My Reason and Phillips Poll

[boedeker]

so true i got banned for 4 days for posting a poll in oot totally lame.

[Tyler Durden]

[ QUOTE ]
This site would not be any where near as good without them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absolutely questionable. Paul Phillips isn't the only one who's had issues w/ Dynasty in the past. Dynasty has deleted posts and then deletes posts that asks why a post was deleted. Then he doesn't respond to PM's about the issue. It's a joke. This moderator in particular abuses his 'powers' and takes them far too seriously.

[Smoothcall]

Careful you can get banned too for trying to start a flamewar with me. Can't we all just get along? Truce bro. I don't want to fight with anyone. I'm tired of that nonsense.

[B Dids]

I'm not reading off of this, but all I'll say this is.

This forum is lacking in any meaningful poker knowledge,and is "home" to many of the worst posters on the site. I think any moderation that curtails an effort to set those posters straight, and bans somebody like PP (who made an immature post, and was acting like a [censored]) isn't helping.

In short: "We need to be able to tell the stupids that they are in fact stupid".

[wayabvpar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Careful you can get banned for impersonating someone. Trust me i know. I made a similar joke once pretending to be Paul and found out the hard way. Just letting you know.

[/ QUOTE ]

How come Paul Phillips got banned, but Smoothcall is still here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Amazing that both Smoothcall and Vincent Lepore made an appearance in a 200 post thread (the original PP thread) within 5 post of each other.

BTW- if Smooth/Vince responds, I won't see it. I have had him on ignore for months.

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
why are we all acting like Paul Phillips begged someone to be unbanned? He left of his own free will, when he got banned he had already decided not to post again.


[/ QUOTE ]

The point is not whether or not Phillips ever posts here again. The point is whether or not the hosts of this forum respect the desires of the people that participate in the forum. They obviously do. As I said Phillips is not the issue, the 2 + 2 forum is the issue. Phillips is the loser if he choses not to post here. He returned and posted here on a few occaisions, I believe, because he knows that this is the most widely read poker forum anywhere. If you want to be heard by the most people in the poker world this is the place where it can happen. Phillips knows that. That's why he posted here.

Mason banned Phillips for ...well being rude among other things. Mason then decided to let the forum members decide how to deal with the situation. He yielded to our desires. I think that he acted fairly despite his own ovious misgivings. We should now thank him and move on. Phillips can do as he pleases.

Vince

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
The results of this poll are three to one in favor of a Paul Phillips return. The ban is lifted.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry to hear that. 2+2 is providing a service, and if Paul can't appreciate that then we don't need him here.

It seems like Mat/Mason may have overreacted to Paul's first post, but there is no excuse for Paul's "I'm very sorry" post. Any good will Paul had was destroyed in that post. He doesn't even use his supposed "genius" to post a well thought out and logical arguement to defend his position with class and show why Mason was wrong. He could of acted like an adult and replied privately to Mason explaining why he didn't need to apologize. Instead he reacted like a 2 year old.

I can't believe a smart guy like Paul can't see that. Maybe we have more than one "pokerbrat" in the poker world.

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
This moderator in particular abuses his 'powers' and takes them far too seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the point of being a moderator if you don't take your position seriously?

Let's cut these guys some slack and appreciate them for making thing better overall and doubt our own infallibiliy a little more. If we weren't all a bunch of crybabies we wouldn't need these guys.

[Zetack]

I think one tends to forget, because their books are so dispasionate and rational, that sklanksy and malmuth are people with (pretty big) egos and the all to human propensity to see internet posts as more inflamatory than they are and as much ability to get into a flame war as anybody else. I was reminded of that after following the link in the other thread to the Lee Jones thread, in which both sklanksy an mason made posts that were supringly low brow and attacky.

We give them a lot of props because we admire their work so much. Unfortunately they have less appealings sides (as do we all) as well and sometimes we get to see that. Unfortunately for those of us who like being here, in any disagreement they get to carry a bigger stick that we do.

In my opinion, and it's certainly true that its not my site and the site owners can do whatever they want with it, I think banning and even post deleting should be reserved for behavior that is truly egregious, not merely mundanely insulting, obnoxious or strident.

Repeated violating behavior and truly abusive (and not merely insulting or derogatory) ought to be the standard of the day. In the interests of a lively, vigorous, wide ranging, and yes, at times downright snarky discourse I would like to see banning and deleting as a very infrequent, nuclear bomb type action.

That's just my 2+2 cents of course.

--Zetack


edit: And quite frankly, I've seen so many posts about Moderators behavior that its quite surpassed "online poker is rigged" and "small sample size"posts as my least favorite topic and the incredibly proliferation of these posts seems to me to be a pretty good symptom indicating that the moderators as a group are too hands on in their moderating activities. In the end, man, its all just words, most of the time you can just let it slide...

[B Dids]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
This site would not be any where near as good without them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absolutely questionable. Paul Phillips isn't the only one who's had issues w/ Dynasty in the past. Dynasty has deleted posts and then deletes posts that asks why a post was deleted. Then he doesn't respond to PM's about the issue. It's a joke. This moderator in particular abuses his 'powers' and takes them far too seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "abuse of power" is a bad way to put it.

I disagree with a lot of what Dynasty has done, but not because I think he's some power made forum overlord who sits in his chair and giggles while the little posters scurry beneath him. He's just seemed remarkably humorless, which is surprising given that he was like the forums most original and effective troll in a past life.

The only real way this forum is not a cesspoll is to implement some really draconian policies. I'm all for that, I just wish that they were biased towards removing horrible posts instead of maintaining civility.