or Connect
DenimBlog.com › Welcome to the DenimBlog Community! › General Topics › Chat › So this one time at banned camp...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

So this one time at banned camp...  

post #1 of 274
Thread Starter 


many people have been asking me how the hell i got banned, so i'll tell you how i got banned: remember this thread?

http://www.honestforum.com/drama/119...-denimdna.html

near the bottom of page 1, fosterzmom posts a "private" message of mine:

Quote:
Originally Posted by fosterzmom View Post
Oh, and this is not just to hurt?

Originally Posted by not_a_virus.exe
people like you make this world more dishonest. you keep making shit up to attack me, and never once did i make anything up. show some integrity and apologize you cunt.


And what she said? Was that to make nice?

You folks need to get off your high horses!

Oh, and that last statement wasn't just to hurt her; it was the truth. I've been wanting to try diesel forever, but I'm not doing business with her. EVER.
yep, apparently, typing the word "cunt" will get you banned, but not "stupid," "idiot," "fucker," "douchebag," or "asshole." even if it was done via PM ("private" message), but what further confuses me is how the ban was invoked 2 weeks later. sure, this is dave's forum, and he could do whatever the hell he likes, but that's not my point. here are my points:

_______________________________________________


1. i see plenty of "offensive" words tossed around on the forums. what makes "cunt" so unique that it's ban-worthy? in fact, what's the big deal about 4-letter words? they're just WORDS and they're not affecting anyone's lives.

_______________________________________________


2. if you're gonna be fair and consistent, if i'm banned for calling fosterzmom a "cunt," she surely should have been banned too, precisely because her offense are far farrrr worse. let's compare:

fosterzmom: repeatedly slandering me (some people were unsure of what slander is; slander is making up false accusations to attack someone). even after i asked for evidence of these accusations, she flat out ignored them and continued slandering me. here are a few reoccurring examples in 3 separate threads:

http://www.honestforum.com/drama/119...ml#post1209563
http://www.honestforum.com/drama/119...ml#post1209684
http://www.honestforum.com/drama/119...ml#post1209699
http://www.honestforum.com/drama/119...ml#post1212002

she also and still continues to try to stir up drama in her usual manner of posting passive-aggressive back-handed comments...while trying to play innocent, which may work on some people, but even this complete lie manages to conclude with one of her patented back-handed comments (in this case, an insincere apology):

http://www.honestforum.com/drama/119...ml#post1212496

here's the most recent proof that that is all a lie:

Denim DNA

not_a_virus.exe: angrily called fosterzmom a "cunt" after repeatedly asking her both in public and by PM why she keeps slandering me; she replies by ignoring me and continuing her falsified attacks. what really ticked me off though is how she also continues to play innocent while constantly trying to stir up drama (as i described above). angry people vent by calling people "stupid," "idiot," "dickhead," "shitpiston," "asshat," "asshole," or "bag of oats;" in this case, i arbitrarily called her a "cunt."

now, if someone had to be banned, who should it have been? someone who falsifies accusations to attack someone and continues to do so despite the accused denying it all and asking for examples...and then later trying to stir up old drama? or someone who had perfectly good reasons to be upset and arbitrarily calls someone a "cunt" out of anger? this is comparing ACTIONS with a completely whimful WORD.

_______________________________________________


3. this is a bit of a tangent actually, but for those who don't know already, none of our "private" messages are really private. they can be viewed by at least some of the mods and admins. i also suspect that dave's cherry-picking was influenced by the fantastic, dramatic PMs of mine he read. it's kinda funny because one day i had accidentally deleted all my PMs and then promptly asked dave and a few other admins and mods if it was possible to recover them. ironically, that may have caused dave to scrutinize my juicy PMs more closely. i've said good and bad thing about dave, but even though i knew he could be reading my PMs, i wasn't a coward to voice my criticisms (and praise). unfortunately, the careless snoop (and i say "snoop" because i've been PMed other times questioning a PM i've sent prior to all this, leading me to think my PMs are routinely read by others other than the recipient) might choose his/her own interpretation, when in reality, credibility is built upon honesty, rather than by kissing ass.

_______________________________________________


4. MARIO FISCHETTI WOOHOO YAY WOOT WOOT GO MARIO FISCHETTI GO! :cheer :

_______________________________________________


CONCLUSION:
dave can take away my honest forum membership, but he can never take away my love. even if dave tends to ban people for the strangest, random reasons (casey60622's ban comes to mind lol).


also, here is a picture of a bear thrown for good measure:



