Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Policy & Help >

Banning Wolfangel

15:11 / 19.03.08

Here's a pointless banning thread for y'all, about Wolfangel (Now Unconditional Love) who after I deleted a load of stuff had a massive and groundless flame at Mordant. Caused by his usual emotional splurging, this latest saga is a recurring theme in the Temple, and I've had enough.
Here's the thread where he calls hir non-human and such-
http://www.barbelith.com/topic/27022#post760753

and here's a couple of quotes to support my banning proposal-

"You are no longer human, you have become the words of your politics and you wear them as a disguise, immersed in bullshit so you do not have to deal with reality which does not fit into any political or religious vision what so ever."

"Advertently or Inadvertently its you that support the Abuse.
Only Abusers Silence or try to delete the truth of abuse from its victims. (Even if they be white heterosexual males)"

Mordant is human of course, and doesn't support abuse in any way of course, I can't be on a board where it's OK to fling shit like that and get away with it. I've started this thread for form's sake but practically speaking it's the last straw for me and I'll be leaving, maybe in a blaze of spam and trolling since nobody can stop me or even slow me down.
I'm angry and sad, not least because *I* was the one who deleted the crap and the the bile gets aimed at, oh, THE MOST COMPASSIONATE SUPPORTER OF THE TROLL. I won't speculate why but for some reason Wolfangel didn't engage with me at all (HELLO, IF YOU'RE READING THIS I AM GLAD, YOU ARE SPREADING HATRED AND INTOLERANCE) and went for MC, giving hir another reason to bail and impoverish Barbelith even further.

Mordant
(prev. This is *my* hole.)

15:22 / 19.03.08

(Now watch as the usual drama llamas arrive to enjoy the show...)

Woah, woah, woah. Okay, first of all: there might or might not be a case for banning Wolfangel, but I'd like to see a bit more tact and compassion. I'm very hurt and angry right now too, but I'd like to remind everyone that we're not dealing with a troll of the usual variety here but with a deeply troubled and unwell individual whose responsibility is diminished and who is very vulnerable to hostility. In fact I think that a more compelling argument for a ban would be that Barbelith isn't very good for Wolfangel, as his dysfunctional relationship with the Temple forum would appear to demonstrate.

That's my two-ha'p'orth. Beyond the above I am not going to be participating in this or anymore ban discussions unless they involve me directly. I have had enough of Barbelith, enough of being the Wicked Witch of the West, and I've really had enough of six-page banning threads.

15:40 / 19.03.08

In fact I think that a more compelling argument for a ban would be that Barbelith isn't very good for Wolfangel, as his dysfunctional relationship with the Temple forum would appear to demonstrate.

I'm voting for the ban on exactly those grounds. This has been a long time in the making, and I think it's pretty obvious that everyone's patience is worn thin, and that WA's interactions here just get worse. I hope that Wolfangel can take the energy he's expended here over the years and put it to a more constructive use somewhere else.

Not that there's any functionality to back any of this talk up, of course, but I'll push the button and assume that a red light will blink somewhere. And I'll also assume that that blinking red light will be ignored, just as every other functional, code-based concern has been ignored since we were handed this faulty, laughable "power". Please do not ask me to prove the existence of the blinking red light, because I can't.

For myself, I'm not ready to throw the towel in on the 'lith just yet, but I'm having a bit of a time putting in to words exactly why. So, whatever. I'm here, and I expect I'll see "Unconditional Love" in about three weeks.

I don't imagine I'll have much more to say on this topic.

West Baltimore Hausing Project

15:48 / 19.03.08

Can we just lock this thread? It's not going to lead to a banning, and if Wolfangel happens to return to Barbelith, it's not going to change the way he expresses himself.

16:33 / 19.03.08

If you can find enough Policy mods feel free.

17:34 / 19.03.08

The moderation action currently has three people agreeing. That leaves just two to make it work, so I take it that Haus is referring to the actual banning being a manual process that needs Tom to actually do the removing. Is this correct: we secure the necessary agreement, and then nothing happens?

Mordant
(prev. This is *my* hole.)

17:38 / 19.03.08

Stoatie's power level is >9000

17:44 / 19.03.08

Basically, banning someone on Barbelith right now is to actual banning as pointing your finger at someone and saying "pow" is to shooting them.

17:51 / 19.03.08

And we're not even keeping it secret any more.

Sigh.

A ban isn't the end of the world on any board, it's just something that helps people cool down (in most cases) or get bored and wander off or whatever.

So I'm one of the agrees, at this point.

(Selfishly, also, just to see if anything does, in fact, happen, against all odds. I, too, was expected more of a "KATHOOM" from Haus' head.)

