RotoRiot/Moos is Loos/huskerfan22/Cheezypuff

huskeraddict said:
Put me in zoog's corner on that one. If anyone at any time gets banned, there should be an email sent to them to let them know of that decision. It'll be kind of hard to back track on that now with the recent sweeps we just had but something that needs to be implemented in the future, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
If you want to give them a reason, that's fine. My opinion "less is more." For me the "behavior detrimental to the board" is enough for me. I don't have the time to get into anything else. Talking Huskers is much more important/fun use of my time.

 
Eric the Red said:
huskeraddict said:
Put me in zoog's corner on that one. If anyone at any time gets banned, there should be an email sent to them to let them know of that decision. It'll be kind of hard to back track on that now with the recent sweeps we just had but something that needs to be implemented in the future, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
If you want to give them a reason, that's fine. My opinion "less is more." For me the "behavior detrimental to the board" is enough for me. I don't have the time to get into anything else. Talking Huskers is much more important/fun use of my time.
Click to expand...
99.9% of the time I agree. People who get banned are either brand-new members blatantly trolling or long-term members who have worked their way through the discipline system - and who are usually well beyond the "three strikes" policy. They know why they got banned whether they want to admit it or not.

In rare instances something weird happens and a bit more explanation is in order. But like zoogs did with beanman, mostly those explanations would be recaps of what has already happened. If they didn't agree they'd done anything wrong in the first place, reiterating it won't dent their hides.

 
I think giving them a "behavior detrimental to the board" line would be bad, actually. Being specific helps, and so too when we can point to history of past issues and chances. It makes it clear we are banning according to protocol.

Using a catch-all "behavior detrimental to the board" and leaving it at that will be read by people, including the rest of the board, as "I'm the admin and I say so." Which is the reality, but it won't make people very happy, or want to be here. We come off as heavy-handed and capricious when nothing could be further from the truth.

 
Can't figure out what is going on here.  Was in the Woodshed (now in Hidden Posts) but still.....

BillMoos said:
Nobody ran off Nuance. Huskerboard was just distracting him from his true calling of dragging his wife into the kitchen and beating her with a rolling pin. 
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, me neither. I just issued him a warning in the below thread for a personal attack on FTW. My guess is he won't be around long and to be honest if he responds negatively I'll just ban him and it'll be done with. St. Paul was close to getting a warning in that thread as well which would be the final nail in his coffin. 




 
Moos is Loos is RotoRiot

Under other circumstances, I'd be inclined to kind of look the other way if a banned member comes back and can behave themselves.  But I think in this case he should probably be gone.

Thoughts?

 
I've spent a fair amount of time pulling up old threads in the leadership forum about the overall Polo situation, just to familiarize myself with it. I also skimmed through most of this thread since I had completely forgotten about RotoRiot as a poster.

In my opinion, the toxicity of this situation warrants Roto's ban remain permanent. He made his bed. Plus, I'm fairly confident his recent status update was completely intentional and related to his ban:

Just fell outside and now by butt hurts. Hope i didnt break anything
Click to expand...


I agree with you, Mav. He should be gone.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good catch, @Mavric. Moos is Loos got on my radar as soon as he started posting. Nothing overly offensive, but he seemed to want to stir the pot a little in every thread he visited.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a comment in ScottyIce's Final Farewell thread:

Moos is Loos said:
Banned huh?
Click to expand...


Knowing Moos is a banned member makes me read this as if he is laughing at the fact he is a banned member who is posting on HB. Now, I may be reading into that too much, as he could just be expressing surprise that Matty was banned. However, if he wasn't on my radar before, I've got my magnifying glass out now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please save your applause until the end.....

After I banned Moos is Loos, he created another sock account and named it .... wait for it ..... sockboy89

Don't ask what first drew my attention to look into this account.  Some people just have a gift.

 
Joined 5 hours ago apparently solely to set up his ivory tower in the Mo Washington thread.

IP resolves to West Des Moines, Iowa

Now, obviously there could be (and probably are) Husker fans in West Des Moines.  But it seems a bit odd to me.

Makes me wonder....

 
@Mavric I did a little digging just now. @huskerfan22 has ip activity that also registers to @ScottyIce, but the other red flag is @Moos is Loos.

Moos is Loos was a sock account for RotoRiot, so I'm pretty sure it's him.

He has been neither positive or constructive since he rejoined the board, and his email address (huskerfan2204@yahoo.com) is further indicative of sock activity.

I think if he'd come in here to behave and contribute, that'd be one thing, but he's stirring the pot like a couple of our other newer members. I'm inclined to boot him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top