The WELCOME BACK Catfish & Southbeach Thread

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Jul 07, 2012 5:24 PM GMT
    We all know that the admins will more than likely reinstate the recently banned members CATFISH & SOUTHBEACH to the RealJock Family. I mean, come on, no one KILLED anyone --- not yet anyway icon_wink.gif In the event that this happens, let us all take a lesson from this and each do our part toward making RealJock a kinder, gentler place for all. I'm sure the banned members know why they were banned (...or at least, in fairness, I hope the admins will take the time to make it clear to them as to why) and that they will make the appropriate changes accordingly so that any admin reinstatement will not be regretted. But, at the same time, I hope we each can make a concerted effort to try harder to respect the opinions of each other, because we all come from different backgrounds, parts of the world, and mindsets. It will be undoubtedly a rough next few months in the USA coming into the home-stretch of the 2012 election, and there will no doubt be a wide variety of opinions that lead often-times to heated debate. Let's not make it personal, and each of us take on the responsibility to at least keep it civil and respectful. Maybe this thread could even serve as an "Olive Branch" of sorts to mend old wounds and start fresh. I will certainly do my part, and I hope the rest of you will as well. We can't hardly expect the general public to accept and embrace "diversity" if we can't even do it here on RJ.

    Here's to the banned members being reinstated sometime in the near future.

    Bounce_together_by_Droneguard.gifBounce_together_by_Droneguard.gifBounce_together_by_Droneguard.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:00 PM GMT
    Maybe R.J. (and the world, for that matter) would be a pleasanter place if we had all heeded the words of our grandparents when they advised us to avoid discussing politics, religion and sex unless we were absolutely sure we would not be offending anyone with our remarks or opinions. Well, that was yesterday, and maybe it is too late to follow that advice, however well intentioned. I think the best thing we can do in this day and age is to show tolerance for those around us who have differing viewpoints.

    I'm not in favor of banning someone, or censorship (unless the offender is absolutely foul and obscene) and we've not seen that here, to my knowledge. We mostly have guys with strong, opposing political views. Surely we can all get along by showing respect to our fellow men here. I propose that the two members who are "away" at present be welcomed back.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Jul 07, 2012 6:21 PM GMT
    Jockbod48 said Surely we can all get along by showing respect to our fellow men here. I propose that the two members who are "away" at present be welcomed back.



    +1
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:28 PM GMT
    Welcome Back.

    (Not pre, because they are both back).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:28 PM GMT
    What a crock of revisionist BS. Your ally southbeach wasn't removed for his political views, he was removed for his personal attacks on other members, and his violations of RJ TOU.

    He's been removed before, and he returned before, no more "rehabilitated" than when he got booted. What makes you think this time would be any different?

    Nice try at lobbying to get him reinstated. And making this all a misunderstanding of legitimate opinions. I wonder if RJ Admin appreciates your implied criticism that their removal decision was wrong, and based on politics alone?

    Maybe it was based on revealing confidential personal information online, to punish & silence his critics? Maybe it was based on vicious personal attacks, totally fabricated and unrelated to anything remotely related to politics and having "opinions"? Maybe it was based on spamming anti-Obama propaganda pieces several times a day for months on end.

    But again, nice try, you remain a loyal fan of your banished buddy. But rather presumptuous of you to claim what we "all know" and what RJ Admin will do. Maybe Admin will, maybe it won't. But at least most of us know that Admin removes no one here for merely having simple political opinions, as you claim. Though I can pretty much predict that if he returns, he'll go right back to pasting anti-Obama propaganda, and making personal attacks on others, about all he's good for.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 07, 2012 6:32 PM GMT
    Iceblink saidWelcome Back.

    (Not pre, because they are both back).


    Where's catfish?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:35 PM GMT
    Jockbod48 saidMaybe R.J. (and the world, for that matter) would be a pleasanter place if we had all heeded the words of our grandparents when they advised us to avoid discussing politics, religion and sex unless we were absolutely sure we would not be offending anyone with our remarks or opinions. Well, that was yesterday, and maybe it is too late to follow that advice, however well intentioned. I think the best thing we can do in this day and age is to show tolerance for those around us who have differing viewpoints.

