My ban thread was removed citing the whole situation has become ridiculous.
I agree
Its ridiculous that a troll who has been banned 4-5 times in the last year over 3 accounts, and continues to troll and be shitty and unwelcome here is protected.
So fuck it, I'm just banning him unilaterally per the powers granted in this proposal
EDIT: Edited post to be slightly less immature.
Posted Mar 26, 2015, 12:52 AM UTC · edited
Thank you. Is he also banned from Meta?
No just r/@
Praise yeezus
I messaged a few people the same message thanking them for supporting me before and telling them they should be aware of a mod trying to invalidate their votes. There's nothing to vote on.
I'm sorry, what the fuck are you doing? Your ban thread was removed because:
This is fucking ridiculous. This is bringing up stuff that has happened over multiple accounts to repeatedly try and hammer through a ban that has been voted against plenty of times.
The small amount of stuff you've referred to that min_thamee has done since the ban is saying that some MRA's have "fallen in with a bad crowd".. I don't see what the problem with that is? It's likely true..
The other things you've brought up are just moderation votes that you disagree with. I'm pulling this, for that reason.
Your ban thread was removed because you continue to try to ban someone who you don't like on trumped up causes. Its good that you agree that this has become ridiculous, it shows you read the precise comment you and i just linked but completely ignored it.
In regards to the proposal. It hasn't been passed yet. and the votes are 5 oppose 8 support. Of those who support Therealradical1 would support with amendments. Those amendments have not been integrated with the original proposal, so his vote is void until they have been. (and after having read over them, it doesn't look like he wants to change the way we do bans at all)
5-7 is not close to consensus (not that we use that anyway) Nor is it 2/3 majority. This was posted less than a week ago and hasn't had enough time.
This is a rage-ban for no other reason than you dislike him. The amount of time you have tried is astounding. You have acted using a contraversial proposal that hasn't even passed and overriden your fellow mod and completely ignored his commentary
If anyone, you deserve to be de-modded at the very least.
Min_Thamee violates the rules of this subreddit and the principles of anarchism. There's a reason he was banned.
The amount of times he's been banned, and someone has coddled him and let him back is astounding. No other user has gotten such leeway
by coddled, you mean voted against the ban right?
Cause you are aware that every time you have tried to ban people, plenty of people are against it, hence why I'm still here. The fact that you are resorting to unilateral behaviour shows that you don't give a shit what people think here and have an agenda to push.
Yes, coddled. Like when you were unbanned, not by vote, but because you whined about it. Or like when you were unbanned on a condition that you still have yet to fulfill, the condition that was voted on btw. You yourself supported the sentiment that if s person was having so many ban threads made, it must mean people really wanted them gone. Now that the shoes on your foot, wear it.
And no shit there was an agenda. It was getting you banned.
[deleted]
Whoa shitlord, you expect anyone to read all those words?
Ok little buddy, i can understand reading a whole paragraph can be a little tough for some people. So i'll make it nice and simple for you:
Enkara is using a proposal that hasn't passed to ban a person who the community has refused to ban multiple times. All because Enkara doesn't like them very much.
Hows that little buddy? didn't hurt your eyes did it?
I think you mean the person that the community has agreed to ban, then let back, then decided to warn, and then continued the behavior they were warned for.
I count 9 in support and 3 oppose, and see 5 days, that's 75% support BTW, so I call that a pass.
Even if not, min kept with the MRA bullshit that he'd been warned about.
Also his unbanning in the first place was a unilateral action.
That's 3 vectors of "legitimacy" by y'all fucked up standards
buddy
Didn't read B)
:3
[deleted]
Absolutely, and here's my OPPOSE for this little temper tantrum from OP.
[deleted]
Highly support.
I'd like to take your word, but if you say someone is a troll and you want my support you need to
describe offending actions making a formal complaint to the community
link to said posts.
I ask this, because before I voice my opinion, I'd like to make sure its an informed one. There is no point in either democratic and/or consesus driven action if everyone is not allowed to review the facts of the matter and make an informed decision
I also say this, because from time to time, I do, get private messages from people asking for help saying they were unfairly banned in either here or r/anarchism. While I don't always side with the people who msg me, Its only fair that offending content be linked. I make it my business to at least review content of the ban, and voice my opinion on said content.(if your really a troll and msg me asking for support, you're likely to get three paragraphs against you btw)
Leaving Fantasy Island
The reason God gave you fingers is so that you could count. I know you'd like it to be that min_thamee was banned "4-5 times in the past year", but that's pure imagination. Here's the reality.
On January 29, 2014 min_thamee was banned unilaterally by emma____ when he had the user name of alookyaw. He returned under the new name of min_dami, and eventually he fessed up and asked to be unbanned. This was approved by a majority. The request was made on July 10, 2014. On October 22, 2014 a ban was proposed, relying on obviously false information, and it was carried.
OK, take out those fingers. "In the last year" alookya/min_dami/min_thamee was banned a grand total of one time. Go back to the textbook, and look it up. Funny thing, one is not equal to 4-5. Even if one were to grant that a 'year' is a 'social construction' and has 14 months rather than 12, two is still not equal to 4-5.
