Super Mario Bros. X Forums

Also, you've failed to respond to every other post, which I'm going to assume is because you acknowledge they're within reason.

michel wrote:Also, you've failed to respond to every other post, which I'm going to assume is because you acknowledge they're within reason.

That was the worst argument you've presented in this thread.

Joey wrote:

michel wrote:Also, you've failed to respond to every other post, which I'm going to assume is because you acknowledge they're within reason.

That was the worst argument you've presented in this thread.

Sure, feel free to tell me why.

michel wrote:

Joey wrote:

michel wrote:Also, you've failed to respond to every other post, which I'm going to assume is because you acknowledge they're within reason.

That was the worst argument you've presented in this thread.

Sure, feel free to tell me why.

Feel free to assume what you want. At this point I really couldn't be bothered to respond.

GhostHawk wrote: Feel free to assume what you want. At this point I really couldn't be bothered to respond.

ok.

8bitmushroom wrote:First off, using a VPN shouldn't make you look suspicious at all. Just because spammers have taken up using them doesn't mean everybody that uses one should be targeted as a suspicious person.

Except...why else would they use one? With the exception of the school thing (which I understand), the only other reason I can think of is "staying anonymous". That doesn't matter on this forum.

8bitmushroom wrote:Second, I find it fucking hilarious that Joey only seems to target either Pixels or michel,

I'm not targeting anybody. I'm saying that this goes back to me taking this more seriously if Michel and Pixels weren't at the front of it.

8bitmushroom wrote:and then addresses anybody else (people he would give less of a shit to bother mentioning) as their friends.

You're not helping your case by taking something completely insignificant (me saying "Pixels and friends") and pulling stuff out of thin air (Joey doesn't give a shit about mentioning other users). Stop doing that.

8bitmushroom wrote:I have to ask what he has against them so much to feel the need to address them and make them out to be bad people, because quite frankly they aren't. And they aren't doing anything wrong or bad.

I wasn't doing any of that. Stop pulling stuff out of thin air.

8bitmushroom wrote:And why not? Can you give us an actual reason other than just a simple sentence to push it away?

Because it wasn't relevant to the topic. This kinda proves that you're more focused on attacking whatever I post than what's actually going on in the argument.

Joey wrote:

8bitmushroom wrote:First off, using a VPN shouldn't make you look suspicious at all. Just because spammers have taken up using them doesn't mean everybody that uses one should be targeted as a suspicious person.

Except...why else would they use one? With the exception of the school thing (which I understand), the only other reason I can think of is "staying anonymous". That doesn't matter on this forum.

That's not the matter though. The matter is: people want to use VPNs at home because of NSA eavesdropping and other stuff alike. I doubt someone is going to bother turning off their VPNs whenever they want to go to your site just because you want them to.

michel wrote:

Joey wrote:

8bitmushroom wrote:First off, using a VPN shouldn't make you look suspicious at all. Just because spammers have taken up using them doesn't mean everybody that uses one should be targeted as a suspicious person.

Except...why else would they use one? With the exception of the school thing (which I understand), the only other reason I can think of is "staying anonymous". That doesn't matter on this forum.

That's not the matter though. The matter is: people want to use VPNs at home because of NSA eavesdropping and other stuff alike

...VPNs aren't a magic bullet against NSA spying. When you're ready to address the issue at hand about banning proxies, let me know.

GhostHawk wrote: ...VPNs aren't a magic bullet against NSA spying. When you're ready to address the issue at hand about banning proxies, let me know.

Your point is. People believe VPNs are a magic bullet against NSA spying and therefore they use them.

I never mentioned anything about people reengineering their internet browsing method in order to access this site. You're missing my point.

If someone uses a proxy for no reason other than "staying anonymous", that looks suspicious.

Joey wrote:I never mentioned anything about people reengineering their internet browsing method in order to access this site. You're missing my point.

If someone uses a proxy for no reason other than "staying anonymous", that looks suspicious.

....

"staying anonymous" is the desire to remain invisible to NSA and other eavesdroppers

I've said that twice now

Allow me to reiterate: This problem can be entirely solved by simply adding a non-anonymity rule. Whether or not you like it michel, this forum is a private organization; people can be excluded on whatever basis the administration so desires. The only issue I see is that it should be advertised as such rather than banning people after they register an anonymous account.

