Going to California episode 2.

[Onket]

Banned for being a dick then.

Exactly. At the whim of a mod.

 

[twentythreedom]

Exactly. At the whim of a mod.

It must be about your turn to start a Banhammer thread

My last effort got locked. Fucking fascists

 

[Onket]

he was offered the chance when challenged on it by rutita and myself. he called her a racist bigot for even mentioning it? you going to defend him bullying her? you don't think that his attempts to paint her as a racist for standing up to racism are out of order when you can't defend his initial behaviour?

I've not defended any of his behaviour.

 

[Sweet FA]

Exactly. At the whim of a mod.

The fucking whimful bastards

 

[Ax^]

If he has 300,000 why is he not starting his hobo village instead of going on a jolly to the states

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

If he has 300,000 why is he not starting his hobo village instead of going on a jolly to the states

It's a shame he got banned before he got the argument he was after when he mentioned the money. Over and over again.

Now we might never know.

 

[gabi]

Has anyone ever read a post by mango5? Just curious.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Has anyone ever read a post by mango5? Just curious.

Why not go to the most recent thread she started and read one?

Trying to bully mango5 now makes you look a fool tbh.

 

[Sweet Meiga]

for my money, he's not shady. he's 50% fantasist, and the other 50% con-artist. but people on here defend him, send him money and toys and support whatever he says and does unconditionally. i guess they've become invested in the notion of Good Guy Stan and don't want to admit they've been conned.

Really? It seems to me that almost everybody who's met Stan in real life has a very different opinion from what you've just described.

 

[Supine]

Poor Stan, he tries to go to California but gets sent to Coventry instead

 

[friedaweed]

I'd like to know how the length of a ban is decided? Lengel got a one year ban a couple of days ago for racism, Stanley's just got a fortnight. No point posting up what each of them said because the debate shouldn't be about which is what, it's racism and there's no excuse.

So both guilty of racism, both worthy of a ban IMHO. One for 52 weeks whilst one get's 2 weeks. How does that work out?

With all respect

 

[dessiato]

Really? It seems to me that almost everybody who's met Stan in real life has a very different opinion from what you've just described.

Apart from yesterday I had never met Stan in the flesh. I had, however, dealt with him through pm and conversation. I can say in all honesty that he is far from the persona many here would have us all believe. Of course he has his faults, who among us don't have some, but to be as filled with loathing as some have does them a greater disservice than it does him.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

I'd like to know how the length of a ban is decided? Lengel got a one year ban a couple of days ago for racism, Stanley's just got a fortnight. No point posting up what each of them said because the debate shouldn't be about which is what, it's racism and there's no excuse.

So both guilty of racism, both worthy of a ban IMHO. One for 52 weeks whilst one get's 2 weeks. How does that work out?

With all respect

Lengel has been picking up regular bans ever since he got here, for all sorts. It's a shame because he's a very entertaining poster but he was always going to end up with a massive ban eventually.

 

[Sweet Meiga]

Apart from yesterday I had never met Stan in the flesh. I had, however, dealt with him through pm and conversation. I can say in all honesty that he is far from the persona many here would have us all believe. Of course he has his faults, who among us don't have some, but to be as filled with loathing as some have does them a greater disservice than it does him.

I agree. Sometimes it seems that people here who refer to him as 'an old alcoholic hobo' or similar think that he is just fair game, no matter what.

 

[Lo Siento.]

Apart from yesterday I had never met Stan in the flesh. I had, however, dealt with him through pm and conversation. I can say in all honesty that he is far from the persona many here would have us all believe. Of course he has his faults, who among us don't have some, but to be as filled with loathing as some have does them a greater disservice than it does him.

I haven't, as far as I'm aware, given any sign of me being filled with loathing for Stan, just a vague awareness of what constitutes a racist comment. I think you're far too being far too ready to overlook something that's plain as day, just because it happens to be someone you find otherwise likeable.

 

[Sweet Meiga]

I'd like to know how the length of a ban is decided? Lengel got a one year ban a couple of days ago for racism, Stanley's just got a fortnight. No point posting up what each of them said because the debate shouldn't be about which is what, it's racism and there's no excuse.

So both guilty of racism, both worthy of a ban IMHO. One for 52 weeks whilst one get's 2 weeks. How does that work out?

With all respect

You do realise they are both wind-up merchants and very far from being a racist?

 

[Pickman's model]

Really? It seems to me that almost everybody who's met Stan in real life has a very different opinion from what you've just described.

i've met him irl in the albert with editor

 

[dessiato]

I haven't, as far as I'm aware, given any sign of me being filled with loathing for Stan, just a vague awareness of what constitutes a racist comment. I think you're far too being far too ready to overlook something that's plain as day, just because it happens to be someone you find otherwise likeable.

