|
And exactly that's what happening here - we interpret 
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
No habla. 
|
|
|
|
|
But the:
Do not post anything offensive
and the:
The SoapBox is not for flame wars, personal vendettas, or for grinding your axe.
are actually quite clear.
When you go to some countries you are asked in the immigration form "Do you have intention of..." Terrorism or illegal acts. If you say no and afterwards you do make something they have more charges against you.
What (for me) in this case... The previous sentence of that post actually proves being done fully on purpose. And that doesn't make it less punishable.
BTW... I am not defending RyanDev I am just being honest with my opinion.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: normal rules of etiquette do not apply.
Agree 100%. But this was way over the line, IMO.
But as you all have proved, because he is a high rep member, no one cares. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
RyanDev wrote: But as you all have proved, because he is a high rep member, no one cares.
Not true, we just do not think that it is as big an issue as you do. If you really want something done about it then a private email to Chris is probably the way to go.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like you missed the previous line:
MM wrote:
I will put a quote at the bottom of the post, that has nothing to do with the discussion just so you can focus on it so you can have something to have a go at.
In other words, the one line you've quoted out of context was put there to wind you up.
And it obviously worked, since you're now calling for a member to be kicked off the site for a single line in a single post. Something which you have always objected to when the abuse was not aimed in your direction.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: the one line you've quoted out of context was put there to wind you up.
Even if it was with that purpose, it doesn't make it less offensive.
Richard Deeming wrote: And it obviously worked,
Seems so, yes.
Richard Deeming wrote: you're now calling for a member to be kicked off the site for a single line in a single post. Something which you have always objected to when the abuse was not aimed in your direction.
There is always a first time for everything in this life.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
RyanDev wrote: I'll go post something in the soapbox about you, your mom, a pineapple, and a donkey. However, I'll make sure to post what MM did as a caveat first so that it will be OK. 
In which case, I'd take your previous advice, report the message, and move on. You'd have to do better than that for me to report your account here. 
RyanDev wrote: You've proven that rules don't apply to high rep members.
You mean the high-rep member who currently holds the record for being kicked off the most times in one day? The member whose previous profanity created the whole "elephant" and "sunshine" meme in the Lounge?
RyanDev wrote: Wrong. You're specifically referring to times when ...
Oh, good. I'm glad you know better than me what I'm referring to. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with your point that high rep members(Better to say most influential?) can do anything they want. Look at this thread[^], user got removed just because it was reported by Pete,most influential member(Why? Because i've been told so in past at some point). If i would have done the same thing, i might have received this message : http://www.codeproject.com/suggestions.aspx?msg=5155156#xx5155156xx[^]
All i wanted to convey here is, it becomes abusive when it comes to 'you'. I also agree with one of your point at the same time.
Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree with you that I do tend to get a pass in cases of abuse reporting. Then again, I'm not as quick with the trigger finger as most. In that particular case, the poster had made several racially offensive comments - I linked to one in the message and then went and tidied up once the user was gone. I'm not sure that I was being abusive by doing this though - you do seem to be mixing your arguments together.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
No. You got me wrong. I've mentioned that on so many ocassions that i'm more concerned about the double standards of community.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I'm not sure that I was being abusive by doing this though
I never mentioned that. You were absolutely right. User should be kicked right away.
Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning
|
|
|
|
|
Gotcha. With pointing to a post of mine I thought you'd considered I was being abusive. No problems.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gone
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For article I think it is clear, I will choose "Plagarized".
For the member in such a case:
Should I even report it?
If yes, "Spammer" or "abuser"? In my opinion, "Abuse" does match ...
Only a Q from a noob.
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Plagiarism is a "zero-tolerance" offence: the article gets kicked as "plagiarism", the "author" gets kicked as "abuse / troll".
And the rule is: he doesn't get his account back!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for clarifications 
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
"Article" on 5. Culprit extinct.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
| .
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
