Shoot the Breeze With the Cooler Crew - Ableminds Edition

ya know, i'd suggested some time ago that mark and tim implement the bozo filter for egrams. if they'd done that, this wouldn't be an issue either.

No Ares, there is NOTHING that you can do to prevent the harrasment. Nothing at all.

Banning him from this forum isn't helping anything because there was no harrassment in this forum.

If there were, then I have already said I am for banning.

whats the bozo filter?

Ok, it's like the guy who killed his wife, and burned the house down. So.. he claims the reason he set the house on fire is because he panicked, reguardless... he killed his wife, he got busted, what's the point of even trying to cover it up or justify it, even if it is your right, it's not going to change anything. It's better to keep your mouth shut. Ya know? He lost the right to defend himself when he took things to the next level. That's just my personal opinion, and I don't expect anyone to agree with me.

but you can prevent it in your little section of the world.

But in this country you have that right......IT IS YOUR RIGHT TO DEFEND YOURSELF! PERIOD...

This country is based on those beliefs. You have the right in the court of law to take the stand in your own defense.

mystikal if you have personal issues with nick, please take them up with him off the board. Jason (TMK) and Elisa (cocorosie) have been very considerate of everyone here by keeping the exposure to this issue at a minimum. I just ask you do the same.

The issue is not if harrasment is bad, of course it is. The issue is should we ban him for something that happened outside of our forum, and of our sphere of control. I say no.

that's pretty sweet, kitch, but i agree with steph.

if you go into your preferences you can add a list of people whose posts you don't want to see. they don't show up. pf had that feature available for egrams as well. they should (but don't) have it here, imho.

Nick can defend himself all he wants.

Anyone who wants to hear his side of the story can egram him.

Nothing's stopping ANYONE from asking him to tell his side of the story.

Tim, let me put it to you this way, it's kinda like, when U were a kid, and ya did something ya knew ya shouldn't have did, ya got busted, and ya got grounded. You lost your privledge to go out right? It's the same principal. He lost his privledge to this forum, because he did something he knew he shouldn't have done, got busted. If ya can't do the time, don't do the crime right? Even though he didn't use this particular forum to harass people, he did use the e-gram that coninsides with it.

no, but I'm not trying to. If I could, I would but I can't so I won't.

But he doesnt have the ability to do it here in the open with everyone involved. We are all sitting here debating this issue. When it should be him telling us why he shouldnt be banned. That was my original point and is all I have wanted to point out.

That's my point mm, the mods are grounding him for something he did outside of here. The mods are not his parents. I think it's wrong to use the ability to post here as a way to punish someone. This is supposed to be an open forum.

This country is based on those beliefs. You have the right in the court of law to take the stand in your own defense.

we're in coolerville here, payme :smile:

no, but I'm not trying to. If I could, I would but I can't so I won't.

you can't change the past, of course, but can you prevent it from happening in here in the future, egrams aside?

I have no personal issues with him. As I've said before, I've TRIED countless times, as a friend, to get him to seek help. The thing that I DO have a personal issue with is harassment, only because I've had it done to me, only a hell of a lot worse than what Nick did, so I KNOW first hand what it's like to go thru. And I think it was TMK who stated that if was you, or your sister, or best friend, what ever, YOU would not stand for it. So why should I? Or heck, anyone for that matter?

So ask him then to defend himself.

I have no problem if someone posts a letter from Nick defending himself. I think that's fair. But given past actions, that he's lied to all of us, I don't think he should be allowed to continue to post here.

He has defended himself to me. But my conversations are not public knowledge. The people here are speaking in an open conversation......He should be given the opportunity to do the same....even if the end result does not change.

The issue is not if harrasment is bad, of course it is. The issue is should we ban him for something that happened outside of our forum, and of our sphere of control. I say no.

So you're willing to support a person who has harassed and stalked two people because you can't do anything to stop it?

you can't change the past, of course, but can you prevent it from happening in here in the future, egrams aside?

egrams aside nothing happened.

no ban, end of discussion.

exactly. and for the record, cm, thx, me2, tc, and myself (that i can think of off the top of my head) have all received egrams in the past from exodus regarding this issue. so to say its just a matter of nick, tmk, and coco is a bold-faced lie.

dinner time out.

