Why was PapaG banned?

[MarAzul]

Not in the least. I feel less annoyed with this place, that's about it. I had zero input so no reason for me to feel successful or powerful. In fact, as I stated above, the last time I petitioned on behalf of papag to have him reinstated. But enough is enough. One time too many. And that's just the way it is. Even after papag returned and made snide comments and minor attacks towards me, I never responded nor contacted any mod. I was not out to get him, but that doesn't mean that he most certainly deserved to be banned.

Ah, you feel safe. If he does come back with a new handle, what will have changed for you? He didn't annoy me but he did you, aren't things still the same, you are subject to being annoyed, me not so much even with those where I can never get it right. But you want people to disappear, I sort of like to see them justify their take. It will still be the same if he came back as PaPa H.

 

[Natebishop3]

Ah, you feel safe. If he does come back with a new handle, what will have changed for you? He didn't annoy me but he did you, aren't things still the same, you are subject to being annoyed, me not so much even with those where I can never get it right. But you want people to disappear, I sort of like to see them justify their take. It will still be the same if he came back as PaPa H.

How would you have handled PapaG? I'm genuinely curious. I know how Maxie would deal with it. His method is to do nothing. He doesn't think that anyone should be edited, suspended or banned under any circumstances. I'm curious what your technique would be.

 

[Further]

It's just a slap on the wrist, but hopefully having to change his handle and hide his identity will encourage him to stop attacking people. He can still attack the post, state his opinions, but he will be just some other poster and will have lost his identity. Over time he will build that back up, but hopefully a better version of papag, one who keeps to the forum rules.

 

[MarAzul]

How would you have handled PapaG? I'm genuinely curious. I know how Maxie would deal with it. His method is to do nothing. He doesn't think that anyone should be edited, suspended or banned under any circumstances. I'm curious what your technique would be.

Sly often calms me down by just editing my posts, then I begins to feel silly if I go much farther.
I thought you had the moment to back out when Sly advised you to let it go. That means back off. I really don't know the mans character but I suspect if you edit out the objectionable section of his post when he gets on a roll, he too will feel silly soon.
Your kinda like the local bad boy after he runs his mouth a bit over the top. There has to be blows to save face, no advise can be followed. And that is not true at all, some other person can step in for you and let your adversary save face and back down. The professional Shore Patrol teaches that lesson as soon as you start serving in that role as a temporary addition. Had to learn that lesson fast or be in a position of busting chops way too often.
Step 1, followed directly by Step 2, and closely backup by step 3 is too damn simple, and it cost us a good forum participant, perhaps a loss even for those that seem happy with the end result.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Sly often calms me down by just editing my posts, then I begins to feel silly if I go much farther.
I thought you had the moment to back out when Sly advised you to let it go. That means back off. I really don't know the mans character but I suspect if you edit out the objectionable section of his post when he gets on a roll, he too will feel silly soon.
Your kinda like the local bad boy after he runs his mouth a bit over the top. There has to be blows to save face, no advise can be followed. And that is not true at all, some other person can step in for you and let your adversary save face and back down. The professional Shore Patrol teaches that lesson as soon as you start serving in that role as a temporary addition. Had to learn that lesson fast or be in a position of busting chops way too often.
Step 1, followed directly by Step 2, and closely backup by step 3 is too damn simple, and it cost us a good forum participant, perhaps a loss even for those that seem happy with the end result.

somebody rep this guy for me, please

Damn, MarAzul the voice of reason....

 

[Further]

Why is it the Mods job to back down again and again if someone breaks the rule, to back up and let him save face, over and over and over. Guess what, the mods do this for free, to help this site that they love run smoothly. If someone continually monopolizes their time breaking the rules, eventually, after many warnings, they get sick of backing down and letting it happen again and again, because as papag has shown repeatedly, he will abuse the situation and the mods again.

 

[Natebishop3]

Sly often calms me down by just editing my posts, then I begins to feel silly if I go much farther.
I thought you had the moment to back out when Sly advised you to let it go. That means back off. I really don't know the mans character but I suspect if you edit out the objectionable section of his post when he gets on a roll, he too will feel silly soon.
Your kinda like the local bad boy after he runs his mouth a bit over the top. There has to be blows to save face, no advise can be followed. And that is not true at all, some other person can step in for you and let your adversary save face and back down. The professional Shore Patrol teaches that lesson as soon as you start serving in that role as a temporary addition. Had to learn that lesson fast or be in a position of busting chops way too often.
Step 1, followed directly by Step 2, and closely backup by step 3 is too damn simple, and it cost us a good forum participant, perhaps a loss even for those that seem happy with the end result.

That method you described can often work, I agree, but not with PapaG. The more you moderate him, the more angry he will get. He spins himself up to the point where, in some cases, he would actually scream that we should ban him. The best way to moderate PapaG is to ignore him completely, but at some point he's more trouble than he's worth.

