I'm very sorry

[sirio11]

[ QUOTE ]
the post is up in his blog. For the record I think a banning for these posts is absolutely rediculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you know he was not banned for that first post, I find ridiculous that just because he's PaulP he should not be banned for this post

" I am very sorry to mason that he is so lame.
I am very sorry to the forum that you're stuck with mason and the rest of the hitler youth.

Best wishes,
paulp "

I really think Paul is way off here, and I really find his intentions of putting Mason down totally disgraceful.

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
But he's clearly on the immature side, and he takes pleasure in smashing taboos.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that's as true of David Sklansky as it is of Paul Phillips. It's part of why I like both of them.

[Mat Sklansky]

That's not quite the point. Mason banned Paul, not me. However, isn't it likely that the reason Paul was banned was a result of this violation of expected privacy? Could not have paul responded privately that Mason was making an unfair request. By making the pm public he was trying to degrade and humiliate the owner of this website.

I already admitted that I should not have deleted the whole thread. I would have been willing to debate the deletion of the post, and perhaps let it return with minor editing. When Mason found out why I deleted the thread, his response was to ask paulp for an apology via pm. Had those discussions remained private I suspect that the outcome of this would not have been a banning.

[IronUnkind]

That didn't take long.

[wayabvpar]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a question for people participating. Is it acceptable for a private message of yours to be posted on these boards? I mean aside from unsolicited spam, don't most people have an expectation that their private message is something that will remain private?

[/ QUOTE ]

When I am dealing with people I do not know well IRL, I know that anything I write may be seen by unintended parties at any moment. In an important issue such as this (in comparison to some trivial OOT thread), I try to take the time to make sure my points are clear and well thought out, as well as avoiding anything that might reflect poorly on me (unfortunately, I am not always successful, but I try).

The posting of an ostensibly private message is almost always childish and immature. In this case, Paul was obviously done with 2+2, and chose to post the message to further the point he had made earlier about the uneven moderation techniques as well as a public bridge burning. Although I am uneasy with his posting of a private conversation, I think the resulting discussion about the climate here at 2+2 has been well worth any embarrassment or anger it may have caused. I know it finally prompted me to speak up about how I see things working here.

I am just sad that Paul P. won't be around to enjoy any improvements that may eventually result. I think he is very interesting to read, and I am fascinated with how his mind works. I don't always agree with what he writes, but he almost always makes me think. Voices like that are important to a community like this one.

[ligastar]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a question for people participating. Is it acceptable for a private message of yours to be posted on these boards? I mean aside from unsolicited spam, don't most people have an expectation that their private message is something that will remain private?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I have an expectation that any private message will remain private. PP acts like a school age kid by posting a private message. I really feel he has issues and could use the services of a professional shrink.

I've followed his postings on this site and his LJ and he comes off as rude and childish. If you don't agree with him he'll just toss you aside. Doesn't strike me as someone that you could have a good, honest, lively debate with. A cause for his childish behavior may be that he became so wealthy at such a young age.

As someone said earlier, "Seat open".

Greg H.

[sirio11]

[ QUOTE ]
Paul:

You have now been permanently banned from this site.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm really glad Mason called Paul's bluff. I don't like people claiming "If somebody dare to delete my post, I'm not posting anymore" so they can post whatever they want, because they feel they have different rights or status in the forum.

[cwsiggy]

"This thread is hot!"

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
That's not quite the point. Mason banned Paul, not me. However, isn't it likely that the reason Paul was banned was a result of this violation of expected privacy? Could not have paul responded privately that Mason was making an unfair request. By making the pm public he was trying to degrade and humiliate the owner of this website.

I already admitted that I should not have deleted the whole thread. I would have been willing to debate the deletion of the post, and perhaps let it return with minor editing. When Mason found out why I deleted the thread, his response was to ask paulp for an apology via pm. Had those discussions remained private I suspect that the outcome of this would not have been a banning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason should have been able to figure out that his request for a public and private apology was silly. If he doesn't he probably should remove those functions from his account because he continues to drive good posters away.

Expecting Paul to go into peace talks after recieving an absurd ultimatum is just trying to shift the blame here.

If Mason is embarassed (and he should be) it has nothing to do with Paul.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
That didn't take long.

[/ QUOTE ]

It looks like Caro opened that door by referring to their existence and how they were written.