1Adam12 is gone

[Keith]

I received an e-mail from 1Adam12, and he requested his account be closed. He is involved with several projects at the police department, and feels that he will not have the time to participate on this forum any longer.

Yes, he was very opinionated, and sometimes rather blunt, but that was his mannerism, and he had the right to his opinion, whether popular or unpopular.

I posted this, because very seldom do we have somebody cancel their account, and I felt other forum members needed to know what happened.

[Lauri101]

That's a shame.
I often disagreed with his opinions, however, I found him to be a nice young man with a good head on his shoulders.

Thanks for letting us know, Keith!

[bandnerd]

Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.

I can't say I'm sorry to see him leave. If he feels too busy, then that's fine, hope everything goes well for him but I won't miss him, either.

[Midtowner]

I received an e-mail from 1Adam12, and he requested his account be closed. He is involved with several projects at the police department, and feels that he will not have the time to participate on this forum any longer.

Yes, he was very opinionated, and sometimes rather blunt, but that was his mannerism, and he had the right to his opinion, whether popular or unpopular.

I posted this, because very seldom do we have somebody cancel their account, and I felt other forum members needed to know what happened.

Just so we're clear -- the TOS is very specific on attacking "members" -- now that Adam is no longer a "member," he's open season? Need some clarification before I continue my postings in this thread...

[Keith]

Just so we're clear -- the TOS is very specific on attacking "members" -- now that Adam is no longer a "member," he's open season? Need some clarification before I continue my postings in this thread...

Nobody is "open season." We aren't going to turn this into a bashing thread towards a former member.

"We take the "Be Polite" rule very seriously! We do not tolerate any rudeness. Personal attacks directed against other members of this forum will not be tolerated. Any member who is intentionally unpleasant or disruptive may be banned without warning."

So, if you are unpleasant or disruptive, you can be banned without warning. So, that should answer your question.

[bandnerd]

I'm pretty sure that was supposed to be a joke, Keith.

Besides, was 1Adam12 not rude to me? When he was bashing my family and its choices?

[Midtowner]

Nobody is "open season." We aren't going to turn this into a bashing thread towards a former member.

"We take the "Be Polite" rule very seriously! We do not tolerate any rudeness. Personal attacks directed against other members of this forum will not be tolerated. Any member who is intentionally unpleasant or disruptive may be banned without warning."

So, if you are unpleasant or disruptive, you can be banned without warning. So, that should answer your question.

The TOS says (and I quote)

Do not post personal attacks or engage in name-calling against other members of this discussion board. (emphasis added)

So Adam is no longer a "member", and thus, it would seem that he TOS doesn't apply. The TOS could say "any other person," and it wouldn't have been hard for it to say that. Of course, it doesn't say that.

At any rate, Adam was intentionally unpleasant to several people on here -- not a personal attack, just a fact. Why was he not banned?

Here's the applicable part of the TOS you quoted:

We take the "Be Polite" rule very seriously! We do not tolerate any rudeness. Personal attacks directed against other members of this forum will not be tolerated. Any member who is intentionally unpleasant or disruptive may be banned without warning.

Again, I fail to see where it talks about non-members? You're threatening to enforce a part of the TOS that just isn't there.

And yeah, I'm mostly kidding, but I will point out that non-members are not covered by the TOS in its present form according to any reasonable interpretation. The word "members" is pretty derned precise.

[Keith]

The TOS says (and I quote)



So Adam is no longer a "member", and thus, it would seem that he TOS doesn't apply. The TOS could say "any other person," and it wouldn't have been hard for it to say that. Of course, it doesn't say that.

At any rate, Adam was intentionally unpleasant to several people on here -- not a personal attack, just a fact. Why was he not banned?

Here's the applicable part of the TOS you quoted:


Again, I fail to see where it talks about non-members? You're threatening to enforce a part of the TOS that just isn't there.

And yeah, I'm mostly kidding, but I will point out that non-members are not covered by the TOS in its present form according to any reasonable interpretation. The word "members" is pretty derned precise.

All I did was explain that 1Adam12 cancelled his account. I really didn't expect nitpicking in this thread. If everybody was civil, polite, and respectful, there would not be so many questions.

"Any member who is intentionally unpleasant or disruptive may be banned without warning."

That's pretty cut and dry to me. No technicalities here.

Yes, he was unpleasant to some, but others were unpleasant to him also. If we banned every unpleasant person on this forum, we would lose some members. Everything is a case by case situation. We don't like to ban, and he was warned a couple of times. You see, there are things that go on behind the scenes that many do not know of. Some may feel that the moderators are not dealing with certain situations, but we are....off the forum, by PM or e-mail. The moderators decide together.

Now, as I have repeated over and over again, if you have an issue with a decision of the administration, please send one of us a PM. We will not deal with these issues on the forum.

[Patrick]

Truth be told, 1Adam12 actually is spending more time with Brian Bates on Robinson Ave. LOL!