UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > UPNetwork

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-13-2017, 01:52 AM   #26
Shuckle
Mage of Mind
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Land of Thought and Melody
Posts: 3,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
Were you actually looking for one? There's already a lot of words in this topic, please attempt purview them again.

Or, tl;dr - from what has been said here, I don't see Aposteriori's unbanning as a second chance, but rather a completely clean slate, because all of his crimes applied to PASBL and not another RP.

To me, this is like being banned from StarCraft II for cheating, but then being allowed to play (and cheat) at StarCraft. Which Activision-Blizzard actually allows, so it's not like this logic is unique to me.

I don't fault Jeri for punishing a troublesome member of the community, I'm faulting him for a technicality, because I'm very militantly pro-letter of the law.
  1. Most people on UPN are part of more than 1 section of the forum. We're a tighter-knit community than "Customers of a given video game."
  2. If you cheat in StarCraft, you will be banned from StarCraft. It's not like being banned from SCII gives you free reign to cheat on any other Blizzard game. Clean Slate = Second Chance.
  3. Blizzard has a financial incentive to allow cheaters to play other games, and it doesn't make sense that a cheater wouldn't be allowed to play a game they bought just because they cheated in another, mostly unrelated game. UPN has no such conflict of interest.
__________________

Spoiler: show
[The Sorcerer's Ambition]A handy link, to be sure.
Level Acquisitions, sorted by level instead of name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoopes View Post
Shuckle's awesomeness level continues to rise.
Shuckle is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 02:40 AM   #27
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
1. Most people on UPN are part of more than 1 section of the forum. We're a tighter-knit community than "Customers of a given video game."
Rule of law, not rule of cliques, is how to run community. Or else people will find you unapproachable and rather than risk hostility, they'll keep their opinions to themselves. Not much of a community if nobody is willing to talk to one another.

*cough* Debate Forum *cough*

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
2. If you cheat in StarCraft, you will be banned from StarCraft. It's not like being banned from SCII gives you free reign to cheat on any other Blizzard game. Clean Slate = Second Chance.
This doesn't make any sense. A second chance is getting another shot at playing StarCraft II, not moving to an entirely different game.

Regardless of the guidance, warnings and indigence toward Aposteriori, nothing speaks louder than punishment, and the first punishment (as I am lead to believe) was a permanent ban from PASBL. There was no opportunity for what I see as an "honest" second chance. If anything, the ban may have been incentive for retaliation in the form of FB abuse. Illegal alts are almost always registered by a revenge-motivated individual.

Hence why the "temp ban" from the forum was largely useless. Aposteriori was banned from parts of the forum he never frequented, and then when he came back he was still permabanned from PASBL. How can you say Aposteriori learned his lesson when you took away his opportunity to show what he learned?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
3. Blizzard has a financial incentive to allow cheaters to play other games, and it doesn't make sense that a cheater wouldn't be allowed to play a game they bought just because they cheated in another, mostly unrelated game. UPN has no such conflict of interest.
Blizzard can't prove that one license violator is the same person playing on another license, since it's one account/IP. You could have a family of 5 using the same computer to play different games. All you could prove was the license-violating offenses. So the TOS apply only to the license, not the license-holder (who is unknown).

It isn't about a financial incentive to cheaters. See: the history of Diablo on Battle.net and how that lead to the creation of the ladder and Blizzard's vast anti-cheat infrastructure.

UPN clearly thinks the TOS is agreed with the user, not the account, hence the justification behind banning alts. But agreeing to the TOS to post on the forum is not the same as agreeing to PASBL's rules to play there, so being banned from PASBL should likewise not extend back to the forum-level TOS (let alone FB's) unless Aposteriori was also violating the TOS alongside PASBL's rules.

I feel like I'm repeating myself now, so I'll just quote myself:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
The proper courses of action were: a permanent forum-wide ban (most severe), a Clubs & Social Projects subforum ban (moderate severity) or a long temp ban with the option to return to PASBL (least severe).

#2 makes the most sense because FB should not have accepted players who got themselves permanently banned from PASBL. If you are Canada, do you accept an immigrant with a murder/rape conviction in the US? If they could not clean up their act in the game they were already vested in, why would they do so in a new one?