_______________________________________________


BIBLIOGRAPHY:
  1. ^ Top 100 American Speeches by Rank Order. American Rhetoric (2006). Retrieved on 2006-12-23.
  2. ^ Martin Luther King: Beyond Vietnam—A Time to Break Silence. Speech. American Rhetoric (2006). Retrieved on 2006-12-23.
  3. ^ Template:Cite web. Martin Luther King was inspired by Gandhi.
  4. ^ The King Center: Biography. The King Center (2006). Retrieved on 2006-12-23.
  5. ^ Scott-King, Correta, My life with Martin Luther King Jr. (New York, 1969) p.124–5
  6. ^ Haley, Alex. "Martin Luther King", The Playboy Interview, Playboy, January 1965. Retrieved on 2006-09-17.
  7. ^ Ross, Samuel (2006). March on Washington. Features. Infoplease. Retrieved on 2006-09-17.
  8. ^ a b Haley, Alex. "Martin Luther King", The Playboy Interview, Playboy, January 1965. Retrieved on 2006-09-17.
  9. ^ King (2000). Why We Can't Wait. Signet Classics. ISBN 0-451-52753-4.
  10. ^ King, Martin Luther (April 4 1967). Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence. Speech. Hartford Web Publishing. Retrieved on 2006-09-17.
  11. ^ Michael Lind, Vietnam: The Necessary War, 1999 p. 182.
  12. ^ Guenter Lewey, America in Vietnam, 1978 pp. 444–5.
  13. ^ Coretta Scott King (ed.). Martin Luther King, Jr., Companion, p. 39. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999.
  14. ^ Patterson, James T.. "An epic comes to a close", Chicago Sun-Times, January 29, 2006, pp. B12. Retrieved on 2006-12-23.
post #2 of 274
wow this took some time to write damn
post #3 of 274
i'm only going to comment on one of the above points because I was not here when this all happened, so I honestly can't really speak on the matter...

Quote:
3. this is a bit of a tangent actually, but for those who don't know already, none of our "private" messages are really private. they can be viewed by at least some of the mods and admins. i also suspect that dave's cherry-picking was influenced by the fantastic, dramatic PMs of mine he read. it's kinda funny because one day i had accidentally deleted all my PMs and then promptly asked dave and a few other admins and mods if it was possible to recover them. ironically, that may have caused dave to scrutinize my juicy PMs more closely. i've said good and bad thing about dave, but even though i knew he could be reading my PMs, i wasn't a coward to voice my criticisms (and praise). unfortunately, the careless snoop (and i say "snoop" because i've been PMed other times questioning a PM i've sent prior to all this, leading me to think my PMs are routinely read by others other than the recipient) might choose his/her own interpretation, when in reality, credibility is built upon honesty, rather than by kissing ass.
The idea of HF having a PM reader installed is completely off-base. Accusations stated as facts like the above are patently untrue and uncalled for. I am wondering why you would state it as a fact when you have no proof that PM's are being read.

Tim, I have nothing against you, but that entire point is completely incorrect.
post #4 of 274
Thread Starter 
lauriebell, thanks for the trying to clear things up. i'm pretty sure i once read a thread in the past where it was confirmed that PMs can be read by admins and mods.

if you're referring to me suspecting that people are routinely reading other people's PMs, please note who i carefully worded it as "suspect" and "think." it's all speculation, and i was hoping for a confirmation or denial. but i still wish i can recall the name of the thread where i could have sworn it was confirmed PMs can be read.

if all of that is false, then i can only think that fosterzmom first forwarded my PM to kellygawtscammed in hopes to get me trouble...then about a 2 weeks later, forwarded again to honestdave in hopes to get me in trouble again (which succeeded).
post #5 of 274
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 for you nota.... I <3 you from now on!

Finanlly someone who makes the effort to back up their statements! (Even if the conclusion is wrong Lauriebell, he really tried to back it up!
post #6 of 274
Thread Starter 
i'd also like to add that if something so unusual and typically unexpected is ban-worthy, it's probably a little more sensible to give a warning. it's your forum, so you can do whatever you wanna do, but i don't know your particular (albeit strange) pet peeves.
post #7 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_a_virus.exe View Post
if you're referring to me suspecting that people are routinely reading other people's PMs, please note who i carefully worded it as "suspect" and "think." it's all speculation, and i was hoping for a confirmation or denial. but i still wish i can recall the name of the thread where i could have sworn it was confirmed PMs can be read.

if all of that is false, then i can only think that fosterzmom first forwarded my PM to kellygawtscammed in hopes to get me trouble...then about a 2 weeks later, forwarded again to honestdave in hopes to get me in trouble again (which succeeded).
oh ok... because I saw the opening sentences to this specific point as stating a fact and not a speculation.

Quote:
but for those who don't know already, none of our "private" messages are really private. they can be viewed by at least some of the mods and admins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by not_a_virus.exe View Post
lauriebell, thanks for the trying to clear things up. i'm pretty sure i once read a thread in the past where it was confirmed that PMs can be read by admins and mods.
I know which thread you are talking about. This particular thread does not talk about HF being able to read PM's, however. I am not going to post the link to this thread because I don't want to dredge up old cross-forum drama. If you search hard enough for it, you can find it.

