Why was this member banned?

Post Reply New Topic

Why was TheZach banned?

I must have missed something. What did he do?

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp1060252.html&highlight=#1060252

It looks like a bunch of non-diagnosed people here were out to make trouble for him. They should be ashamed of their behaviour; though I'm not condoning that of TheZach, or criticising Alex.

That's an interesting way of looking at it.

Indeed, my talents know no bounds!

Seriously, now, my post above is not an attack against non-diagnosed people, just criticism of some non-diagnosed people. Actually, I notice you're not diagnosed, and as far as I'm aware you generally seem to conduct yourself with integrity.

Most people will probably click the link and see for themselves, but for those that don't wish to do so, it seems to me that he was banned for writing numerous short, insulting statements about self-diagnosed people without entering into a debate. Things like "If I had my way they should all be locked in a 6 x 11 cell the rest of their lives", "just sick of the posers and abusers of the system", "So you took an online test, why dont you take another one and find out what Jedi you are", etc.

Also, the sheer volume of these was probably taken into account - this went on for about 9 pages.

I thought I'd post this because the context of the above post makes it seems like he was banned for having a reasonable yet unpopular position in a debate, rather than for simply being insulting.

I was censored because my beliefs did not conform with the majority thus hurting alex's bottom line. This is a buisness not an online community.

Its funny how people are attacked for being Christians and no one does anything because they are the minority.

We don't all have the ability to communicate in a socially-acceptable manner, you know. Moreover, people often find another's opinion insulting no matter how it's dressed-up to make it more palatable. Should that prevent someone expressing an opinion? Beneath the inappropriate-delivery of the opinions of the person in question was a reasonable concern; a concern I share. However, I'm not criticising Alex for banning him as I don't have all the facts. I would tentatively suggest, though, that if the non-diagnosed didn't kick-up such a fuss when they're legitimately criticised then perhaps this wouldn't have occured.

Bingo

So you answer a post by taking my quotes out of context, thats pretty hipocritical of you, or did Alex help you with that.

We don't like to make a practice out of publicly discussing the details of bannings, but I do want to address your concerns, ascan, because I think you've brought up an important point that interests many members. It's an issue that the moderators grapple with every time there is a behavior-related complaint. Seeing as this is a support community for those whose lives are affected by AS and related symptoms and these conditions heavily impact social aptitude, how do the moderators respond when the symptoms of those conditions impact a member's ability to "play well with others"?

This is how I see it:

The old saying "you can't please everyone" applies here. Not only can we not please everyone, we also cannot help or accomodate everyone.

Our first priority is to keep the community running smoothly for those who are using it for legitimately and without abuse, for its intended purpose. We also have other goals, such as helping those with social difficulties find a way to interact successfully on the boards. But if we are to be a supportive community as a whole, we cannot (and should not) focus on accomodating belligerent members at the expense of members who are exercising great effort to observe the rules. AS impacts an individual's social abilities but it does not force a person to flout warnings or deliberately insult others--those are choices.

Generally the difference between the rule-breakers who are banned and those who are not (and the reason nobody with good intentions needs to worry about being banned), is that those who are banned have refused to attempt to comply. We do not enjoy banning people, nor is anyone banned lightly, and it is always our hope that members who are warned will end up being able to stay.

In this particular case, the member was given a great many opportunities over the course of several days to start making an effort to correct the offensive behavior, even to the point of being offered help in thinking of alternative approaches to communicating his views. It was his decision not to try. He was absolutely not banned for his stance on the issue at hand, but rather the blatant and repeated refusal to attempt to change his delivery by ceasing to include insults.

WHAT?! he was being an ignorant jerk, calling all undiagnosed people "a**sholes" and "idiots" he was very insulting, and not all the people who replied, including myself were undiagnosed. He was out to get undiagnosed people. he brought it up, and started insulting them. NOT the other way around.

Go away. if you are coming back to cause trouble after being banned then DON'T!

Not from what I read, but if it makes you happy you can think that.