I'm not supporting his actions, I'm just saying he shouldn't be banned here unless he did something wrong here.

He hasn't lied to me, personally. If he lied about any of the goings on in here to anyone else and I have heard about it, that's different, but he hasn't lied to each individual person in this forum by speaking with them directly.

On that point you are saying that we should all have backround checks? What if there is a child molester, or a murderer amongst us. We would only know this by researching each individual. By not doing the investigation does it mean we support that?

OK. So using this place to ruin someone's life and harass a bunch of people isn't wrong in your book?

I'm saying that if you know someone is a child molester than you have the right to not have them participate in activities and people you associate with in a group setting.

But it's tim's point not mine.

he hasn't ruined anyones life in our forum, or harrassed anyone. that's my point.

egrams are out of our control, and banning him from our forum wouldn't have any signifcant impact on stopping those egrams.

It's taking a principled stand.

exactly, the ability to e-gram coinsides with this forum, and each and every other forum on this site. Which is why I think he should be banned all the way around because he used the site, in general, to cause harm. I know this has to be done by the site owner, and I'm in the process of telling him why I think that his IP should be banned. Period.

I've already sent the owners my support that he needs to be banned from the site entirely.

There are people here that I am not comfortable with my children being around because of the possiblity that this could be true.......Is it my responsibility to out those people to "prevent" anything from happening to any of our children?

You're losing the analogy as you extend it. But to answer the question, yes, you have a responsibility to prevent that if your children were using this site. More specifically, I have a responsibility to YOUR children if they are using this site to do the same.

What I would like to know, independently, from the dissenters, is what do you think constitutes behavior that deserves removal from this site.

I'd like answers from Pay Me, Tim, and Leelabell. I define harassing behavior as grounds for removal. What do you?

Note: Not being snotty. I really want to know.

If he's defended himself to you, then ask him to write something to post on the WHOLE board defending himself. I don't have a problem with that.

harrassing someone in our forum.

::: Sigh :::

I wish I had the energy to spend hours typing responses to all this stuff.

Just got back from the hospital.

Surgery went fine and my Grandmother will be staying in ICU overnight and should be home tomorrow.

I am not even disputing banning him from this site. My only thing is that I think before banning him he should have the opportunity in the open forum for everyone to hear to defend himself if he chooses. That is it.

Tim, you're cutting too fine a point. He's doing it under the grander umbrella of the Cooler crew.

I understand your principled stand, that's fine for you on an individual level, don't talk to nick.

My point is we shouldn't ban people from our forum on principle.

Yes but he doesnt have the opportunity to respond to questions or comments. One blanket statement I dont feel is fair. But that is only my opinion.

I'd be willing to suggest a compromise if folks are willing to listen to it openly and not have issues that it came from me.

I am listening!

I really don't think I am.

Let me ask the Mod's a question: what was the purpose of banning Wicked Nick?

Was it preventative, punitive, out of principle? I'm curious.

One blanket statement is a good start. And it's better than what he's got now, which is nothing. And if we use it to spur further discussion, isn't that a good thing?

So if I use a method to harass and stalk you that isn't on this board, I'm free to post here at my leisure then?

Yes we would use it to spur further discussion. But I feel that discussion should include him.......It just goes back in the circle...you know what I mean?

As I've said, and I'll say it again, I have nothing against Nick as a person. I really don't.What I am against are his actions. If he can do this to Coco, he can do this to anyone of us.

Then why was Jake banned?

Thanks for the update, Dan. I'm glad to hear that. Please continue to update us as she recovers?

(Steph, you too...)

Let Nick have his moment to post. Hell give the guy a thread. Let him make statements regarding his defense on issues. If people feel the need to ask questions then perhaps allow that as well. If so many people have examples of things he did to them with specifics then this would also give those people a chance to address then with him one one.