I would rather just do something like "the staff reserves the right to ban users on the basis of using proxies/anonymity devices".

But that would be redundant, since the staff reserves the right to ban for whatever reason.

I guess you guys just need to trust that we're going to ban people for the right reasons. If a ban was issued by mistake, people are always free to clear it up with us.

Joey wrote:I'm saying that this goes back to me taking this more seriously if Michel and Pixels weren't at the front of it.

Why? Why does me and michel being at the front of it make things any less important? I mean, other users are also arguing their points who I don't talk with that much also.
You can't ignore the boy crying wolf when there's actually a wolf everytime. I mean, I don't remember too many times I've argued over the moderation other than both of the things that were complained about in this topic.

Joey wrote:If you have nothing to hide, you probably shouldn't be using a proxy.

What if you're being harassed by someone who is constantly stalking you on IRC? In this case, I think a proxy/VPN is a convenient way of avoiding possible complications.

But why not tell the staff that someone is harassing you?
Because you probably can't prove that to someone else, and staying anonymous is likely the only choice you have. You may think this is very unlikely to happen, but it actually did happen to other people.

I'm not advocating Sundowner's case, but if he really is forced to use a proxy to connect to the IRC or forum then the staff should allow it. You can't prove he's a spammer, and if he does spam you can simply ban him. Banning him preemptively is reckless and impulsive.

Joey wrote:I guess you guys just need to trust that we're going to ban people for the right reasons. If a ban was issued by mistake, people are always free to clear it up with us.

*!*@escapenet.tk banned by GhostHawk!~GhostHawk@smbx/staff/GhostHawk on Tue Jul 08 20:25:21 2014

Pixels and michel are still banned for whatever reason.

Please resolve this.

I really don't like how you're only targeting Pixels and michel about this, Joey. From my point of view, it looks like you're trying to get away from the complaint at hand just because Michel and Pixels wanted to know why this guy (Sundowner) was banned. Do you really think they're the only ones who give a damn, and want to know why he was banned for such a silly reason? I give a damn. 8bitmushroom gives a damn. I can name a few more names here, but that's not the point.

Sundowner was banned for using a proxy. So what, it's been known to be a spam proxy. Does that mean Sundowner will actually spam? No... Sundowner's reason for using a proxy was because his school has filters, and at this point, I believe him more than your staff.

fake edit: Note I might not have made sense when I wrote this, it's 2 am here and I'm quite tired. If you want anything clarified, ask me in the morning.

It'd be nice if this place could go no-drama for a few days...

I really don't like how you're only targeting Pixels and michel about this, Joey. From my point of view, it looks like you're trying to get away from the complaint at hand just because Michel and Pixels wanted to know why this guy (Sundowner) was banned. Do you really think they're the only ones who give a damn, and want to know why he was banned for such a silly reason? I give a damn. 8bitmushroom gives a damn. I can name a few more names here, but that's not the point.

Joey questions the validity of michel and pixels's argument because from his POV they have no reason to suddenly start caring and point out things that were ignored by others. If someone else posted the complaint maybe he would've taken it into consideration, but he thinks it's odd that pixels and michel are the ones who started this...

8bitmushroom wrote:

Joey wrote:I guess you guys just need to trust that we're going to ban people for the right reasons. If a ban was issued by mistake, people are always free to clear it up with us.

*!*@escapenet.tk banned by GhostHawk!~GhostHawk@smbx/staff/GhostHawk on Tue Jul 08 20:25:21 2014

Pixels and michel are still banned for whatever reason.

Please resolve this.

Michel can still access the channel with his own IP. Who he lets on his server is his business, not the staff's.

I never even gave my opinions on the Sundowner issue outside of understanding it. I was just speaking generally about proxies.

Sundowner should be unbanned, of course, but I'm pretty sure we dealt with that already.

Also, sleepy, I'm not "trying to get away from the complaint at hand". I'm pretty sure we've already solved the issue; I just don't want to give it the time of day when it comes from Michel and Pixels (see my first big post in this thread for more info).