    I'm not in favor of banning someone, or censorship (unless the offender is absolutely foul and obscene) and we've not seen that here, to my knowledge. We mostly have guys with strong, opposing political views. Surely we can all get along by showing respect to our fellow men here. I propose that the two members who are "away" at present be welcomed back.


    It's not possible to avoid politics, though I think largely no matter what you believe most people want the same outcomes. I'm not in favor of banning someone in general but building communities online are tricky things. The ones that work get there with a lot of hard work and experimentation, and there's no guarantee of success as your audience can disappear almost overnight.

    Take Southbeach - who generates a tremendous amount of controversy and is also a lightning rod for vile comments (look at how many page views the meta conversation of his departure has generated over lesser noticed ones like catfish or tropicalmark). I don't read most threads. I don't know what caused his ban given that there have been far more offensive/racist/threatening comments in the past by others. There's a trade off to be had here by the administrators - banning someone who while being unpopular results in a tremendous number of page views and interest.

    The reality is that for any topic people really care about, people are going to be offended. And, there will also be complaints. This in itself should not be a cause to ban. Yes, there ought to be rules, and yes they ought to be enforced - but no one should be surprised if there's even greater outrage when the rules are not enforced equally.

    Personally, I hope he has been made aware of why he was banned, I just don't understand why the rules aren't always applied equally. This is however a private site and it is the prerogative of admins to do what they see fit but again, they end up having to walk a fine line. Finally, the reality is that it's going to be a much tighter race than Democrats had been expecting this fall. Which means it will be nasty - but as noted to others, all campaigns are nasty. Some people are offended by the fact others hold different ideas to them as evidenced by this site and many who hope SB's ban is permanent - particularly as they overlook comments made by others and even themselves. Bans for this reason are not only censorship but they also mean a less vibrant and trafficked site.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:35 PM GMT
    Jockbod48 saidSurely we can all get along by showing respect to our fellow men here.

    I dont see any mention of LOLcats. I am sure that that is just an oversight made in the haste and emotion of the moment and respecting our fellow LOLcats in certainly to be understood in any Pax Realjockus.

    funny cat pictures - respect  brudda


    proceed.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:35 PM GMT
    creature said
    Iceblink saidWelcome Back.

    (Not pre, because they are both back).


    Where's catfish?


    http://www.realjock.com/catfish5

    http://www.realjock.com/southbeach1500
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 07, 2012 6:38 PM GMT
    Iceblink said
    creature said
    Iceblink saidWelcome Back.

    (Not pre, because they are both back).


    Where's catfish?


    http://www.realjock.com/catfish5

    http://www.realjock.com/southbeach1500


    Thanks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:41 PM GMT
    Bollocks.

  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jul 07, 2012 6:46 PM GMT
    I'm all for it, so long as there is reasonable interaction between members.. that seemed to have been lacking. If it hadn't, there wouldn't have been a "banning"
    to begin with.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:46 PM GMT
    LOVE the panic this has created--
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:50 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidTake Southbeach - who generates a tremendous amount of controversy and is also a lightning rod for vile comments (look at how many page views the meta conversation of his departure has generated over lesser noticed ones like catfish or tropicalmark). I don't read most threads. I don't know what caused his ban given that there have been far more offensive/racist/threatening comments in the past by others. There's a trade off to be had here by the administrators - banning someone who while being unpopular results in a tremendous number of page views and interest.



    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/2504694

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/2496380/?forumpage=5
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 07, 2012 6:51 PM GMT
    Dean_ saidLOVE the panic this has created--


    Where?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 6:53 PM GMT
    Not much of a banishment. icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:07 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidWhat a crock of revisionist BS. ...

    But rather presumptuous of you to claim what we "all know" and what RJ Admin will do. Maybe Admin will, maybe it won't. ...

    I only know of one person who claimed to know why the Admin did what he did and whether the bans would be permanent. So the talk of "revisionist BS" is misdirected, he said politely.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:08 PM GMT
    riddler78 said (look at how many page views the meta conversation of his departure has generated over lesser noticed ones like catfish or tropicalmark).


