Non Spoiler Forum Brouhaha...Big Question Marks

Are these the rules you refer to, Kadue?

http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=2069617&replies=1

 

Ternian those laws say what isn't a spoiler, not what is.

Sadly what isn't a spoiler isn't cut and dry. In a borderline case it's up to the admin who's there to decide.

The decision was made get over it.

 

Those are the older ones that can be found in the Announcements board, but I've seen the 'alluding' rule else where. That is the whole reason why I haven't posted in the NSA forum, I don't want to slip up and ruin it for someone. But Mr P is right, what are you hoping to get from this?

 

Ternian has the right to defend himself and present his side of the argument. It may be boring to some (mostly those who have already made up his mind against him), but I don't see why he should be told to just be happy after he feels he was treated wrongly.

Also, clarifying what happened here might go a ways to figuring out just what the rules in the NS forum are, or are going to be from this point forward. I don't think they're very clear right now (it seems to me that even if you posted something that's deemed okay by that list that's linked to, someone will complain they've been spoiled...if the rules have been changed, they need to be made clear, and put somewhere people can reference to).

 

Mr.P,

You astound me. You accuse me, you can't provide proof, and continue to abuse me. The reason I don't ask you for an apology is because I don't care what you think - your thoughts don't reflect my actions.

Dark Lady Mara however does affect my actions. She has limited me to where I can post because she is a liar. Therefore, until I can post anywhere and she gives an apology to these actions, I will continue with this.

If YOU don't like - tough. YOU get over it.

Ternian

 

Let me first say that I won't argue with you anymore about the subject of "Is DLM right or Ternian?" unless I really have a point to make. I have made my decision: DLM is in the right. So, there is no use arguing in my position. You and your cronies obviously have already made your decision as well, so there's no use trying to convince you. I respect your opinions, and you have your rights to them - but I've never said that I think that your opinions are the correct ones. In any case, let me get on with what this post was originally going to be about...

I understand that you have the RIGHT to argue your case. However, I think that you won't get anything accomplished with it. The only thing I can think of that you might be trying to get done here is to convince the people who disagree with you that you're right.

However... obviously, those are the people who won't listen to you. I may be one of them, but I'm just pointing out that the great majority of them probably won't even pay heed to any of your arguments. Let me ask you a few questions about your goals here:

1. What is/are your goal(s) here?

2. If you accomplish your goal(s), what will really be accomplished?

3. Do you want to be let back into NS? If yes, why in particular (seeing as you can discuss anything (spoiler or not) in SA, but are constricted in NS)?

4. What do you want with DLM? YOu call her a liar. Do you want her demoted, or do you want what?

5. What will accomplishing the goal(s) you mentioned above do at all?

6. Do you think taht you can accomplish your goal(s)?

7. Are you content with the action of DLM - being unbanned? If you answered "no", explain why.



Please explain to me these things that confound me so.

--Mr. P

 

Mr.P,

1. What is/are your goal(s) here?

- For Dark Lady Mara to post an apology here and in the NSA Forum and that I am allowed to post anywhere.

2. If you accomplish your goal(s), what will really be accomplished?

- The fact that I have an apology for those who bring it up against me later on.

3. Do you want to be let back into NS?

- Yes.

4. What do you want with DLM? YOu call her a liar. Do you want her demoted, or do you want what?

- DLM is a liar. I want an apology from her.

5. What will accomplishing the goal(s) you mentioned above do at all?

- Bring justice to me and a resolution to this matter.

6. Do you think taht you can accomplish your goal(s)?

- I hope so. I have and continue to provide evidence against DLM's comments.

7. Are you content with the action of DLM - being unbanned? If you answered "no", explain why.

- No. This is like being accused of being guilty, then found innocent but having parole placed on top of you anyway. I'm either innocent or guilty - unconditional.

 

That sounds reasonable. But does the fact that DLM hasn't posted here for *how* many pages influence the idea that DLM may not even be giving this thread a glance? Apparently, your qualm is with DLM. So why do you keep arguing with everyone else?