Trust me, if you were able to see the mod forum you would find that half of the posts in that thread are about how to handle PapaG. It has been endlessly debated. We develop strategies and discuss how to handle posters, but we have exhausted any ideas on what to do with him. I finally had enough. That's why so few people have actually been banned here. Maybe 5 or 6 in the history of our little community.

 

[cmeese47]

Sly often calms me down by just editing my posts, then I begins to feel silly if I go much farther.
I thought you had the moment to back out when Sly advised you to let it go. That means back off. I really don't know the mans character but I suspect if you edit out the objectionable section of his post when he gets on a roll, he too will feel silly soon.
Your kinda like the local bad boy after he runs his mouth a bit over the top. There has to be blows to save face, no advise can be followed. And that is not true at all, some other person can step in for you and let your adversary save face and back down. The professional Shore Patrol teaches that lesson as soon as you start serving in that role as a temporary addition. Had to learn that lesson fast or be in a position of busting chops way too often.
Step 1, followed directly by Step 2, and closely backup by step 3 is too damn simple, and it cost us a good forum participant, perhaps a loss even for those that seem happy with the end result.

24 hour suspensions or even 48 hours is usually enough to defuse whatever situation arises permanent bans should only be used for illegal actions like threats of violence, child porn etc.

 

[MarAzul]

Why is it the Mods job to back down again and again if someone breaks the rule, to back up and let him save face, over and over and over. Guess what, the mods do this for free, to help this site that they love run smoothly. If someone continually monopolizes their time breaking the rules, eventually, after many warnings, they get sick of backing down and letting it happen again and again, because as papag has shown repeatedly, he will abuse the situation and the mods again.

Well no worry! I saw you say, you would never do the job.

Sly has let me save face or saved my face 22 times. Maybe a forgot a few.

But then I don't really know the answer to your question, except maybe they want to learn how to do it?

 

[RR7]

How is that a voice of reason? His posts have been edited a ton for a long time with many warnings and suspensions in between. Clearly he was not feeling silly from his posts and not changing his behavior. This is where nate mentioning you never being in the main forum comes into play. You're trying to speak as a voice of reason without having a clue of what's happened over time.
I don't care about his Blazers knowledge, the guy was an asshole that came on frequently with the sole intent of arguing. Had no interest in a true exchange of ideas and would just twist a conversation enough to argue more and more. Fuck him. Good riddance. Great job nate!

 

[MarAzul]

24 hour suspensions or even 48 hours is usually enough to defuse whatever situation arises permanent bans should only be used for illegal actions like threats of violence, child porn etc.

Darn good addition.

 

[Natebishop3]

24 hour suspensions or even 48 hours is usually enough to defuse whatever situation arises permanent bans should only be used for illegal actions like threats of violence, child porn etc.

This might be true with 99% of posters, but when someone clearly doesn't respond to warnings, and they are consistently damaging the morale of the forum, it's time for them to go. Most arguments on here last a few posts and that's it. When PapaG gets into a feud with someone, that feud spans over multiple threads and he will hold onto that feud for years.

 

[MarAzul]

How is that a voice of reason? His posts have been edited a ton for a long time with many warnings and suspensions in between. Clearly he was not feeling silly from his posts and not changing his behavior. This is where nate mentioning you never being in the main forum comes into play. You're trying to speak as a voice of reason without having a clue of what's happened over time.
I don't care about his Blazers knowledge, the guy was an asshole that came on frequently with the sole intent of arguing. Had no interest in a true exchange of ideas and would just twist a conversation enough to argue more and more. Fuck him. Good riddance. Great job nate!

I use to think you were Cup, another of the same over on Oregonlive. I read your post here as I did there. About the same guy.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

So.... wait...... was PapaG banned or suspended? Or did he first get suspended, then banned?

Quick summary please. I was here draft night just before the suspension. I figured he'd be back by now?

 

[cmeese47]

This might be true with 99% of posters, but when someone clearly doesn't respond to warnings, and they are consistently damaging the morale of the forum, it's time for them to go. Most arguments on here last a few posts and that's it. When PapaG gets into a feud with someone, that feud spans over multiple threads and he will hold onto that feud for years.

That because most people run out of smart ass things to say PapaG had a deep playbook.

 

[Natebishop3]

So.... wait...... was PapaG banned or suspended? Or did he first get suspended, then banned?

Quick summary please. I was here draft night just before the suspension. I figured he'd be back by now?

He's gone permanently.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Well no worry! I saw you say, you would never do the job.

Sly has let me save face or saved my face 22 times. Maybe a forgot a few.

But then I don't really know the answer to your question, except maybe they want to learn how to do it?

I believe that you and I see this somewhat alike. In my opinion developed from past experience, Sly has the temperament, maturity and lack of ego that allows him to diffuse even the most stubborn, pigheaded and unrelenting personalities (me).

I suppose it is not fair of us to expect the same exceptional ism in Nate.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

That because most people run out of smart ass things to say PapaG had a deep playbook.

