Why was BBL banned?

[Londo]

@0 2

I think you've been put in the position of justifying something you probably think is bullshit, and for that I don't envy you.

BBL was someone who brought much needed universal comic relief. His posts were retarded, sloppy and on the nose... and they were hilarious at times because of it.

This shit is why faggots like onion farms make fun of us - because it is entirely laughable for a forum based on an autistic dude that got scared of dudes in pickle costumes to be so against anything even remotely fun.

Just let the nigga cook with his memes, or at least let him come back as BBL and purge the other accounts.

 

[Londo]

Now, to be fair, the act is done with emotion by some staff, but it's always done because the user annoyed the moderator by breaking the rules and then continuing to be annoying as far as I've ever seen.


I can say with confidence it was done clearly due to the sockpuppet accounts, and I don't think the general protectiveness towards the forum's integrity is something that requires further elaboration. Next to nobody knew who he even was until the sockpuppets were noticed since staff don't look at the off topic boards, generally. He's being treated the same just as everyone else.

Welcome to Kiwifarms. You guys ban for the shit that most users are expected to deal with then get called faggots for complaining about.

 

[I'm Retarded?]

Next to nobody knew who he even was until the sockpuppets were noticed since staff don't look at the off topic boards, generally.

nobody's expecting the jannies to be intimately familiar with every user, but I don't think it's unfair to say that there are obvious cases where moderation should defer to community opinion, especially in the case of no active harm being done to the board, and this is absolutely one of them. a decision was made, a response has manifested. that much is a normal and fair part of the process. but for the mods to tell everyone to fuck off because none of them personally care about the off-topic boards is categorically retarded.

 

[Ultrapenguin]

Bargain Bin Laden wasn't funny, he was just irritating and desperate for attention. Which would be easier to tolerate if he wasn't on here doing it constantly, every single day.

I'd toss 100 BBLs into the sacrificial pit if it spawned another 50% of a single Cats, even if it was a version of Cats that was a little mutated and maybe missing a couple fingers.

I don't think being irritating and desperate for attention makes the ban justified, but Bargain Bin Laden's sucked since he first made that account and started spamming Q&A.

 

[eatler]

Why does Null hate the offtopic board, but complain that nobody talks about stuff off topic on MATI?

We were talking about this in one of the blobby boards

TL;DR null is weird and confusing and is confusing us which I personally believe is apart of him being put in a situation he doesn’t want to be in.

I'm a lazy tard, can someone tell me what accounts are suspected to be bin laden?

---

I’d be less upset about BBLs and blobbys banning if the other disruptive users who were disruptive and posting actual nudes were hit first. Sure what BBL did was stupid and should of been stopped but as far as I know this was his first mistake and wasn’t really doing it out of malice like a onion farms user or madre

I don’t blame you ahead of time though O 2 nor do I hold it against null because this isn’t an easy situation but never the less it’s still frustrating.

 

[Lokenstien]

I'm a lazy tard, can someone tell me what accounts are suspected to be bin laden?

I too would like to know what accounts were his socks.

Edit: Thank you @eatler

 

[eatler]

I too would like to know what accounts were his socks.

I posted it

 

[draggs]

Next to nobody knew who he even was until the sockpuppets were noticed since staff don't look at the off topic boards, generally. He's being treated the same just as everyone else.

No jannies cared who he was until he put on the shitsock

 

[SentinentCloud]

in the grim war of the noble Q&A users against the invading furry hordes by the dark Lord Catler, the masters of Kiwi Farms fell to the dark side, and choose to back the furry, the weeaboo, and the foids

"So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous cringe"

 

[Absurdity]

It was the principle of it. He knew that even if he didn't post with those accounts, the fact that they existed meant he was pooping in them.

 

[0 0]

@0 2

I think you've been put in the position of justifying something you probably think is bullshit, and for that I don't envy you.

BBL was someone who brought much needed universal comic relief. His posts were retarded, sloppy and on the nose... and they were hilarious at times because of it.

This shit is why faggots like onion farms make fun of us - because it is entirely laughable for a forum based on an autistic dude that got scared of dudes in pickle costumes to be so against anything even remotely fun.

Just let the nigga cook with his memes, or at least let him come back as BBL and purge the other accounts.

I asked the staff seeking a more thorough justification for both the community and myself, as my apprehension towards the decision was rooted in uncertainty. I'm satisfied with the reasoning, although I understand others will not be. Ultimately, the request was made with the intent of making an exception, not for a ground-breaking change of rules, and I've been transparent with this fact. The exception was denied and it was explained as to why. While I did so with the intent of appeasing the handful of members asking for this exception, I can't argue for something I've been given more reasons to support than defy.