The only way you can reach 4-5 is to include the 3 (I think) times somebody posted on meta complaining that min_dami hadn't been banned.
As to the three accounts matter the first change is explained above. The second was publically announced when min_thamee was under the mistaken impression that changing the account name would lead to a lessening of some of the pressure on him. No such luck. Not a snowball's chance in hell. Still - no sneakiness involved as is plainly shown by the record.
For any readers who don't know the facts of the situation:
A week ago, Enkara tried to ban me, but the ban didn't pass. Many people did want to ban me, but at the same time, Many people opposed the ban, so there was no clear consensus.
A few of the moderators then carefully analyzed who was voting against me being banned and looked through their comment history to find some trumped up reason to ban them. many people on the sub found this to be highly problematic.
Around that time, u/sync0pate and others decided to try and do a reboot of the rules of meta, and there was and is a few proposals and discussion threads about it.
I contributed to (among others) u/sync0pate's thread on "rebooting" making a comment that Deleting posts was sometimes counter productive to education about issues
I also contributed to u/RRRRRK's proposal on trigger warnings supporting the proposal
I also made a post in the main sub where I said that some MRA's have simply fallen in with a bad crowd and we should try different tactical approaches. I made it very clear that I was not supporting or defendign MRA, but advocating for different tactical approaches to smashing hierarchy, going so far as to put the disclaimer "I think most MRAs are misogyinist and I normally wouldn't welcome them, or defend them"
I also opposed a ban of Enkaras, because she did it with out voting and gave a vague explanation. As far as I remember, users here are allowed to oppose bans.
I mean I also posted other things to, but it was these posts that Enkara used as evidence for a new ban. None of them were oppressive in anyway, so it was clear that Enkara was simply hoping to push through a new ban because they don't like my views on moderation here. If we cannot tolerate dissent against tactics on a supposed board of anarchists of all places, then where can we?! I feel like Enkara has been given enough chances at this point to learn and it's simply not working. She is turning Meta into her own personal fiefdom and has now reached the stage where even disagreement with tactics is a ban worthy offense. The meta group will often try to spin any disagreement into "trolling" or oppression, because they still realise that they have to at least pretend there is a valid reason for banning.
Anyway thankfully, u/sync0pate stepped in and realised that the ban had zero legitimacy and deleted it, saying (my emphasis):
This is fucking ridiculous. This is bringing up stuff that has happened over multiple accounts to repeatedly try and hammer through a ban that has been voted against plenty of times.
The small amount of stuff you've referred to that min_thamee has done since the ban is saying that some MRA's have "fallen in with a bad crowd".. I don't see what the problem with that is? It's likely true..
The other things you've brought up are just moderation votes that you disagree with. I'm pulling this, for that reason.
I guess in a way, Enkara was never suited for moderation, and plenty of people realised this during the moderator elections. But i think her behaviour is the result of the broken system here more than anything, and so it's clear that a reboot is needed if this place is to stop being an embarrassment to anarchism. Just this week a guy was doxxed in real life based on spurious accusations and two trolls who were allowed to get away with calling for death threats in the sub. We need to figure this sub out.
TL;DR this is a ban based on the fact that Enkara doesn't like me and my comments on meta which have a different opinion to her. Any accusations against me are spurious and are essentially lies which try to make people support them by accusing me of things I have never done. This is a good example of the state of this sub and shows we need to change.
FYI, despite my comments I'm not 100% sure you shouldn't be banned - I'm just sure you shouldn't be banned for those reasons.
I've unbanned you and removed Enkara as moderator.
Of course, I understand that you don't know the full story, so it might very well be likely that I've done something that you find violates the AOP, but I really doubt it.
Anyway thanks, I'm glad there are others who saw the problems here, one of which is the disenfranchisment of everyone who voted oppose in the previous thread.
All I want to do is contribute towards this place and not be worried that my opinions on moderation and general tactics will lead to me being banned. I don't use slurs and I don't support anyone who is sexist, racist, anti feminist ableist. But I do support the notion that people can change and dialogue is important, I don't believe this is a controversial opinion among anarchists, or maybe it is, I don't know, I'm not american, and american/western thought tends to dominate here.
I think that your reboot idea needs to be stickied in the main sub too. We need to get as many people as possible talking about this. I would suggest a primary "zero" thread, just to get people talking about meta issues, and then follow that up with a thread where each top line comment is a proposal, with a relatively high threshold of consensus and participation.
I don't know, I'm not american, and american/western thought tends to dominate here.
I agree this is part of it, I'm not american either and I've had disagreements with people in the past that definitely centre around that.
OK I didn't want to do this, but I've removed you as a moderator.
I sent you a private message, and a response to your ban thread detailing my issues with it, and hoping we could talk about it and come to a sensible conclusion, and instead you go ahead and make a ban anyway.
I think you should step down.
