Page 1 of 1

Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2012 5:06 pm
by MagickalMemories
This message was placed in the HoS thread for Gian Holland. As it's off topic there, it doesn't belong.
I thought, though, that the poster's misunderstanding could use some pointing out. There seem to be a few things he doesn't get:
Dragonfangs wrote:Gian told me last night you guys banned him again.
You guys are off base - he is a solid and honest guy who (as far as I see) made one feedback mistake back in 2008.
He never ripped anyone off here.
His current account (Glacius) had nothing but positive feedback since Oct 2010.
His original account (Glacius) had only positive feedback, save for one backout.

The other 2 accounts look like they were never used.

I realize you guys all get jacked to enforce a rule around here, but it's pretty SAD that you guys take one feedback mistake that was over 3 years ago and continue to hold it against someone who is clearly a solid member of this board and the miniature community.

The staff around here never seems to admit when they make mistakes, so I'm completely expecting you all to disagree...... but you guys are wrong here.
You should reinstate him.
I understand that Gian is, apparently, your friend. As such, you surely feel the need to defend him. I think you need to stop, take a moment, and view this from a neutral point of view.

In early 2008, Gian (as "Glacius") received a negative reference from kbolster12345. In return, Gian left a negative reference for kbolster12345 for the sole purpose of retaliation.
viewtopic.php?f=44&t=45470
Rule #11: ITL or Reference intimidation
ITL (AKA Reference) intimidation is a first-offense ban.

What qualifies as ITL intimidation?
In its most direct form, ITL intimidation is when someone says something like "If you give me a bad trader report, I'm gonna give you one."
Anything that is not so direct, like "If you don't give me a good trade report, you'll regret it" also may qualify. Note that giving someone retaliatory feedback qualifies as well. No free hits.
If you are not sure, please contact either myself or one of the moderators. The equivalent level of evidence required for filing a bad trade report is necessary: emails with headers, PMs, and so forth.

YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO LEAVE FEEDBACK. If you don't, you can't really complain when someone says "this guy's a jerk - he never left me any feedback!" Should you just forget and someone leaves you what you consider to be an unjust reference, please see the 30-day feedback appeal rule below. I would consider leaving an appropriate feedback for them in exchange for having your own feedback edited acceptable and not 'intimidation' per se. Everyone makes mistakes, and not everyone is abundantly patient.
(Red text emphasis: mine)
Ignorance of the rules is not a valid excuse for breaking them. If you join a site and do not read the rules of posting there, it's your own fault if something goes horribly wrong. So, whether or not he read the above rule (which has been a rule since AT LEAST 5/26/2007, when that post was written), he's expected to adhere to it.

Wait, though. Not only did Mr. Holland turn around THREE MORE times and start new accounts when the old ones were banned, violating another site rule in doing so:
Rule#3: Multiple User Accounts: One User Account Per Person, One Person Per User Account ONLY. EVER!
Having multiple accounts does not make one look like a trustworthy person. That is why it is forbidden. It makes you look like you're violating rule #1.

Furthermore, you may not share your Bartertown user account with anyone else. The only exception to this may occur with specific written administrative permission, and that's when a minor has an account and their parent or legal guardian is 'looking over their shoulder.' If you're a minor and your parent wants to see what you're doing here or post as you, have them contact me. I will require some manner of proof that they are who they say they are.

If you've forgotten your password, DO NOT CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT. Email Linrandir@bartertown.com for a reset. Be prepared to prove that you are who you claim to be.
But, we find out that he actually had ANOTHER ACCOUNT (tact_strat) prior to Glacius (the initial one we discussed here):
memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=10300

Interesting factoids about tact_strat:
Joined: 12/11/06
Last Visit: 9/14/08

Now, wait. If you're like me, you're thinking, "Wait. What's this? Those dates look... wrong... somehow."
Why, then, in that case, you'd be correct. You see, as "Glacius, his dates are:
Joined:8/7/06
Last Visit: 3/1/08

Wow. It seems your buddy had a little problem with multi accounting from almost the very beginning.
Yeah. His only violation is that one negative reference.
Umm... except that's not true, either. There was this little reference left for him (as tact_strat) by voodoopainter.

Other accounts not used?
9laciu5:
memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=19547
What's his post count?

3plus:
memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=12954
And the post count THERE?