At any rate, I'm not here to argue. Just clear a few things up.

And welcome back.

(PS: I didn't see any tapirs in CR, unfortunately)
post #8 of 274
It did seem a little inconsistent and and the delay was a bit odd...
post #9 of 274
how come it says NAV is banned still???
post #10 of 274
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckee26 View Post
how come it says NAV is banned still???
^_^
post #11 of 274
Artistic license!
post #12 of 274
Thread Starter 
honestdave, can we please ban lucky62? she just called me a jerk and i can forward you the PM if need be.
post #13 of 274
I don't think that anyone should be banned for the content of a private message. Yes, it was still sent on the HonestForum, but private messages aren't the business of anyone but the sender and the recipient.
post #14 of 274
I have not ever had the ability to read pm's. As Lauriebell already stated, mods , admins, etc. DO NOT read pm's.
Just want you to know that, even if you don't believe me.

Most likely, the pm's were forwarded and sent around to other members. Youd be surprised at what people will forward. I try not to say anything in PM that I wouldnt say out in the open.
post #15 of 274
o gawd i was fooled haha


BLONDE MOMENT!!! lo siento!
post #16 of 274
Thread Starter 
kelly, you don't strike me as someone who habitually lies, so i believe you.

funny thing is that i've used the word "cunt" multiple times before on the forum, and i wouldn't have had a problem calling fosterzmom a "cunt" too publicly. either way, i was really pissed at fosterzmom and wanted her to know how i felt, as she seemed completely unremorseful. why the fuck did she keep targeting me for no reason?

i can think of the usual suspects whom my PMs were forwarded to. which i actually encourage because ANYONE who is sensible will see how offensive fosterzmom was. it's the typical "oh look how horrible this person is" game in an attempt to lay the blame on someone else, but i think she forgot how evident the PMs reveal how the problem is on her. just the more reason why i've told her she disgusts me, not to mention that slander is already morally reprehensible. i can't help but think that this is all related to the recent treasurehoard-impersonating-me incident.
post #17 of 274
Cant you guys just agree to play nice. You say nothing in reguard to her and vice versa. I mean shit happens right reguarldess of whos right or wrong, or who said what .. "Im not siding with anyone in fact im not even reading the previous posts so this to avoid any drama on my own end"

its all just drama why dont you be the bigger person and end it, and if it continues to be a problem and there are more post on her end "which i dont know because I wont read certain threads just to avoid drama" then let her dig her own grave. We all know dumb things get said. You are both good people at heart so just put it behind you allready seriously :P
post #18 of 274
Thread Starter 
i agree with you, that's why i've said immediately after the treasurehoard incident that i want to end the drama now. i never brought up the topic again (even if fosterzmom tried to resurface it).

unfortunately, there's no way to explain all this without referencing her, especially considering the newfound knowledge that these PMs were forwarded by fosterzmom. how do you suggest that i could have questioned dave's ban without bringing her into this?
post #19 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenKid0505 View Post
I don't think that anyone should be banned for the content of a private message. Yes, it was still sent on the HonestForum, but private messages aren't the business of anyone but the sender and the recipient.
I agree 100% with sevenkids statements. Pm's are private and people should not be banned when they are told to take it to pm and then say something that someone else thinks is inappropriate!!

Not a virus...You have made great points and It is great to see you back....
post #20 of 274
I agree with iluvshopin
post #21 of 274
+1 for perm ban
post #22 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by lauriebell View Post
i'm only going to comment on one of the above points because I was not here when this all happened, so I honestly can't really speak on the matter...



The idea of HF having a PM reader installed is completely off-base. Accusations stated as facts like the above are patently untrue and uncalled for. I am wondering why you would state it as a fact when you have no proof that PM's are being read.

Tim, I have nothing against you, but that entire point is completely incorrect.
Insofar as everything you post on HF is stored in a database, technically anyone with direct access to the database can view anything stored in it so long as that information is not encrypted. I remember when I did backups of the old HF when it was running on PHPBB the PMs were all there. They weren't exactly easy to find because they were all nested in SQL statements and XML and stuff but they were there... I'm not saying dave has the wherewithall or even the inclination to look at PMs but from a technical standpoint it's possible.
post #23 of 274
^true... if you ran the sql queries. i barely got out of that class alive in college, so you won't see me even attempting to do that. i was just speaking more from the point that we don't have vbulletin's PM reader hack installed.
post #24 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC EXCLUSIVE SHOP View Post
I agree with iluvshopin
You only agree because I outed you for the barage of insulting and harassing pm's you sent me!

I outed you, now you regret it! Stupid!
post #25 of 274
Speaking of letting things die...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Chat
This thread is locked  
DenimBlog.com › Welcome to the DenimBlog Community! › General Topics › Chat › So this one time at banned camp...