Jeri's ultimate choice was pretty much the worst option. The main forum loses a potential contributor, FB was terrorized, and the banned posters received inconsistent treatment regarding their transgressions in different RP which sets a bad precedent as it moves the ban into vaguer discretionary authority.
Note that I am not in favour of #3, but consider it fairer to everyone (Aposteriori included) than #2. In the #3 scenario, Aposteriori never goes to FB, and it is a true second chance where he either opts for revenge (and we quickly proceed to option #1) or reforms and keeps his PASBL gains.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 02:49 AM   #28
Sneaze
#SWAG
 
Sneaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Sigs Hell
Posts: 5,654
Send a message via Skype™ to Sneaze
Aposteriori's permaban from ASB was not his first punishment, just to clear that bit of misinformation up. He had recieved a temporary ban prior to that, and many, many warning along the way.
__________________
Wild Future - FizzBy
PASBL - Ghost Grass Gym Leader - Dragon Elite Four


Daisy wins at life for making this Battle Cut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post
Whatever Sneasel says is right
Sneaze is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 03:03 AM   #29
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Well, that's a case closed then. I don't have anything further to say, except that I'm annoyed/disappointed I had to waste all this energy when all someone had to say was he wasn't a first time offender.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 03:30 AM   #30
Ironthunder
The Uncultured One
 
Ironthunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Getting train rekt
Posts: 2,215
Send a message via Skype™ to Ironthunder
It was 100% a second chance, and it's pretty clear that a chunk of the community wouldn't have minded if his first ban was permanent. If he was banned for cheating at the game, then maybe it would have been. He was banned for being a colossal chodemunching assdweller, which is a community thing and nothing to do with it being ASB in particular. In your metaphor of Starcrafts, he wasn't banned for cheating, he was banned for being a toxic shit in the community. Also FB and ASB are probably a lot more interconnected than Starcraft I and II due to a rather large community overlap, so being banned for community stuff is a much larger issue, because a chunk of the community in both is the same people.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Squad summary here.
TL3, 129.5 TP, 37 KOs, 3 SP
C grade ref.

WF quest log here.

FB stuff here.
Ironthunder is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 04:24 AM   #31
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Again: Unless someone is literally threatening to split apart the forum, toxic posters are better off ignored and ostracized than banned.

Because all you've done is block off main street and roll out the red carpet for his Illegal Alt Parade. The #1 rule to defeating trolls is to not feed them.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 05:32 AM   #32
KamenAeons
What are you looking at?
 
KamenAeons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: FLOOF
Posts: 2,733
I'm pretty sure it's been said numerous times that DT was a repeat offender, Dopple.
__________________




Spoiler: show


Yukirin is awesome for doing this for me! And by Yukirin, I mean lilbleucorsola.
3DS FC: 1607 2923 7949

The Kamen Fleet (TL5 / A- Grade Referee) | Cameron Kalmia: Viridian's Maskmaker
Hizumi Yukikaze: Emerald Breeze~ | Tokikou Nobuyuki: Time Mage
Ludger Bullenaar: Bastion of Raji City | Helena Levinton: Violet Stitching
Shizuya Kasen: SHSL Armourer

Waifu Squadron and Explorers | Cavern of Chaotic Creativity




Paradise lies beyond the horizon, challenge it because it is unreachable.
Speak of the absolute territory, and grasp it with your hands.


Spoiler: show


SAAVE ME


FLOOF AND MOFUMOFU JUSTICE! *WHACK*


Spoiler: show

"Quit poking my face! >_<"
"Ahahaha, you'll never get rid of this! *hiss*"

Spoiler: show

"STOP POKING MY SISTER!"

Spoiler: show

"That was a terrible idea. But holy carp, this tastes pretty nice."


Spoiler: show
Kamen's mind:

"YOUKOSO WAGA CRAZY E"



Love burns brightly for one and all.

Spoiler: show


Please don't diss idols or fluffy things in my presence.
KamenAeons is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 09:43 AM   #33
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
That doesn't matter though! Being a douchebag is not a crime, and if that is the "real" reason he was banned (much like the constant baiting to get UM to self-incriminate) you all should feel bad, because that's pathetic. Not because the poster was trouble, but because the solution is very easy and effective if everyone cooperates.

