Should Believer be banned? - Page 2

Frazod · 01:07 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.

jidar · 01-30-2007, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPchief

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by jidar

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Zach)

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Zach)

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPchief

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPchief

Ban him, no. Revoke his thread making capabilities, yes.

SPchief · 01-30-2007, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Zach)

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPchief

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.

SLAG · 01-30-2007, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPchief

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.

Hammock Parties · 01-30-2007, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPchief

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by (Zach)

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.

View Poll Results: Should Believer be banned?
Yes, ban him.	35	41.18%
No, don't ban him.	50	58.82%
Voters: 85. You may not vote on this poll

01-30-2007, 01:02 AM
Frazod Did you hear what I said? Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $-756615	Should Believer be banned? 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. Last edited by Frazod; 01-30-2007 at 01:07 AM..
Posts: 121,768

01-30-2007, 01:26 AM	#24
FAX testing ... 1, 2, 3 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Tennessee Casino cash: $6753759	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
Posts: 44,492

01-30-2007, 01:27 AM	#27
Extra Point MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Prairie Village, KS Casino cash: $10004900	His crusade is for naught. __________________ "Sometimes I sits and thinks, and sometimes I just sits." --Satchel Paige
Posts: 7,845

01-30-2007, 01:30 AM	#29
Frazod Did you hear what I said? Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $-756615	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.
Posts: 121,768