If you want her to give you an apology (which I myself don't think she owes), you've got to talk to her, not everyone else. They can't make her give you an apolgoy. Apparently, DLM isn't going to give you one, if her absence is a good signal that she isn't even looking at this thread.

However, if DLM is here, this is a totally different story.

--Mr. P

 

she isn't looking at any thread apparently she hasn't logged in in two days.

 

Mr.P,

All evidence I have posted here has also been sent to the JC-Admins. She has seen the evidence.

Certain posters are calling me guilty on the basis of DLM's lies. I am trying to remove those lies from their arguments and show them how they are mislead.

Ternian.

 

OK; that's nice. Now let's see about your very coincidental unanswering of a question:

Ternian posted:

-----------------
3. Do you want to be let back into NS?

- Yes.
----------------

However, the original question was:

"Do you want to be let back into NS? If yes, why in particular?"

You forgot to tell *why* you want back in NS. Explain away, Ternian.

--Mr. P

 

Ternian posted:

----------
7. Are you content with the action of DLM - being unbanned? If you answered "no", explain why.

- No. This is like being accused of being guilty, then found innocent but having parole placed on top of you anyway. I'm either innocent or guilty - unconditional.
----------

I think that you're looking at the analogy from the wrong direction. You were banned - found guilty - and then DLM decided that perhaps the sentence (IP banning) was a little harsh, and removed the sentence except for being banned from posting in NS. If that's called being considered innocent and being placed on parole, I don't know.

The way I see it, it's metaphorically being placed on death row, and then the attorney genral deciding to put you on parole. Where-oh-where did DLM declare that you were innocent?

To quote Chyren:

"Post proof or retract."

--Mr. P

 

"- Bring justice to me and a resolution to this matter. "

Define "Justice" and "a resolution to this matter".

--Mr. P

 

Sorry, Mr.P. I must have posted BEFORE your TWO EDITS.

The reason I should be allowed to post in the EPII/III is because there is no reason I shouldn't.

If Dark Lady Mara changed the rules, she should have posted the new rules to me when I pm'd her about the closure of both threads.

This problem could have been solved by DLM sending me the new rules and outlying what parts she now considered spoilers. She didn't.

 

"I have and continue to provide evidence against DLM's comments."

And wehre are these comments of DLM's that you are retorting? I see you retorting others', but I see none of DLM's. So why are you retorting everyone else's?

--Mr. P

 

Since you seem to be on such a law-abiding and lawyer-like roll of finding exceptions:

Ternian posted:

----------
Did the rules change? Maybe.

Was I notified? Have they been rectified as of yet? Have they been posted int he rules thread? Have they been posted in the 'What's a Spoiler Thread?' Have they been changed in any thread?

No. No. No. No. No.

If Dark Lady Mara changed any existing rules, it appears she did not notify anyone.
----------

And tell me, Ternian, since when is ignorance an exception under the law? It's NOT!

--Mr. P

 

Ternian posted:

----------
When V2.0 was closed it was cited that I had posted/alluded to a spoiler in it - not that the thread was inappropriate.

I brought up V1.0 because it was kept open since NO SPOILERS had been posted in it.
It wasn't until I recieved a reply from DLM that V2.0 was closed.
----------

Well, if it was only spoilers in V2.0, then why was it LOCKED? Why couldn't DLM just edit out the spoilers? Obviously, she thought it was inapproriate, and so V1.0 was as well.

I cite her that stuff on the first page fell under the rules of locking - that she wouldn't go muckraking through the back-pages. V2.0 was on the front page; I highly doubt that if V1.0 was on as well, that DLM wouldn't have locked it.

--Mr. p

 

Stop asking him questions faster then he can think up excuses!

It's not fair!

 

"Sorry, Mr.P. I must have posted BEFORE your TWO EDITS."

Sorry here as well. There were just somethings that I noticed that I really should have put in and therefore EDiTED it. That's what the EDIT function is for, no?

"The reason I should be allowed to post in the EPII/III is because there is no reason I shouldn't."

OK. That makes sense... why do you want to be let in? Do you want to post there? Do you want to make another of these "non-spoiler" report threads of yours? Explain!

