A quick word on "Overwhelmingly Negative Influences"

[emjay]

Come get it squish.

Yay! hehe

[robvalue]

In my opinion, the ONI rule should be about what it says: a negative influence on the forum. Not just on discussion, we already have rules for disrupting discussion. Someone can affect the whole atmosphere of the forum, make many members uncomfortable, and clearly have no particular reason to be here other than to ruin the experience for everyone else; all while carefully skirting the rules. So I would see it as a plug for all the holes in the rules, now and in the future.

Of course it's subjective, but that's why every single staff member has to sign off. If not one person on staff thinks a member has anything to offer and is an overwhelming negative influence, then for the benefit of all the other members, I think it's quite reasonable to cull them. This is way more than a discussion forum, it's a community. It would be selling it short to say otherwise at this point.

[Edwardo Piet]

I don't like the ONI rule because it's basically a way to start a witchhunt on someone if enough people deem the person as a "negative influence" without them having broken any actual rules.

It was a way to get people banned for skirting the rules before.... but the rules have been amended. It's now obsolete.

Without an objective system or rules The Staff are vulnerable to bias and ganging up on someone just as much as anyone else. They're awesome, but they're still people.

If The Staff all vote for someone getting banned... I'd rather it was that the person had broken an actual rule rather than them all just thinking "yeah they're a negative influence." and voting +1 on it.

I love The Staff of AF and I'm soooo glad that the ONI is now defunct

[Shell B]

I can accept that Dan has a differing of opinion. I can accept that he can be blunt. What I cannot and will not accept is that he basically said that a life event of mine didn't happen because I didn't report it. No, sorry. He doesn't get a free pass from me on that.

That being said, I have stayed out of his threads. I have not responded to him. I have done my best to keep the peace by ignoring him. For what it's worth, I have accepted the staff's decision and I have let this shit go. I also can say that I contributed very little to this thread, given the numbers of pages it contains.

I will continue to keep this behind me because my past is my past. I don't live there anymore. However, I will keep a promise to myself and try very hard, in the future, to ignore the posts he makes. I can live with that.

Yeah, I wasn't referring to you. You pretty much said your piece, took your break and let it go after. For the record, I don't think what he said to you was cool or excusable. I just think it's folly to take shit he says to heart. The only reason I think he's a bit right here is that some folks are quick to bully him after giving his bullying behavior as an excuse to ask for him to be banned. The point has always been that if they banned him for it, then they would then have to ban everyone who has been publicly berating him, deserved or otherwise. Also for the record, I think people should be completely allowed to berate him. I just also think he should be able to berate us as well. Again, not directed at you.

[Faith No More]

When has Drich ever been bullied?

[Shell B]

Yeah, Evie. It's no secret I think ONI was out of keeping with the rest of AF's policies. Glad to see it go, myself. Anything that leaves so much up to interpretation is going to lead to a lot of misunderstandings.

[FatAndFaithless]

Bullying kind of implies that he actually understands our points, doesn't it?

[Shell B]

When has Drich ever been bullied?

Maybe bullying isn't the right word, in which case, he's not a bully, either. However, this thread is the perfect example of a bunch of people ganging up to gripe about one person, publicly and without restraint. He wasn't even in it for the bulk of it. Again, I don't think anyone should be stopped from doing it. I just think it's right in line with the kind of behavior everyone seems to dislike about Drich. I'm merely pointing out that you can't have one without the other. If you want shittiness to go, you can't then be shitty. And again, I think everyone should be allowed to be shitty within the rules. I don't feel bad for Drich, I just think he has a few fair points.

[Shell B]

...but sincerely I don't like seeing you or anyone get bullied and I hope for nothing but the best for you with all that is going on in your life.

He wasn't getting bullied.  He was reaping what he sowed.  He doesn't get to shit on everyone by constantly calling people indoctrinated, d-bag Nazis that are too stupid to understand what he's saying in a smug condescending tone and then cry victim when there's some backlash.  

He got the tiniest taste of his own medicine, and quite frankly, he deserves a lot worse.  Plus, it's insulting for him to think he can get personal all of a sudden in some shallow attempt to show he's an actual human being when he's the one constantly dehumanizing everyone else.  It's contemptible, and it reeks of him not being able to handle what he dishes out.

The point is that it doesn't matter that it's a taste of his own medicine. It's the hypocrisy that bears mentioning. You get one or the other. A place is either a safe space and people like Drich go or it's a place where everyone can say what they mean, regardless of how distasteful, and people like Drich stay.

[Faith No More]

The point is that it doesn't matter that it's a taste of his own medicine. It's the hypocrisy that bears mentioning. You get one or the other. A place is either a safe space and people like Drich go or it's a place where everyone can say what they mean, regardless of how distasteful, and people like Drich stay.

What hypocrisy?