The decision is fair. Making this exception would be preferential treatment. Sockpuppets are banned. The talk about him being generally non-contributive is simply outlining what losses there are for banning this user, it has no influence on the decision to ban him, just like the fact people liked his posts has no effect either. No, it isn't fun, because website management isn't fun. I don't like banning users, so you'll have to take my word that if I weren't convinced, I'd continue to press the issue with staff. The only awkward position I have is relaying the justification to the general community, and this is still something I am doing so willfully, as I recall wishing the decisions of staff was demystified when I was just a normal user.

nobody's expecting the jannies to be intimately familiar with every user, but I don't think it's unfair to say that there are obvious cases where moderation should defer to community opinion, especially in the case of no active harm being done to the board, and this is absolutely one of them. a decision was made, a response has manifested. that much is a normal and fair part of the process. but for the mods to tell everyone to fuck off because none of them personally care about the off-topic boards is categorically retarded.

Not to be brutally honest, but if a poll was made and featured on the front page asking if the ban was justified, the overwhelming response would unquestionably be asking "who," stating he isn't funny, then agreeing with the ban. A good portion of that majority would base the decision entirely on not finding him amusing. Deferring to the community's opinion is an entirely unrealistic prospect in all regards.

 

[draggs]

in the grim war of the noble Q&A users against the invading furry hordes by the dark Lord Catler, the masters of Kiwi Farms fell to the dark side, and choose to back the furry, the weeaboo, and the foids

"So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous cringe"

Beware the furry, the weeb, the UwU *nuzzles* ERPer. The Dear Feeder Proteccs

 

[Londo]

@0 2

He's just so... harmless. I get that the rule applies but the banning still sucks.

I don't belong to any particular board. I joined because of MATI and BBL was cringe at times, but in the same way as that autistic kid that just discovered that they can say the word nigger on the Internet. His posts were a good pallet cleanser between the posts about child grooming, zoosadists, and retarded politics.

 

[JamusActimus]

One of the few users I put on ignore.

He had nothing of value to add even a tiny bit.

 

[Dynamite Bean]

Looks like it was @Blobby's Murder Knife.

Why was Blobby banned?

 

[Begemot]

@I'm Retarded? I think @0 2 is referring to the possibility of gaming the system if popularity becomes a metric instead of strict adherence to the standard rules. How many forums have been taken over by bad faith actors who use friendship groups to take over positions once they hit moderation status by using popularity as a tool? For example, a forum like ResetEra clearly uses favouritism based on political ideology and that creates bad incentives and ideological siloes.

 

[Seedling]

Why was Blobby banned?

from what i've heard Blobby made the mistake of admitting it was a sock account, although i have no idea why blobby was originally banned for

 

[0 0]

@0 2

He's just so... harmless. I get that the rule applies but the banning still sucks.

I don't belong to any particular board. I joined because of MATI and BBL was cringe at times, but in the same way as that autistic kid that just discovered that they can say the word nigger on the Internet. His posts were a good pallet cleanser between the posts about child grooming, zoosadists, and retarded politics.

Yes, but consider how nebulous enforcing an exception would be to make it fair for other users. How do we decide when to overturn a ban due to user feedback consistently across all other users? Do we meet a certain threshold of other users defending them? The number of responses that are positive towards their post? The issue is taking abstract concepts to tools which only operate in the concrete. What is "harmless?" What is "liked?"

It sounds absurd, but the issue stems from the fact that if there is any inconsistency, future users will complain the rules are not being applied universally to them. Retaining consistency in this regard is not only fair, but it also easily dismisses further arguments on the matter. I can't be any more convinced by the observation that this user was treated exactly the same as everyone else, and I'd imagine such an argument would convince even more people should the matter come up again.

@I'm Retarded? I think @0 2 is referring to the possibility of gaming the system if popularity becomes a metric instead of strict adherence to the standard rules. How many forums have been taken over by bad faith actors who use friendship groups to take over positions once they hit moderation status by using popularity as a tool? A forum like ResetEra clearly would use favouritism based on political ideology and that creates bad incentives and ideological siloes.

Correct. When we set the precedent that a user must be "appreciated" before they can bend the rules, that strongly affects discourse on the site. People will feel less obligated to disagree or go against the grain. I love the stupid stickers, but people rating dissent negatively is a prevalent issue with them which cannot be avoided, and that too affects discource. Users believing the longevity of their account is tied to their appearance to other members would only worsen matters.

 

[eatler]

blobby was originally banned for

That’s the question we’ve been trying to ask all day I’ve asked this in like 3 threads even the pay to win one and I haven’t gotten an answer. Are you guys sworn to secrecy on this? 0 2 if null has you at gunpoint about this topic please mark my question with the Islamic content sticker.

 

[Dojima's Dragon]

After a brief discussion, to paraphrase, moderation has concluded users should not need giant bold letters telling them not to run multiple gimmick account sockpuppets, and to paraphrase less so, that @Bargain Bin Laden should kill himself, so I do not believe this decision will be reversed.

I am gonna ddos this site beware chuds.