![]() |
2013-01-30
, 09:24
|
Moderator |
Posts: 6,215 |
Thanked: 6,400 times |
Joined on Nov 2011
|
#2
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to thedead1440 For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 10:17
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#3
|
You wanted evidence against Estel_? I would say you followed almost 0 of the drama that was on-going before his ban to ask for such.
From what I read on mailing lists too, he didn't delete his posts but the mods deleted his extremely insulting and rude posts (along with one of mine and one from woody too which were posted as retorts to him).
His first ban if you followed it was just for a few days (3?) known as a cooling-off ban to calm him down after all the FUD he was spreading here.
However, instead of taking the ban and then coming back what he did was to create another account called letse and posted using it which is clearly against Forum Rules. He admitted to creating this account FYI. This extended his ban period from 3 days (I can't remember exact figure) to a month. After he was given this ban he claimed that he created this second account to speak to Board of Directors to complain against the mod/admin who banned him. Does it mean that just because he's an old member here and knew someone in the BoD he can circumvent his ban this way while the rest of us if banned should wait for the ban to expire? Even if you don't see anything wrong in his FUD surely his feeling of entitlement was wrong.
After this, another account was again created and seemed like Estel again at which point the mods did the necessary checks and banned the other account without increasing Estel's ban period again and he was told on the mailing list by several people not from Council to think what he was actually speaking about.
IMO, he should have been given infraction points much earlier but he was allowed to spread FUD for quite a long period of time before the mods felt he had gone over-board.
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 10:26
|
Moderator |
Posts: 6,215 |
Thanked: 6,400 times |
Joined on Nov 2011
|
#4
|
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 11:07
|
|
Posts: 694 |
Thanked: 619 times |
Joined on Nov 2011
|
#5
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Akkumaru For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 11:10
|
Posts: 107 |
Thanked: 173 times |
Joined on Feb 2011
|
#6
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to pierrem For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 11:39
|
|
Posts: 2,222 |
Thanked: 12,651 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ SOL 3
|
#7
|
all/some previous posters are liars and talking BS.
I don't care about this topic at all, but I'm the one who knows what's been the correct facts, just I won't elaborate on it.
All those who dare to answer to this post are idiots either, I declare the thread closed.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to joerg_rw For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 12:24
|
Posts: 3,328 |
Thanked: 4,476 times |
Joined on May 2011
@ Poland
|
#8
|
You wanted evidence against Estel_? I would say you followed almost 0 of the drama that was on-going before his ban to ask for such.
From what I read on mailing lists too, he didn't delete his posts but the mods deleted his extremely insulting and rude posts (along with one of mine and one from woody too which were posted as retorts to him).
His first ban if you followed it was just for a few days (3?) known as a cooling-off ban to calm him down after all the FUD he was spreading here.
However, instead of taking the ban and then coming back what he did was to create another account called letse and posted using it which is clearly against Forum Rules. He admitted to creating this account FYI. This extended his ban period from 3 days (I can't remember exact figure) to a month. After he was given this ban he claimed that he created this second account to speak to Board of Directors to complain against the mod/admin who banned him. Does it mean that just because he's an old member here and knew someone in the BoD he can circumvent his ban this way while the rest of us if banned should wait for the ban to expire? Even if you don't see anything wrong in his FUD surely his feeling of entitlement was wrong.
After this, another account was again created and seemed like Estel again at which point the mods did the necessary checks and banned the other account without increasing Estel's ban period again and he was told on the mailing list by several people not from Council to think what he was actually speaking about.
IMO, he should have been given infraction points much earlier but he was allowed to spread FUD for quite a long period of time before the mods felt he had gone over-board.
I'm inclined to suggest a forum rule addendum, declaring any post following the above exposed scheme of
as a sufficient reason for a ban.all/some previous posters are liars and talking BS.
I don't care about this topic at all, but I'm the one who knows what's been the correct facts, just I won't elaborate on it.
All those who dare to answer to this post are idiots either, I declare the thread closed.
>:-(
/j
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to marmistrz For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 15:04
|
Posts: 1,048 |
Thanked: 1,127 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Amsterdam
|
#9
|
![]() |
2013-01-30
, 15:45
|
Posts: 3,328 |
Thanked: 4,476 times |
Joined on May 2011
@ Poland
|
#10
|
I have no clue what the fight is about, but there are a couple of things I'd like to comment on:
1. This is a private forum. Anyone wishing to be a member agrees to the Terms of Use before signing up. There is no such thing as illegitimacy in the sense that you are using it here.
![]() |
Tags |
banning, infractions, moderating |
|
Having seen the storm that has been on tmo (esp. mailing list) about Estel aka Piotr Jawidzyk, I think it's time for the things to change. What really concerns me
1. No evidence stored. - I think that banning Estel was against the law - when I asked for concrete examples of rules being broken by Estel, I received a vague claim: "Look at any of his posts". Later, the council people claimed that Estel is said to have deleted the posts. Nevertheless, the evidence should be stored. Either the post should be frozen, not to be deleted or screenshot. Without evidence being stored you can really ban anyone..
2. Banning because of IP. One maemo.org member has been banned because he had similar IP to Estel's. Similarly, people living in Poland cannot use turbobit as it has oversensitive more-than-one-download-at-a-time checks - even though they don't download anything, they are denied the download
3. There should be a way to appeal about the ban - if one thinks he's not guilty.
These "bugs" may lead to abuses in the future.
If you want to support my work, you can donate by PayPal or Flattr
Projects no longer actively developed: here
Last edited by marmistrz; 2013-01-30 at 12:25.