View Single Post
  #3  
Old 09-27-2007, 04:22 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default well, since you asked

Posted By: JK

My thoughts cut and pasted from the other thread on Jay's Banning:

"I have, to this point, stayed out of this mess. I will first state that I agree with Todd that banning Jay was a bad idea - though in all honesty, I dont believe that his contributions will be missed because, quite frankly, he hasn't really attempted to contribute positively in some time. My problem with the banning is that Jay's attacks were directed at Leon and Leon decided to ban Jay simply because he was tired of it. Jay has an opinion and while its old and tired, his "attacks" weren't all that insulting. On the other hand, Ive seen others attacked - I mean truly attacked and insulted - without so much as a "tone it down" from any of the mods. This reeks of a double standard. A post above made an analogy to the workplace - well, certainly management would not stand for constant insubordination directed toward management. However, nor would management allow employees to go about attacking other non-management employees with abandon. So if you are going to stop one, be consistent.

Personally, I dont think the board needs to be free of all "attacks". Often times, they person attacked brings it on themselves (not saying this is the case with Jay/Leon). I just have a problem when most everything is allowed to go unfiltered as long as you put a name next to your post, yet Jay is banned simply because we are collectively tired of hearing his rants.

Finally, a lot has been mentioned about a post generally being negative to generate any interest. That is too true. Unfortunately, I dont believe banning Jay will stop the train wrecks or increase the quality of the posts that are actually on topic - to me, I'd rather see something being done to try generate more on topic posts and dialog within those posts."

Reply With Quote