If Papa got banned solely for being a smart ass, I undoubtedly would have been banned a long time ago. I think it was a step beyond "smart ass things".

 

[cmeese47]

So.... wait...... was PapaG banned or suspended? Or did he first get suspended, then banned?

Quick summary please. I was here draft night just before the suspension. I figured he'd be back by now?

Permabanned

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

He's gone permanently.

Was he banned from the draft night meltdown? Or did he come back after and meltdown and I missed it?

 

[Further]

MarAzul, I think you are basically correct in most situations, a nudge is enough to defuse the situation. I totally believe that these mods (not true on every site) really try to be fair and not overly restrictive or forceful with their decisions. As evidenced, in the 6 years I have been at this site, I think fewer that 5 people have been banned. Actually only three I can think of, BenDavis who had violent outbursts and actually asked to be banned, That Woman poster, I forget her name, but she was warned over and over and over and over and wouldn't stop attacking, even though she was often provoked, and lastly papag. 3-5 posters is less than 1 ban per year, not a sign of some internet gestapo.

I am glad that they help you (and me) save face, and keep this place a fun place to post. I wish nothing bad for papag, and as I said, I suspect he will comeback with a pseudonym. You and I very often disagree, but that's actually why I like talking to you, and why I liked papag for the most part. But not the attacking, especially attacking people and their families. That crosses the line.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

That because most people run out of smart ass things to say PapaG had a deep playbook.

that cracked me up..nice and repped

 

[cmeese47]

If Papa got banned solely for being a smart ass, I undoubtedly would have been banned a long time ago. I think it was a step beyond "smart ass things".

I am saying he had a plethora of smart ass comments which could escalate issues when he had them with equally stubborn people. Someone like me, MM etc never back down so those conflicts tend to get heavily moderated. Against other weak willed or mature users PapaG would drop a few insults and they would back down.

 

[cmeese47]

Was he banned from the draft night meltdown? Or did he come back after and meltdown and I missed it?

Draft night

 

[Natebishop3]

Was he banned from the draft night meltdown? Or did he come back after and meltdown and I missed it?

He was banned on draft night. To my knowledge he has not come back.

 

[Hobbesarable]

I am saying he had a plethora of smart ass comments which could escalate issues when he had them with equally stubborn people. Someone like me, MM etc never back down so those conflicts tend to get heavily moderated. Against other weak willed or mature users PapaG would drop a few insults and they would back down.

Maturity says you ignore freaks in public. And mature people do the same here.

 

[MarAzul]

I believe that you and I see this somewhat alike. In my opinion developed from past experience, Sly has the temperament, maturity and lack of ego that allows him to diffuse even the most stubborn, pigheaded and unrelenting personalities (me).

I suppose it is not fair of us to expect the same exceptional ism in Nate.

I don't know about fair, but I sure don't see in action what I expect.

 

[Natebishop3]

MarAzul, I think you are basically correct in most situations, a nudge is enough to defuse the situation. I totally believe that these mods (not true on every site) really try to be fair and not overly restrictive or forceful with their decisions. As evidenced, in the 6 years I have been at this site, I think fewer that 5 people have been banned. Actually only three I can think of, BenDavis who had violent outbursts and actually asked to be banned, That Woman poster, I forget her name, but she was warned over and over and over and over and wouldn't stop attacking, even though she was often provoked, and lastly papag. 3-5 posters is less than 1 ban per year, not a sign of some internet gestapo.

I am glad that they help you (and me) save face, and keep this place a fun place to post. I wish nothing bad for papag, and as I said, I suspect he will comeback with a pseudonym. You and I very often disagree, but that's actually why I like talking to you, and why I liked papag for the most part. But not the attacking, especially attacking people and their families. That crosses the line.

From my memory

Mixum
BenDavis
Blazer Fanatic
PDXKass
PapaG

I feel like I'm forgetting someone. Obviously there was a bunch of Timbertrolls that were nuked, but I don't count them.

 

[Natebishop3]

I believe that you and I see this somewhat alike. In my opinion developed from past experience, Sly has the temperament, maturity and lack of ego that allows him to diffuse even the most stubborn, pigheaded and unrelenting personalities (me).

I suppose it is not fair of us to expect the same exceptional ism in Nate.

The Sly that you describe is a facade. I have seen the list of posters who have crossed him, and when he finally snaps the only warning you will get is the muzzle flash in the distance

 

[Further]

From my memory

Mixum
BenDavis
Blazer Fanatic
PDXKass
PapaG

I feel like I'm forgetting someone. Obviously there was a bunch of Timbertrolls that were nuked, but I don't count them.

It does suck that this is such a sausage fest. To my knowledge, Blazer Fanatic, PDXKass, crandc and Blazer4life are the only women who have posted on this board and two of them were banned and one I haven't seen in ages. All 4 were very Blazer knowledgeable (well Kass was iffy), It would be nice to somehow get some more women posters in this place without being attacked.