Before you start defending people, know who you're defending and know the history. He received TWO negative references under TWO different accounts. He tried to hide at least one of those. He left a retaliatory negative reference. After he was banned for a rule violation, instead of appealing it to us as a man, he tried to be sneaky and join the site (in violation of another rule).
Your buddy's been up to shenanigans from the start. You're mistaken about what we did and did not do improperly. We're not holding ONE feedback mistake against him. We're holding a whole litany of rules violations and a history of disregard for the rules against him.

Eric

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2012 11:31 pm
by Stanislav
I read the post in the Hall of Shame thread...just didn't comment because of it's location.

No matter how you may think he's been hosed over because of ONE negative (which we see is more than one actually), you can't be on this forum and not realize about the multi-accounting stipulation. This goes for anyone. He had been on this forum for years under various accounts, he KNEW it was wrong, just figured he could beat the odds.


There ain't no coming back. Man up or move on. It seems that you have done the "Man up" option yourself, so I don't see the issue. A negative is not the end of the world, it just means you have to pay karma back someway or how. How someone handles that obligation speaks volumes about their character.

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2012 12:01 am
by spiralingcadaver
Stanislav wrote:There ain't no coming back. Man up or move on. It seems that you have done the "Man up" option yourself, so I don't see the issue. A negative is not the end of the world, it just means you have to pay karma back someway or how. How someone handles that obligation speaks volumes about their character.
Nicely put.

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2012 12:53 am
by themailedfist
MagickalMemories wrote:This message was placed in the HoS thread for Gian Holland. As it's off topic there, it doesn't belong.
I thought, though, that the poster's misunderstanding could use some pointing out. There seem to be a few things he doesn't get:
Eloquently put.

It's not that he had the bad transactions, it's that he tried to HIDE them, and that sure looks like he did it in order to have MORE bad transactions.

--Robert

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2012 4:57 am
by MagickalMemories
Frankly, it matters as much to us THAT he did it as WHY he did.

Eric

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2012 5:11 am
by kturock
I know Gian in RL. I was the one who sent him to b-town. He shared his account with someone else. The other guy screwed up and didn't send the models, or not as intended or something. [they told me the entire story then, in 06? and I don't recall the specifics.] We all played 40k together.
He admitted to screwing up and filing retalitory feedback after getting a neg. He lost his temper and reacted.

I'm not saying he should get a 2nd chance, because he screwed up more than once. I was just surprized at how much he did. He didn't cause the 1st problem witht he trade, but, unfortuantely, he continued it. If he expalined the entire problem to a Mod and the original trader, when the problem happened, maybe this wouldn't have blossomed into what it is today.

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2012 4:23 pm
by MagickalMemories
His initial mistake was in sharing the account. There have been rules about that for a LONG time. It's been a no-no since we have had a "written" rules document, as far as I know.

That being said:
If he expalined the entire problem to a Mod and the original trader, when the problem happened, maybe this wouldn't have blossomed into what it is today.
You'd be surprised just how far the above actions and a good attitude will get you.

We had a trader break one of the biggest rules here; he offered weapons for trade. They were display weapons, but they were considered weapons by our posted definition, none-the-less. Of course, this is insta-ban activity. He was contacted and notified that the ban was coming and why. He was given 24 hours to exchange information with his trade partners, etc.

In response he was calm, cool, collected (and respectful). He said he understood, etc., and asked for a chance to explain. If we still decided against him then so be it. He showed how the weapons were nearly permanent attachments to the display and how they'd be ruined by removing them. We gave it a lot of consideration and, in the end, Lin decided on a brief vacation with a one-time pass on it.
The rules are here to keep trading as safe as possible for everyone with as little hassle as possible. They're black and white, but we often allow for shades of gray in our enforcement of them, because we know not every situation is black & white. If you take kturock's suggestion to heart, you'd be surprised how easy we can be to work with.

On the other hand, if you act flippant and as if it's no big deal... Well, then, we'll see how that goes. LOL


Eric

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2012 6:03 pm
by Forsaken Poptart
In my experience, I've always found it better to let the mods know before or during a situation, rather than wait until they find it. That's when they can help you, or at least steer you in the right direction.

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:46 am
by EVIL INC
I gotta say, I've been treated well and fairly when real life issues caused me to "lose my cool" here.

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:57 am
by mysticarcher
In my experience, I've always found it better to let the mods know before or during a situation, rather than wait until they find it. That's when they can help you, or at least steer you in the right direction.
Having dealt with Linrandir directly about a personal matter that intersected my trading here I definitely have to agree. The staff are here to do more than punish and move the occasional post. They're awesome people.

Re: Discussion on Banned/Hall of Shame members

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:14 am
by MagickalMemories
Thanks, Mystic... the check's in the mail.
; )

Eric