those who give a crap can read it.

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 08:43 AM
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3742751&postcount=94
Ahem, speaking of technological tools.


:)

greg63
01-30-2007, 08:46 AM
:)

I laughed out loud at your sig! :)

crazycoffey
01-30-2007, 08:50 AM
I laughed out loud at your sig! :)


give the credit to rainman, he said it. I laughed out loud to, so I thought I would share it with everyone, at least for the time being that the religion topic is still so strong.

Groves
01-30-2007, 09:01 AM
I've got it, we need the "partial ignore" button. The full on ignore button seems the same as banning to me.

We just want things to tone down in frequency and fervor, and tone up in awareness and common senseness....it's like adjusting the "suck" button on a sound board. Do we have THAT capability?

http://www.commodore.ca/misc/jokes/suck_button.jpg

htismaqe
01-30-2007, 09:06 AM
I voted no only because I'm considering revoking thread starting privileges as a "first step".