What it takes to get banned from FR? (Vanity)

None | Today | CSM

[CSM]

Given the rumors and speculation regarding banning of individuals from FR, I took the suggestion of another poster to start a thread around the topic. I have gone back and reread the rules and the specific speculation of posting to one type of thread or posting one type of article only is not called out as against the rules.

So, outside of the rules, what constitutes being banned or suspended from posting on FR?

[John Beresford Tipton]

"Wouldn't the really offensive posts have already been removed by the mods?"

Even were that so, it would not effect Ladydoc's alleged numerous postings to whomever, which she could easily find, were she not [note use of subjunctive] full of [word redacted].

[jmc813]

Of course, but judging by his pro-Catholic stance in every post in my link, do you realistically think he did a 180 on certain posts and became a Catholic-basher?

[CWOJackson]

Oops...looks like "true advocate" had an accident.

[tacticalogic]

Disdain for the site, or at least the posting guidelines doesn't really seem to be a consistent measure of probability of being banned.

[CWOJackson]

Coming back to the site once or twice a day with a new assumed name however might be reason for staying banned.

[tacticalogic]

Might be. Then again, it might not.

[LadyDoc]

You told me to "put up or shut up".

Try scanning these posts:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/844487/posts

anti semitism. Even Catspaw told him off.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/735663/posts

Leroy's post said: "I'm still not convinced that the Israelis didn't have something to do with 9/11. And a country 'actively seeking peace' doesn't slaughter whole villages of civilians.Of course, it would never be that part of Islam's problem with the U.S. is their continued, blind, un-failing & un-flagging support for Israel...

Again, anti semetic to the point of bigotry.

Jim Rob keeps bigots off of FR...

Sorry I couldn't answer your "flames" right away, but some of us have to work for a living....

And John: YOU OWE ME AN APOLOGY

[jmc813]

The poster in question on this thread is MrLeroy, not Le-Roy.

[John Beresford Tipton]

"John: YOU OWE ME AN APOLOGY"

Nonsense, you finally dredged up posts by a wholly different person, someone other than Mr.Leroy. And more to the point, you had not really confused that person with Mr. Leroy because nowhere in this other person's postings is there any thing about Catholics, nor are there any of those angry interchabges you allege happened between him and you.

I find it too interesting to let pass that you attacked a person because you did not think he was paying enough respect to your religion, even finding fault that he might not have recognized some obscure quotation by St. Peter, while all the while you were content to ignore the Boss's words:
"THOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR"

[CWOJackson]

We can only hope. I know he would be missed...by a hand full of his associates. Given the underwhelming show of support for him on this thread...not by many.

[tacticalogic]

Considering the overwhelming numbers who have expressed their relief he's gone, I don't expect he'll be back. </smarmy>

[CWOJackson]

Well, at least not using his real name. He does seem to have a desparate penchant for coming back under new aliases.

[tacticalogic]

He does seem to be tenacious.

[LadyDoc]

really? Then why was he banned?

I am sorry I got the wrong Leroy, but only a few posts were on the search engine and that is all I found...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1014534/posts

people are banned from FR for being uncivil, for racism, and for being trolls...i.e. liberals trying to discredit FR by posting extremism.. .

[tacticalogic]

really? Then why was he banned?

That's the point of the thread - to try and find out.

I am sorry I got the wrong Leroy, but only a few posts were on the search engine and that is all I found...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1014534/posts

people are banned from FR for being uncivil, for racism, and for being trolls...i.e. liberals trying to discredit FR by posting extremism.. .

Yes, they are, and if that's the case here, the archives should be rife with evidence.

[Huck]

then they would crush every Anna Kournikova thread

Here's a low bandwidth sample

[Gianni]

Here's a low bandwidth sample

Well, if we can't get MrLeroy back, how about we demand more Anna!

[Crispy]

"he got so hateful in one post that I quoted the bible from Peter saying that you should explain plainly and clearly what you believe, and he didn't even recognize the quote."

OH, so he is bad because he cannot recognize a quote out of the bible. Maybe you are the one with problems. There is a saying for people like you. I will leave it to you to figure out. I don't want you to "report" me.

[LadyDoc]

OH, so he is bad because he cannot recognize a quote out of the bible

no, it was because he called me all sorts of vulger names. He quoted a few verses from the bible out of context, but I was calling him on his knowledge of scripture, suspecting he was a troll, i.e. posting hateful stuff to make all Christians seem like hate mongers. When he failed to recognize a famous verse from Peter, I recognized he didn't know the bible, but was just using a few verses to distort the discussion.

[Gianni]

This whole thing is a red herring. LadyDoc is not even talking about MrLeroy as far as I can tell, which is the topic of this thread. Maybe this Le-Roy character was banned for being a troll or a bigot or inflammatory comments about this or that - I doubt many people on this thread really care too much, as I usually try to ignore the trolls.

MrLeroy, who this thread was started about, was apparently banned for being 95% single issue poster (boy, I could certainly be accused of that at times) and maybe being on the wrong side of the issue for the tastes of JimRob and the Admin Mods. Those of us who are on the same side would like to know if we're also skating on thin ice.

We know very little of the 'facts' outside of these:

1. MrLeroy posted almost exclusively on WOD threads.
2. MrLeroy was notified at one time by the admins not to 'promote drug use'
3. MrLeroy is now no more on FR.

Since his admonisment (adMINishment?), and even before, I don't believe I ever saw MrLeroy 'promote drug use' by any reasonable standard. He was vehemently anti-WOD, which is a statement that applies to probably 40% of the people on these threads. If you read them often enough, you'll realize that most of the inflammatory BS comes from the pro-WODders who repeatedly hurl insults and use make-believe phraseology like 'liberdopians' and call anyone with a different viewpoint a doper or a stoner. For posters like CinFla, Dane, CWOJackson et. al. the MO is to present some totally vacuous or nonexistant "argument" and then demand acceptance of it as axiom as the standard of a reasonable person.

The only regular pro-WOD posters who haven't lost their cool at one time or another seem to be robertpaulsen (who engages in reasoned debate on the subject for the most part, arguing from a drugs are destructive stand) and Roscoe (who presents the laws and ruling as currently enforced, arguing from a rule of law stand).

MrLeroy was not anti-Catholic, anti-semetic, and as far as I have seen in his posts, not anti-anything save abortion and the WOD. Debating with other conservatives on FR has been a great learing experience for me personally, as I'm sure it is for others. The last thing I would want is for it to turn into a sounding board for the Straussians and neoconservatives with no alternative viewpoints.

Ping to those mentioned - thank you for providing such a fine example.