Many come across as having a very closed mind towards anything that Stan says, including both you and me. You are right that his very initial comment appeared racist. However, reading his further comments, in which he explained himself, I really cannot see that that was his intention. Unfortunately it is often easier to see what one wishes to see than to see what is really there. We all are guilty of this at some time

 

[Sweet Meiga]

i've met him irl in the albert with editor

Good for you.

 

[twentythreedom]

I'd like to know how the length of a ban is decided? Lengel got a one year ban a couple of days ago for racism, Stanley's just got a fortnight. No point posting up what each of them said because the debate shouldn't be about which is what, it's racism and there's no excuse.

So both guilty of racism, both worthy of a ban IMHO. One for 52 weeks whilst one get's 2 weeks. How does that work out?

With all respect

Lengel got a year? Fuck

 

[dessiato]

I have to go to watch Dr Who now. I'll leave you all to play, nicely!!!

 

[Pickman's model]

Good for you.

i don't see why, it wasn't like i spent days, weeks or months setting up a meet or anything

 

[friedaweed]

You do realise they are both wind-up merchants and very far from being a racist?

Both have been racist in what they said. There's no defending either of them on what they said. I like them both for the record they're very similar which is why I asked about the difference in ban lengths.

Personally I believe it's best to let the board sort out some of these things but I also appreciate that the mods are between a rock and a hard place as well.

I think the question needed asking. I like a good wind up myself but not at the expense of someones skin colour or nationality. That's racism isn't it and if you do it you're being racist are you not?

 

[Lo Siento.]

Many come across as having a very closed mind towards anything that Stan says, including both you and me. You are right that his very initial comment appeared racist. However, reading his further comments, in which he explained himself, I really cannot see that that was his intention. Unfortunately it is often easier to see what one wishes to see than to see what is really there. We all are guilty of this at some time

My most recent interaction with Stan was a bit of football banter and I clicked on the thread to post a youtube clip from the Big Lebowski. Was hardly looking to come and pick a fight with him.

TBH, I just can't see what you're getting at. His further comments contain further unsubstantiated generalisations about the same group of people, each of them from anecdotal evidence and confirmation bias, some of them even citing the same overheard nonsense from the sodding police (!).

It's really this easy Dessiato:

"Young Moroccans resident in Spain are disproportionately likely to be involved in street crime according to a study done by criminologists at Granada University in 2012. This is largely explained by the precarious position of young unemployed, undocumented, often orphaned immigrants in Spanish society." Not a racist thing to say.

"Everyone knows that most of the crime around here is done by dirty little Moroccans." Racist.

 

[Sweet Meiga]

Both have been racist in what they said. There's no defending either of them on what they said. I like them both for the record they're very similar which is why I asked about the difference in ban lengths.

Personally I believe it's best to let the board sort out some of these things but I also appreciate that the mods are between a rock and a hard place as well.

I think the question needed asking. I like a good wind up myself but not at the expense of someones skin colour or nationally. That's racism isn't it and if you do it you're being racist are you not?

True. What I meant is that when it comes to Stan and Frances, people too often forget to play the ball instead of the man and start attacking their lifestyle etc.

 

[Pickman's model]

True. What I meant is that when it comes to Stan and Frances, people too often forget to play the ball instead of the man and start attacking their lifestyle etc.

yeh because it's not like neither of them has ever attacked people's lifestyles.

 

[Treacle Toes]

True. What I meant is that when it comes to Stan and Frances, people too often forget to play the ball instead of the man and start attacking their lifestyle etc.

Given that I am the one that called both FL and Stan out on their racist comments recently I feel I should comment.

Neither Stan nor Frances were attacked for who they are. They were called on what they said/their racist comments.

You know, racist comments that attack others for who/what they are.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Both have been racist in what they said. There's no defending either of them on what they said. I like them both for the record they're very similar which is why I asked about the difference in ban lengths.

Personally I believe it's best to let the board sort out some of these things but I also appreciate that the mods are between a rock and a hard place as well.

I think the question needed asking. I like a good wind up myself but not at the expense of someones skin colour or nationality. That's racism isn't it and if you do it you're being racist are you not?

On the question of the length of the bans they received I think you should look at the thread FL made the comment on and see that the most recent comment didn't stand in isolation, he was pulled up on another thread for thinking racism was a legitimate trolling method around here.

 

[Sweet Meiga]

yeh because it's not like neither of them has ever attacked people's lifestyles.

You really can't see the difference?

 

[Sweet Meiga]

Given that I am the one that called both FL and Stan out on their racist comments recently I feel I should comment.

Neither Stan nor Frances were attacked for who they are. They were called on what they said/their racist comments.

You know, racist comments that attack others for who/what they are.

I know. I wasn't talking about you. I meant people who have a go at them for their lifestyle.