duo
Gorubeshu
Posts: 261
|
Post by duo on Jul 24, 2010 0:26:44 GMT -5
Should certain banned members who show they are willing to contribute positively in Legends society become unbanned after a certain period? Is permanent banning even ethically just or humane? Here are the Facts (from Wikipedia):
1. Since World War II there has been a trend toward abolishing the death penalty.
2. Singapore, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the U.S. are the only developed countries that have retained the death penalty.
3. The death penalty was overwhelmingly practiced in poor and authoritarian states, which often employed the death penalty as a tool of political oppression.
4. Opponents of the death penalty argue that it has led to the execution of innocent people, that its main motive is not justice but revenge and to save money, that life imprisonment is an effective and less expensive substitute, that it discriminates against minorities and the poor, and that it violates the criminal's right to life.
5. Supporters believe that the penalty is justified for murderers by the principle of retribution, that life imprisonment is not an equally effective deterrent, and that the death penalty affirms the right to life by punishing those who violate it in the strictest form.
|
|
Qwertman
Habarool
Work work work...
Posts: 736
|
Post by Qwertman on Jul 24, 2010 0:58:32 GMT -5
This is a good idea. Too bad none of the polls work. >.<
|
|
|
|
Post by Chiz on Jul 24, 2010 1:18:08 GMT -5
Should certain banned members who show they are willing to contribute positively in Legends society become unbanned after a certain period? There is a difference between temporary and permanent bans. If a ban is temporary, we recognize that they have the ability to reform. In permanent cases, there has been a marked demonstration of disregard for the rules and that either reform is impossible, or the efforts of convincing the offender to change is too great for it to be worth it. This "unnamed" individual (let's face it: we all know who we're talking about here. Let's stop treating Mir@k like some unspeakable horror like Harry Potter's Voldemort of s/th.) demonstrated increasingly antagonistic behaviour which led to his ban. His final post is found here, not to mention a series of PMs to staff, such as telling Dashe to fellate him, etc. Highly inappropriate. Compare with the fact that we had given him a temporary ban months earlier, and when he returned, despite claims of reform, quickly fell right back into the same throes of piss, vinegar and vitriol. Is permanent banning even ethically just or humane? Wait, what? 1. Since World War II there has been a trend toward abolishing the death penalty. 2. Singapore, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the U.S. are the only developed countries that have retained the death penalty. 3. The death penalty was overwhelmingly practiced in poor and authoritarian states, which often employed the death penalty as a tool of political oppression. 4. Opponents of the death penalty argue that it has led to the execution of innocent people, that its main motive is not justice but revenge and to save money, that life imprisonment is an effective and less expensive substitute, that it discriminates against minorities and the poor, and that it violates the criminal's right to life. 5. Supporters believe that the penalty is justified for murderers by the principle of retribution, that life imprisonment is not an equally effective deterrent, and that the death penalty affirms the right to life by punishing those who violate it in the strictest form. You're equating permanent bans with capital punishment?! Come on, as much trouble as he's caused us, we didn't send hitmen down to Mexico to fix our problem. We just kicked him out of the clubhouse. If you read some more appropriate articles, you'll find what we're doing is far less graphic and emotionally charged. |
|
|
|
Post by fAB on Jul 24, 2010 9:41:03 GMT -5
When I handed over the position of admin to Dashe I wanted her to understand that I was truly giving her the power to run this place. I told her that (with one exception), she could feel free to un-ban anyone on the ban list at that time. So you see, even a permanent ban may not be absolutely permanent. Times change, things can happen.
While Mir@k has certainly succeeded in ticking a lot of people off, there are those among us who wouldn't mind so terribly if he were to return. To my knowledge he hasn't really done anything outrightly offensive (though it's possible I'm speaking too soon) since his ban. However, he continues to show disrespect for the rules and this place by creating new accounts. His repeated returns are only serving to gain him increased pest status around here.
@mir@k
Ah, what the heck, I know you're out there. Just want to let you know that my above paragraph is not intended to have any hidden meanings. We'd certainly appreciate it if we didn't have to repeatedly ban you, but we're well aware you can and will get back in anytime you want and apparently have no intentions of going away. If that's how it has to be than that's how it has to be.
Regarding Pocket Legends, yes the thread was locked, but it was not deleted. I thought that was a good compromise, allowing everyone to still discover and download the game from a post that should by rights never have been made. No?
I don't believe there's anything in the rules about speaking/posting on behalf of a banned member, so feel free to ask any of your friends here to post the game. They can continue to add to and update the thread whenever you have something to share. Of course you wouldn't be able to respond directly to peoples' comments, but well, that's one of the downsides of getting yourself banned.
And yet you did. XD
|
|
