Ms. Tytania banned, but...? (93)

I'm usually a bitch to people because they have hurt me in someway. My play partner is not on ic what would be interesting to know is PC banned as he named your friend in a weblog from a private memo.

@admin has made a decision and to back track now he would have to do with the likes of other banned ICers which you have already claimed was downright nasty and yet some of us don't think was.

I didn't name you. I didn't put a link to your blog. I didn't quote you. I didn't use information from a private memo.

You took it upon yourself to draw attention to it being you I referred to.

There are many diet-like dom/sub blogs here, not just yours.

Vote for the repeal of the Extreme Pornography Laws
http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/wp/?page_id=768
Perverted Pederast Puppetmistress Pimp Pandering to the Patriarchy... apparently

yes there you are i chose to out myself on your weblog, your friend chose to out herself to admin.

Can you see now why admin took the action?

As i asked which no one seemed to answer was the person who decided to publish her memo banned or put on the naughty step.

Well not really

If he felt, on reflection, that he had made an incorrect decision in a particular case he could reverse it without it having an impact on other bans

To be clear. I am talking generally here and not commenting on any specific instance

Yes they could, and it will be interesting to see if they do it.

After they have defended their postition several times

In the interest of full disclosure:

The 'target' of this horrific campaign of bullying was actually Admin himself. Just in case anyone was wondering why she's the only person to be banned for moderately rude comments.

MsT also considers herself a working class northerner from an industrial region, a fact that any level-headed Admin might easily have construed from the words he himself quotes (in bold):

I also don't see any personally-aimed language there- looks quite broad to me.

Nonetheless, pretty harsh words, there. That 'bullying' took place a year ago, so it must have left some serious mental scars inside that poor yellow head. Anyway, even if it was meant as a joke, it's not excusable as a joke, because bullies also use jokes:

Ergo, joking = bullying. Apparently.

So that's why he doesn't like her. But what was the final straw? Well, apparently it was MsT's statement that she knew she was being bitchy, and that she intended to keep on being bitchy:

Since we're quoting private memos here, I presume it's okay for me to do the same? Otherwise it seems a little one-sided.

If you have a root around in Admin's private memos, you'll find that the exchange goes a little more like this:

So, she didn't say she would keep being bitchy, just that she would stay, to annoy him. Hmm...

So he's distorted her words to fit his purpose, it would seem.

I remember an old buddy of mine getting his panties in a twist over someone doing something similar, earlier in this very thread:

Hmm... it just really feels like the decision to ban Ms_Tytania was made first and then the evidence to support it was garnered after the fact. like a private agenda. Very similar to the Iraq war, actually. I'm not saying there's a link, but you've got to admit, he does bear a passing resemblance to Gordon Brown.

Anyway, this is a private site. Don't be surprised if the owner does what he wants with it. She got kicked off because he wanted to kick her off, and the same thing will probably happen to me in a moment.

If it was my site, I'd probably kick tons of people off it if they annoyed me or bullied me mercilessly with comparisons to an eccentric northern steeplejack.

But I hope that I would at least have the balls to admit that was what I was doing, and not spin it so it looked like I'm protecting someone else.

www.somethingson.com Follow my nonsense at www.twitter.com/somethingson

Whereas what happens on IC is that people are allowed to carry on being "bitchy" as she admitted (you didn't quote that comment of hers) until they actually break part of the AUP, as she did with the YKINOK comments. That's where they've crossed the line. It's exactly the same principle as was followed with Delphian and Platinum_Man.

Admin

Remember: it's only a website
Please read this page before contacting the Admin team - thanks!

2. But, from what I've read, there are loads of people posting on IC for the sole purpose of being abusive to others and with apparently no intention of reforming their behaviour.

3. I do not want to be held guilty by association, for simply sharing a film I helped produce.

4. I am a genuine working-class person.

5. Vote for for the AV/STV tomorrow!

"Nothing is true: everything is permitted."

"Nothing is true: everything is permitted."

You mean the video that has now been banned because someone reported it?

"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness

Edited 4 May 11, 5:25 PM by Lady_Anna_Bradford