----------
If Dark Lady Mara changed the rules, she should have posted the new rules to me when I pm'd her about the closure of both threads.

This problem could have been solved by DLM sending me the new rules and outlying what parts she now considered spoilers. She didn't.
----------

Like I said, ignorance is no excuse under the law. Do you think that DLM could send a PM to every member of this site so that they should know the new rules? It would take FOREVER? SO why do you think you should get special treatment?

--Mr. P

 

Mr.P,

1) If you happen to read this entire thread you will find DLM's statement to the Admins about me. You will also find every Pm she sent me that contradicts what she posted. You will also find every post of mine in the V1.0 proven to be non-spoiler material. Did you mention ignorance?


2) Can you please post a link to these so-called 'new rules?' Kadue refered to them but could not find them. Can you?

 

"1) If you happen to read this entire thread you will find DLM's statement to the Admins about me. You will also find every Pm she sent me that contradicts what she posted. You will also find every post of mine in the V1.0 proven to be non-spoiler material. Did you mention ignorance?"

As a matter of fact, I did read the whole thread. I've been following it all along. And all the PMs I've seen have been posted by YOU - you could be witholding one. We need cleo to show us all of them or to say that you've posted them all. And does it matter whether or not V1.0 had spoilers? DLM thought it was inapproriate, and so closed it. BIG DEAL.

"2) Can you please post a link to these so-called 'new rules?' Kadue refered to them but could not find them. Can you?"

Since when does DLM have to tell people explicitly, make up a list of rules? She did it b/c it was hard to keep track of. But the fact of the matter is, when she was making those up, she expressed feelings to the point that she was afriad that if she did it (which she did) there would be those - LIKE YOURSLEF - who would find exceptions between every letter of the law. She simply tightened up. The fact was that she never changed her rules. People weren't following her rules, and she just decided to enforce them. Since when does taht need a totally new set of rules?

--Mr. P

 

I think also the fact that Ternian is choosing to reply to some things and not some others is a case-in-point - he has conceded those points, and therefore I have won this debate. But let's not debate whether I've won or not yet, k?

--Mr. P

 

Why do you want to be let in?

- Because there are some good topics in there to discuss.

Do you want to post there?

- Of course. There isn't a reason for me not to.

Do you want to make another of these "non-spoiler" report threads of yours? Explain!

- Okay this is the question DLM should have asked me and herself. I believe the Non-Spoiler report thread should stay and I would be willing to start another one. It belongs in the NSA.

I understand that you and Mace Windy don't like this thread because even though what we discuss is considered Non-Spoiler by the rules, it is still a little too spoilerish in your books.

However, the correct action over this type of thread is already underway which is a discussion about how it should be handled. This is what should have been done to start off with.

 

"- Because there are some good topics in there to discuss."

But can't you discuss them in SA? Why not?

"- Of course. There isn't a reason for me not to."

Why isn't SA good enough for you? I'm sure that you spend plenty of time there - I won't look at your recent-posts for fearing being spoiled - and so why do you feel the need to frequent NS as well? Are there peopple there that you're friends with and want to discuss the upcoming movies with who won't come into SA b/c they're unspoiled?

"- Okay this is the question DLM should have asked me and herself."

OK. SO we're finally making progress! And what aobut all those other points I made... are you going to have rebuttals for those as welL?

"I believe the Non-Spoiler report thread should stay and I would be willing to start another one. It belongs in the NSA."

But it is against NS rules according to DLM.

"I understand that you and Mace Windy don't like this thread because even though what we discuss is considered Non-Spoiler by the rules, it is still a little too spoilerish in your books."

Well, it is also according to DLM's books. And she's the one who matters.

"However, the correct action over this type of thread is already underway which is a discussion about how it should be handled. This is what should have been done to start off with."

So what do you suggest? Would you be opposed to having the thread be in misc and patrolled by fellow SA citizens?

--Mr. P

 

"DLM thought it was inapproriate, and so closed it. BIG DEAL. "

- But didn't happen to tell anyone...


"2) Can you please post a link to these so-called 'new rules?' Kadue refered to them but could not find them. Can you?"

- Point still open, Mr.P...