DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Forum Feedback and Support (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/forum-feedback-support-4/)
-   -   dvdnaut = BANNED (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/forum-feedback-support/101719-dvdnaut-%3D-banned.html)

qbert 04-18-01 01:02 PM

why was dvdnaut banned?

was it the spielberg's son sodomy comment that did it? http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=101697

i don't agree with the guy but, i still think a banning is harsh. the comment was definitely out of line, but a permanent banning i always thought was reserved for maliciously directed speech intended as HATE (sorry i haven't read the rules in awhile). i'm sure that the comment was an off-color mistake but i don't think he is actively wishing harm on spielberg's kid as later on he adds, "if even one child is abused out in the woods, then that is one too many, and if it can be prevented from happening then great."

just my $.02

suziq999 04-18-01 01:12 PM

Bushdog stated: This, on top of the fact that I am fairly sure you are a returning banned member who is pathetic and cannot take the hint to leave, leaves me no choice.




Heat 04-18-01 01:12 PM

OK, from the above-mentioned thread:



Originally posted by dvdnaut
if that's what he wants to do, then that's fine, but the scouts is a christian private organization, and they can have whatever stance they choose.

I think people should consider the more practical things here. Is it right to have a gay adult male scoutmaster camp at night in fairly close quarters with boys that are the gender that he is sexually attracted to?

I know that they would never allow a male scoutmaster to camp at night with a bunch of 12 year old girls.

If I was a parent, I would NEVER want my kid to be camping with a gay scoutmaster.

Maybe SPeilberg's kid need to be sodomized a few times for Stevo to realize what he is doing.
Ok, that's it. This, on top of the fact that I am fairly sure you are a returning banned member who is pathetic and cannot take the hint to leave, leaves me no choice. I am email Geoff and recommending he take some action.

Homosexual = Sodomizer is a ridiculous slur
Since Geoff actually did the banning, I would guess that DVDnaut was a former banned member (same IP address), or that the inference that all homosexuals rape young men was too much.

[Edited by Heat 1 on 04-18-01 at 10:14 AM]

Startide 04-18-01 01:30 PM

qbert, There was a running inflammatory conversation
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=100860 here where "dvdnaut" kept upping the ante.

In my opinion (this is not the board's opinion, it is my own opinion), the "dvdnaut" posts upped the ante to the point where if the moderators didn't do as dvdnaut wanted, then dvdnaut was implying that he would do some vigilante things like report all porn pictures to copyright holders, etcetera. This is not far from getting that rogue member who comes into DVD Bargains and says, "If the board doesn't do as I want, then I will report all pricing errors and good deals to the websites in order to make sure the deals are cancelled."

I've been a victim of this "moral majority" crowd where someone sends a complaint to my ISP because I've posted something hentai. It's kind of like nuclear fire and unfair where the anonymous people take potshots. So I am in favour of the banning as this person on the forum only makes me feel "bad" about posting.

Bushdog 04-18-01 01:53 PM

Thanks for you comments, and I agree.

I was 99% sure he was a returning banned member (Banned several times. 4+ times off the top of my head.). Since I was not 100%, I wasn't going to toss him for that alone. Once you couple some of his recent actions with this, it was the best decision for everyone here.

If someone else made that statement I would probably have issued an email warning explaining why he cannot say things in such an inflammatory manner. It is fine to think homosexuality is wrong, but there are better and worse ways to say it. Many members strongly oppose homosexuality at DVDTalk, and they post their opposition. And they do so thoughtfully and respectfully, which is why I consider them valuable members of this community who I would fight to keep here.

It is fine to not agree with the decisions of a mod or Geoff, but try to give us the benefit of the doubt occasionally. There was a lot more going on than that one post. Also note, I'm very responsive with email. If you have a question about something I've done, I'm more than happy to talk to any and all members about it.

Sonic 04-18-01 04:21 PM

Geoff..good call!!!!


veloce 04-18-01 04:29 PM


Originally posted by Bushdog
It is fine to think homosexuality is wrong, but there are better and worse ways to say it. Many members strongly oppose homosexuality at DVDTalk, and they post their opposition. And they do so thoughtfully and respectfully, which is why I consider them valuable members of this community who I would fight to keep here.

How can you "oppose homosexuality"? And how can you do that in "better or worse ways"? What kind of lines do you draw here?

Sonic 04-18-01 04:35 PM

Ban every member that makes fun of Gay people. Any member that shows a sign that their post is Gay targeting, ban em!

Ban em all!

:D

Bushdog 04-18-01 04:51 PM


Originally posted by veloce

How can you "oppose homosexuality"?

By saying you oppose it. Not sure about the question here.


And how can you do that in "better or worse ways"? What kind of lines do you draw here?
[sarcasm]I am completely arbitrary. I randomly decide who should be banned or not by my mood at that moment.[/sarcasm]
OR
If the person with the opinion is respectful of others and doesn't resort to stereotypical slurs and/or personal attacks their opinions are welcome here.