XK

18:16 / 19.03.08

Woah, woah, woah. Okay, first of all: there might or might not be a case for banning Wolfangel, but I'd like to see a bit more tact and compassion. I'm very hurt and angry right now too, but I'd like to remind everyone that we're not dealing with a troll of the usual variety here but with a deeply troubled and unwell individual whose responsibility is diminished and who is very vulnerable to hostility.

Compassion = yes more please always. Diminished responsibility? Not being hostile to other posters is sort of the base line requirement for not being a troll. I'm willing and I think most online communities are willing to interact with a huge range of levels of functionality and ability to engage but if someone cannot maintain that standard there's no point to engaging with them. WA's offtopic habits are in a different category for me than the hostility directed at other members of the board. I completely support a varied range of posting styles and exchanges but not conflict driven attacks.

West Baltimore Hausing Project

18:38 / 19.03.08

Actually, a troll is somebody who seeks to generate attention and derail discussions for amusement or some other nefarious purpose. Wolfangel is at best a de facto troll, as far as I can tell - like 33 or Paranoidwriter, somebody whose personal problems make it impossible for them to interact profitably in a group environment like this.

Notwithstanding, I'm sort of thinking that the idea that people are voting to ban an emotionally disturbed abuse survivor out of curiosity about what the ban button does might offer a sunnier outlook on the brokenness of the ban function, so some good has already come from this mess.

Mordant
(prev. This is *my* hole.)

18:41 / 19.03.08

the idea that people are voting to ban an emotionally disturbed abuse survivor out of curiosity about what the ban button does

Yeah, that's quite a nasty idea really. Where did you get it?

Mordant
(prev. This is *my* hole.)

18:43 / 19.03.08

Oh God what am I doing why am I posting to this fucking thread anyhow. It's a Spring day outside.

West Baltimore Hausing Project

18:45 / 19.03.08

Mordant - well, from here:

Selfishly, also, just to see if anything does, in fact, happen, against all odds.

Mordant
(prev. This is *my* hole.)

18:47 / 19.03.08

Sorry. I do apologise, I missed that or didn't process it properly.

Anyhow, Spring.

20:06 / 19.03.08

DELETE DELETE DELETE! Delete this thread it's pointless and sorrow making. I'm going home, sorry everyone for mentioning banning, let's just delete wolfangel's bile with compassion as the kindest action.

I'll get my coat.

21:26 / 19.03.08

Well, it's not so much because I want to see what will happen as I'd like to see what should happen.

In most other places, where standards are lower and so on, a person can get banned for not terribly much at all, but can also return after a while or else turn up in a parallel/related space elsewhere. I'm dealing with a similar case elsewhere and there's a lot discussion behind the scenes about the same kinds of things discussed here, only much more briefly and painlessly in part because things do things.

I want this technology to work.

Our Lady Drinks Your Milkshake

23:54 / 19.03.08

Well, if wishing fixed anything then Torchwood and David Caruso wouldn't both be a week-after-week disappointment.

01:53 / 20.03.08

For reference I have voted to ban.

Now I am going back outside to look at the daffodils.

*

08:10 / 20.03.08

Can I come too, Lula?

Mordant
(prev. This is *my* hole.)

15:06 / 20.03.08

Not that it makes a smidgen of material difference to anything but I'm abstaining from the ban vote.

A Hu-Li
(prev. Darrell Rivers)

19:00 / 20.03.08

This thread is hateful.

Moderators can't ban anyone, Tom isn't around to ban anyone but you are all discussing banning a person who is quite clearly having a far worse time than anyone who is trying to ban him. Most of you are rational, thinking, stable adults, exercise your brains and stop it. He is not a troll, he is going through a bad patch and if you were going to ban it would need to be clean and quick not this protracted, theoretical punishment.

20:29 / 20.03.08

I think a more ideal response than a ban would be a temporary suspension in cases like this so the person can in fact take some time to cool off. But lacking that, a ban means they go off to sulk for awhile and then likely creep back on under a new suit so it has about the same effect anyway. Having made that realization, I throw in an approve vote and go off to fire up my motorcycle to get lunch somewhere far away from here.

West Baltimore Hausing Project

21:28 / 20.03.08

This is what it is to moderate the Temple. Oy.

West Baltimore Hausing Project

21:33 / 20.03.08

Anyway, I've moved to delete this thread. It's doing nobody any good.

A Hu-Li
(prev. Darrell Rivers)

12:07 / 21.03.08

Are people who read the Temple all engaging in some kind of mass nervous breakdown?