    Late news: The page views have been fraudulently generated. Besides, a thread on Kim Jong-un's demise would probably draw far more page views than one on the departure of Hugo Chávez. Page views are certainly no indicator of approval.

    In my 5 years on this site, I have never blocked anyone, nor have I ever communicated with the admins. I have click-reported 2 spamming incidents and that is it. Nonetheless, I can honestly say I have missed SB like a hole in the head.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:09 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Art_Deco saidWhat a crock of revisionist BS. ...

    But rather presumptuous of you to claim what we "all know" and what RJ Admin will do. Maybe Admin will, maybe it won't. ...

    I only know of one person who claimed to know why the Admin did what he did and whether the bans would be permanent. So the talk of "revisionist BS" is misdirected, he said politely.

    Your reading comprehension skills haven't improved since I took you off Ignore. I was referring to CJAZ's sly attempt to imply that SB's all-too-brief banishment was due to mere differences in political opinion, rather than for actual TOU violations. Somewhat insulting to Admin, wouldn't you say? That's the revisionism of which I spoke. Would you like a retest scheduled?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:10 PM GMT
    I agree with the OP. Those who are most easily offended should use the Ignore function, not only with those who write what they find offensive, but those who quote them as well. Then their world will be more peaceful, and everyone can get from the forums what they care to and be oblivious to the rest.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:11 PM GMT
    I just wanna see your cock pics Curious.....icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:13 PM GMT
    "I wish we could all bake a cake with butterflies and rainbows so we could all be happy."
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Jul 07, 2012 7:14 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidWhat a crock of revisionist BS. Your ally southbeach wasn't removed for his political views, he was removed for his personal attacks on other members, and his violations of RJ TOU.

    He's been removed before, and he returned before, no more "rehabilitated" than when he got booted. What makes you think this time would be any different?

    Nice try at lobbying to get him reinstated. And making this all a misunderstanding of legitimate opinions. I wonder if RJ Admin appreciates your implied criticism that their removal decision was wrong, and based on politics alone?

    Maybe it was based on revealing confidential personal information online, to punish & silence his critics? Maybe it was based on vicious personal attacks, totally fabricated and unrelated to anything remotely related to politics and having "opinions"? Maybe it was based on spamming anti-Obama propaganda pieces several times a day for months on end.

    But again, nice try, you remain a loyal fan of your banished buddy. But rather presumptuous of you to claim what we "all know" and what RJ Admin will do. Maybe Admin will, maybe it won't. But at least most of us know that Admin removes no one here for merely having simple political opinions, as you claim. Though I can pretty much predict that if he returns, he'll go right back to pasting anti-Obama propaganda, and making personal attacks on others, about all he's good for.



    Bob, I respectfully request that you honor the spirit in which the original post in this thread was intended and do your part to bury the hatched, let bygones be bygones, and try to start fresh in the interest of a more friendly atmosphere. We all have to do our part in order to achieve this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:15 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness said
    Art_Deco saidWhat a crock of revisionist BS. ...

    But rather presumptuous of you to claim what we "all know" and what RJ Admin will do. Maybe Admin will, maybe it won't. ...

    I only know of one person who claimed to know why the Admin did what he did and whether the bans would be permanent. So the talk of "revisionist BS" is misdirected, he said politely.

    Your reading comprehension skills haven't improved since I took you off Ignore. I was referring to CJAZ's sly attempt to imply that SB's all-too-brief banishment was due to mere differences in political opinion, rather than for actual TOU violations. That's the revisionism of which I spoke. Would you like a retest scheduled?

    OK, I stand corrected as to the context of your comment. My opinion is that while the specific offenses were not political in nature, and I don't think the Admin rules based on politics, it is also my opinion that there was a concerted effort to lodge complaints. While those reasons were not political, to me it is clear that had SB's politics been in line with the majority, there would have been no such concerted effort at lodging complaints. So politics cannot be divorced from the effort. Again, responding politely and ignoring the baiting comment.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 07, 2012 7:17 PM GMT
    msuNtx said"I wish we could all bake a cake with butterflies and rainbows so we could all be happy."


    Deal, but only if you jump out of it.

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQk_1Ze0uMOAms0zClLNLX