I made a thread regarding this issue:
http://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/comments/30dxqs/asking_sync0pate_to_step_down/
Why?
the last time something like this happened is when you sided with agnosticnixie in another similar demodding. we need more proactive moderators who feel more empowered, not less. especially with capn_blackbeard stepping down. you have presided over this mess for too long, and anyone who thinks it's better to have min_thamee around than enkara doesn't have my trust.
Enkara is still around, just not as a moderator, and I'm not going to make min_thamee a moderator any time soon.
You've got a very fuzzy memory about what happened last time, FYI, also - if you don't trust nixie, then wouldn't me stepping down be a bad thing?
I'm incredibly unhappy with Min_thamee, and I'm very upset with your actions here. I will address all of your points, but first there is a separate issue at hand of double standards that might be better placed in a public thread then modmail. I've been debating on the best place to bring it up.
There is a double standard for mods that have recently been added in the past few months and senior mods such as yourself. Newer mods have had continual demands to post transparency threads for every single action we take. When we do take actions, even if there is near unanimous support, our actions are decried as "fascistic". However, when more senior mods take unilateral actions it's ignored.
I bring this up, because I see this playing a key part in this issue.
The ban thread was a joke, we all know it.
No, that is not true. The_Mermaid, Vindalfr (a mod you unilaterally demodded without discussion with the community), and myself all supported the new thread.
now unfortunately I've had to remove Enkara also
Another unilateral action without any discussion.
There have been SEVERAL ban threads for them, which have FAILED.
There have also been SEVERAL ban threads that PASSED, and I proposed a warn thread that PASSED and Min_thamee has completely ignored it. This also leaves out the fact that the Min_dami account he used to use is still banned on meta, and he is avoiding that by using this new account.
Since then, I've seen nothing that constitutes a problem.
Well, that's good for you I guess. I completely disagree.
I've seen plenty of people saying "why should we allow MRA apologism?" - well, personally, I don't think we should. I just haven't seen any MRA apologism from min_thamee whatsoever.
Literally, every post in his history is MRA apologism.
I feel like the newer mods have been bending over backwards to accommodate Min_thamee. I've discussed these topics at length with him trying to convey that he needs to step back when these issues come up. He keeps promising to do better, and then gets worse. It's incredibly disruptive, and makes the space unsafe.
I would like to see you write an accountability thread about your actions. I'm so upset over what you have done that I'm shaking. I was so upset alone at your unilateral deletion of the ban thread that I didn't comment there, because I didn't think I could without loosing my cool and creating tons of drama. I think we are past that now.
Enkara needs to be remodded. If she is not, then I will remod her. After that, maybe we can have a discussion about what to do with Min_tamee. A discussion much like what we were having in that ban thread before you removed it.
This is an unacceptable action. His presence here is far more harmful than should be tolerated. He's been banned and let back without a vote on multiple occasions. And he supported multiple ban threads in a short period of time for users he wanted to see gone. Now when it happens to him it's unfair? You should reinstate enkara and step down.
Oh and I almost forgot the vote manipulation.
Edit: if mods like you had left him banned in the first place, this would have been resolved two years ago
I agree, Syncopate needs to step down. This is unacceptable.
EDIT: I made a thread:
http://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/comments/30dxqs/asking_sync0pate_to_step_down/
At this point you're the only person that gets this leeway. Coincidentally, you're the only person without a check to their behavior. It is difficult to actually discus banning people and taking any kind of action with you deciding what is to be done or discussed.
It may be time to consider handing off the top mod spot.
At this point you're the only person that gets this leeway.
The leeway to stop someone from throwing temper tantrums, because this is the only way to interpret min's unilateral ban a week after a failed ban proposal.
Although to be honest, it's not... A ridiculously arbitrary and hopeless action could be done solely for the purpose of framing it's correction as arbitrary... especially if the person who is expected to correct it has publicly disagreed with you on a number of issues.
Obviously, its not "the only way." I don't disagree that this whole situation has gone back to stupid and intractable, I don't even disagree with the idea that some people may be entitled to an apology or three.
I can say that obviously, this isn't a reasonable way to foster consensus.
You're the boss.
Enkara, I reinstated you. Also, I proposed that Syncopate should step down.
http://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/comments/30dxqs/asking_sync0pate_to_step_down/
Well, if you actually want to talk about it, the offer's always open.
we were talking about it, and you deleted that thread.
There was a discussion, you deleted it.
I second the idea that you should step down as a moderator, and I'm thinking of making an official proposal about it.
You have now unilaterally demodded two moderators, without even a discussion. You changed my mod permissions without even informing me of it. And there was absolutely no reason to remove the ban thread Enkara created. If you wanted a sensible discussion, you should have participated in the thread (you know, the one you deleted).
I don't like the actions you are taking as a moderator. It's almost as if the rest of us either do exactly what you want, or we get demodded.
Thanks for resolving this temper tantrum of a ban. I found particularly aggravating the fact that the proposal that was used to justify the ban (which, btw absolutely doesn't, since it's meant to only solidify the already established prerogative of the mods to ban blatant trolls and clear AOP violators) only passed because of the disqualification of votes (including mine) in a completely bullshit-legalistic fashion (citing inactivity in the main sub, even though I am very much active in the meta).
I say gj