jamest suspended from ratskep for 6 months

[JimC]

[piscator]

...it's the roofies...

[rainbow]

...and the floories, and wallies.

[piscator]

...and it took an hour and ten minuted for the echo to reverberate from the cavernous walls of F.'s birth canal...so it's a safe bet she hasn't noticed Seth yet.

[Seth]

...and it took an hour and ten minuted for the echo to reverberate from the cavernous walls of F.'s birth canal...so it's a safe bet she hasn't noticed Seth yet.

It's true, the murals and inlays are beyond remarkable...

[Stein]

W T F?

Pithily stated. My compliments. As long as we're "outing" ourselves, I have my own sock story to tell, and it's a very sad sock........... But it may make jamest feel (marginally) less down(?). I agree with Surreptitious that the Jamest suspension stinks. But bear in mind that my agreement with Surr. -- and with Jt. -- comes from a "place" that's hardly impartial...........

I was initially suspended from RatSkep for two weeks, early in '14, for posting an angry response in a Historical Jesus thread, featuring huge all-caps letters in a red font. During that two-week suspension period, my wife (bless her heart) was curious enough to sign up herself as a poster there just in order to see if there was any sub-forums' talk going on about my suspension. She informed me there was......... I'm afraid I couldn't resist going in once or twice myself by using her log-in, just to see what the posters were saying. Well, it was hardly surprising that (with the Historical-Jes./Mythical-Jes. argument being so polarized over there) those viewing an ordinary human historical Jesus as the more likely (as I do) also viewed my suspension with regret while those who'd swallowed the myther Jesus kool-aid were triumphalist about my suspension.

After reading the sub-forum exchanges, the real trouble started the next morning. I had used my regular PC rather than my wife's own laptop in my use of her log-in to surf the sub-forum. My guess is that the mods probably detected my surfing from the IP address of my regular PC. In any case, that following morning, they promptly extended the two weeks' suspension to six months. They also banned my wife's account outright! Since their notification arrived in my regular private Inbox for my private e-mail, I was able to carry on an exchange using my private e-mail in appealing the decision. No dice. They insisted that my wife's account was entirely my own sock-puppet and sustained the total ban of my wife's account for good, while sustaining the six-month suspension for yours truly.

My wife was extremely amused by all this and suggested that a six-months suspension might do wonders for my blood pressure -- ;-) -- but I personally thought it was unfair of the mods to ban her account outright. She hadn't done anything wrong, but it was plain that the mods had made up their minds that her account was only a sock-puppet, period. If they had bothered to check the IP used when her account was first registered, they'd have seen that I had nothing to do with registering the acct. I pointed out as much in my e-mails to the mods. But they pointedly ignored my request that they check the IP at the time the acct. was registered. They never so much as addressed my suggestion and just came back with boiler-plate about the rules on sock-puppets as if none of the facts were in dispute at all.

In sum, It seems pretty human to me that one would want to just view some sub-forums while one is on suspension. Clearly, Jamest wants to view them because he -- and I -- don't like fellow posters to think one does phony messaging as multiple personalities! The fact that mods there make no effort to clarify situations like this in their public announcements (their public announcement on Jamest is provokingly opaque) underscores the extent to which their actions re sock-puppets borders on the absurd. Evidently, they also threaten suspension for anyone who communicates in any way with a fellow poster while on suspension. That means that everyone in this thread who is also a member of RatSkep is now liable for suspension from there! Idiotic? Yes. But quite serious. If any mod from there were to stumble on this thread, we'd all be in great trouble. Would they have the face to suspend us all? Maybe.

Stein

[Ra]

Suck Poppets are terrible things and will bring destruction on you all. Luckily, I am a sun god. So I will be OK. You should all rejoice in this as you suffer the consequences of your sick pappetry.

[jamest]

Evidently, they also threaten suspension for anyone who communicates in any way with a fellow poster while on suspension. That means that everyone in this thread who is also a member of RatSkep is now liable for suspension from there! Idiotic? Yes. But quite serious. If any mod from there were to stumble on this thread, we'd all be in great trouble. Would they have the face to suspend us all? Maybe.

Stein

They can't suspend me for posting in rationalia, surely? I haven't even berated the mods, nor their decision.