Your interest in the rules of this forum are important, and welcome. I'm happy to answer them as best I can. But, allow me to suggest that you ought to read some threads in the different forums to get a feel for what works or not. Speaking for the Other forum, most of the members self-regulate, making my job a lot easier. They know what goes or not. If you watch them in action you'll learn a lot.

veloce 04-18-01 04:59 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bushdog

Originally posted by veloce

How can you "oppose homosexuality"?
By saying you oppose it. Not sure about the question here.

But isn't that a little silly? What's the point of opposing it? That's like opposing a hair color, or gravity -- what does opposing it mean other than something hateful?

qbert 04-18-01 05:04 PM

thanks for the answer bushdog

i didn't draw this out on the other forum b/c i didn't wanna spark some whole nonsense of people leving/resigning again. you're right in that i didn't know his background and such, and truthfully i only read through a handful of his prior posts to see what he was all about.

just for the record though how do you know if he was an already banned member? he doesn't come back with the same name/email addy does he?

RandyC 04-18-01 05:09 PM

qbert, we can't tell you all the ways we might know...but the most commonly known one is a person having the same IP as the banned person. But there are other ways.

Bushdog 04-18-01 05:10 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by veloce

Originally posted by Bushdog

Originally posted by veloce

How can you "oppose homosexuality"?
By saying you oppose it. Not sure about the question here.

But isn't that a little silly? What's the point of opposing it? That's like opposing a hair color, or gravity -- what does opposing it mean other than something hateful?
Moral opposition, religious usually. Read some of the threads about homosexuality in Other, you'll see how it plays out.

GeoffK 04-18-01 05:27 PM

See my thread: http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=101823

The climate on the forum has been less than enjoyable of late and we're stepping up or moderation/administration of the forum and specifically targeting hate speech and abusive members.

Additionally any member who returns after being banned will be banned on site.


Alyoshka 04-18-01 05:28 PM


Originally posted by Bushdog
Speaking for the Other forum, most of the members self-regulate, making my job a lot easier. They know what goes or not. If you watch them in action you'll learn a lot.
Bushdog likes us, he really likes us... :blush:

We are a beautiful sight to see, huh? :D

Master J 04-18-01 07:33 PM

Taken from Webster's

sod·om·y (sd-m)
n.

1.Anal copulation of one male with another.
2.Anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex.
3.Copulation with an animal.

Here is the Webster's definition of Sodomy. Draw from it your own conclusions if DVDnaut was out of line.

For what DVDnaut said in the Boy Scouts thread or the PornTalk thread, in my opinion it did not warrant a ban. However if he was previously banned, I see nothing wrong with banning him again. A more constructive way to return to DVD talk would be to e-mail geoff or the mods and get a conversation going towards a return. A banned user who tries to sneak around should be cut no slack.

J

codefree 04-18-01 08:04 PM


Originally posted by sonic
Ban every member that makes fun of Gay people. Any member that shows a sign that their post is Gay targeting, ban em!

Ban em all!

:D

I can't believe that someone with as many hostile comments as you've written lately would want anyone to be banned! :rolleyes:

Josh H 04-18-01 08:23 PM


Originally posted by Master J
However if he was previously banned, I see nothing wrong with banning him again. A more constructive way to return to DVD talk would be to e-mail geoff or the mods and get a conversation going towards a return. A banned user who tries to sneak around should be cut no slack.

Geoff just said in another thread that returning banned members are banned on site, which has been the policy. A ban is forever, there is no coming back. The only member I can remember being allowed back was avhokie, and he didn't last very long. He was soon posting the same type of stuff that got him banned the first time, and he was back under conditions that he didn't. That was probably the first and last time someone will be allowed back from a ban. Suspensions are used to punish people and give them a chance to reform. Bans are for people who have thrown away their chances.

Applejack 04-19-01 12:59 AM


Originally posted by Master J
Taken from Webster's

sod·om·y (sd-m)
n.

1.Anal copulation of one male with another.
2.Anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex.
3.Copulation with an animal.

Here is the Webster's definition of Sodomy. Draw from it your own conclusions if DVDnaut was out of line.

For what DVDnaut said in the Boy Scouts thread or the PornTalk thread, in my opinion it did not warrant a ban. However if he was previously banned, I see nothing wrong with banning him again. A more constructive way to return to DVD talk would be to e-mail geoff or the mods and get a conversation going towards a return. A banned user who tries to sneak around should be cut no slack.

J

I have to disagree.
He was basically insinuating that gay men are child molesters.

That is pretty hateful, and even if he felt that way, he probably should have kept it to himself

RandyC 04-19-01 01:03 AM

He also said the Speilberg's son should be sodomized..in itself a strange and ugly statement.

But...that was just the last straw. He is a returning banned member....so it's a moot point.

centermonroe 04-19-01 04:49 PM


Originally posted by joshhinkle
Suspensions are used to punish people and give them a chance to reform. Bans are for people who have thrown away their chances. [/B]
However, there are many people who have been banned recently who haven't been told what they did wrong.

I was never given a suspension. Hell, i didn't even know there was suspensions till right now.

The Mods often refuse an open dialog with the banned members anyway.

GeoffK 04-19-01 04:51 PM

Please see: http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=101832


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:11 PM.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.