[JimC]

Evidently, they also threaten suspension for anyone who communicates in any way with a fellow poster while on suspension. That means that everyone in this thread who is also a member of RatSkep is now liable for suspension from there! Idiotic? Yes. But quite serious. If any mod from there were to stumble on this thread, we'd all be in great trouble. Would they have the face to suspend us all? Maybe.

Stein

They can't suspend me for posting in rationalia, surely? I haven't even berated the mods, nor their decision.

You are associating with heretics, remember...

[Stein]

Evidently, they also threaten suspension for anyone who communicates in any way with a fellow poster while on suspension. That means that everyone in this thread who is also a member of RatSkep is now liable for suspension from there! Idiotic? Yes. But quite serious. If any mod from there were to stumble on this thread, we'd all be in great trouble. Would they have the face to suspend us all? Maybe.

Stein

They can't suspend me for posting in rationalia, surely? I haven't even berated the mods, nor their decision.

Actually, they can increase your penalties for an exchange like this. In my case, I was given the explicit understanding that any attempt on my own part that even looked like an attempt to gain sympathy from fellow posters on the RatSkep board, whether intended so or not, would result in serious long-term penalties.

Now, that was in early '14. I have no information that there's been any change in that since.

Stein

[tattuchu]

Sock puppets are problematic but sock monkeys, on the other hand...

[Seth]

Evidently, they also threaten suspension for anyone who communicates in any way with a fellow poster while on suspension. That means that everyone in this thread who is also a member of RatSkep is now liable for suspension from there! Idiotic? Yes. But quite serious. If any mod from there were to stumble on this thread, we'd all be in great trouble. Would they have the face to suspend us all? Maybe.

Stein

They can't suspend me for posting in rationalia, surely? I haven't even berated the mods, nor their decision.

Actually, they can increase your penalties for an exchange like this. In my case, I was given the explicit understanding that any attempt on my own part that even looked like an attempt to gain sympathy from fellow posters on the RatSkep board, whether intended so or not, would result in serious long-term penalties.

Now, that was in early '14. I have no information that there's been any change in that since.

Stein

And that's why nobody should associate with the fuckwits at RatSkep. Particularly the fuckwit mods.

[hackenslash]

Evidently, they also threaten suspension for anyone who communicates in any way with a fellow poster while on suspension. That means that everyone in this thread who is also a member of RatSkep is now liable for suspension from there!

Or not. Bet you can't defend that.

[Scott1328]

stein's allegation is manifestly false. The prohibition is against making posts on behalf of suspended users. I myself posted on RatSkep that Jamest started a thread over here about his suspension. What I didn't do is convey any message from Jamest. I haven't been warned nor would such a warning be called for.

Something like this happened 2+ years ago. A self banned user contacted a RatSkep user via another forum and asked her to make a a post on her behalf. The RatSkep user did so and received a sanction.

Over year ago that very same self-banned user contacted me via Facebook and asked me to convey a message to the forum. I however didnot convey her message, but rather informed the commentariat of a very active thread and told them to contact me via PM if interested in the message. I received no warning or sanction about that either.

It puzzles me who fed you that line of crap.

[Stein]

stein's allegation is manifestly false. The prohibition is against making posts on behalf of suspended users. I myself posted on RatSkep that Jamest started a thread over here about his suspension. What I didn't do is convey any message from Jamest. I haven't been warned nor would such a warning be called for.

Something like this happened 2+ years ago. A self banned user contacted a RatSkep user via another forum and asked her to make a a post on her behalf. The RatSkep user did so and received a sanction.

Over year ago that very same self-banned user contacted me via Facebook and asked me to convey a message to the forum. I however didnot convey her message, but rather informed the commentariat of a very active thread and told them to contact me via PM if interested in the message. I received no warning or sanction about that either.

It puzzles me who fed you that line of crap.

I am aware that a prohibition against posting on behalf of suspended users is sanctionable. But that's only one leg of the information I acquired during my case. The other leg was that any attempt by a suspended user to inquire after someone else's relaying any info from the suspended user is likewise sanctionable for the suspended user and will result in increased penalties. Now I am not dumb enough to divulge exact quotes from and an id. for a private communication! But I can tell you it was an official mod who explicitly told me that a suspended user risks amplifying the penalty still further if there's any perception that the suspended user is attempting to coax any direct or indirect representation in any way from a fellow user in good standing.

Stein