This has happened on UPN before (with one of my best friends) and it happened at work, and I will probably see it again in some form. But I cannot, for the life of me, understand why people take things personally on the internet and cannot hit the ignore. Perhaps I grew up in an era where a screename is merely a pseudonym and not an alter ego. Perhaps it's because I have years of experience trolling and learned how to grind people down to a miserable, self-doubting puddle of paste.

But ostracizing is the only real tool that works. It's like a community-enforced "hellban". By taking this route, you guys have only opened yourself to a recurring curse and exposed yourself a lacking self-control or self-discipline.

Now, maybe Kuno's ignore function could use work. I still see the poster's hidden post in topics where I have ignore enabled. Other forums have their presence completely ablated unless someone quotes them, as if the post were deleted. Mods can see deleted posts so why not make the functions more similar?
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 10:12 AM   #34
Talon87
Shenmue III, baby!
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,161
Send a message via AIM to Talon87
Victims of cyberbullying can easily explain to you why it isn't a simple fix of hitting Ignore:

The toxic member continues to be a part of the community.

It doesn't matter if you stick your head in the sand and ignore all the shitty things the person is saying about you or indeed doing to you. That person is still around. They're still whispering in people's ears. They're still spreading misinformation. They're still sowing discord.

Ostracization doesn't work when less than 100% of the community engages in it. Everyone has to be on board for ostracization to really work. You've already demonstrated this, with your principled defenses of Aposteriori signaling that you would not have agreed to ignore him had you been approached and asked to do so by the ASB memberbase. Even if he had been successfully "banned" (read: ostracized) from ASB and FB, you would have still rolled out the welcome mat for him in the other corners of the forum. He wouldn't have moved on with his life, or allowed others here to move on with theirs. He would have continued to linger, for better or worse, and found new acquaintances with whom to discuss.

Even when somebody is permanently banned from the forum, if people from the community decide to keep in touch with the offender elsewhere, he's still going to feel a connection to the community and he's still going to stick around on the fringes. We have demonstrable proof of this. I don't know why I should even have to explain to you the limitations of ostracization as a tool for punishing offensive members.

Banning a member can be as much about providing relief to members of the community as it can be about punishing the offender. While no degree of banning can ever truly stamp out communications between the banned individual and lingering members of the community (unless of course no one wants to continue their relationships with the banned member, in which case you have achieved your 100% ostracization scenario), it can at least mitigate the damage. The banned member isn't as easily able to sow discord as before; they aren't as easily able to offend as before; they aren't as easily able to disrupt as before. Even if you can't fully remove their toxic presence, you can greatly reduce it through a hard ban.

All of this stated, I am inclined to agree with you rather strongly that this scenario appears to bear more resemblance to the situation with UnownMew than it does with other members we have banned in the past. If you look at most of his final posts in the Fizzy Bubbles' Time Out thread, you can see a lot of similarities in how they composed themselves.

First: Aposteriori was civil, polite, and rational in most of his writing, whereas his critics were frequently immature, impolite, or irrational in theirs. That's not to say that they are wrong or he is right, just that, I see a lot of similarities in terms of how the two composed themselves. UnownMew had that faultless Mormon disposition to him where, no matter how harsh you were to him, he would always maintain his composure and respond with kind words. He didn't call people "douchenozzles", "scumbags", or "sacks of excrement" the way that many of his critics here have done to him in the last few weeks.

Second: it is clear that, from the wing(s) of the forum pushing for his ban, this was an almost universally unpopular member. It's not so much that he broke rules (I won't speak for ASB but I can't think of any flagrant rulebreaking he engaged in in FB) as it is that he engaged in practices which made people resent or despise him. In essence, people wanted him GONE. No matter the means. Any excuse would do. Any excuse to be rid of his presence once and for all. It feels similar to UnownMew, where the justification for his ban (his outspoken pedophilia on a forum which was only just then starting to cater to the under-15 crowd) came second to a long-brewing desire to be rid of the guy due to posts he had made in other discussions.
Talon87 is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 11:11 AM   #35
Heather
POOTIS!
 
Heather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Under the Gay Cloud
Posts: 2,847
I'm going to take issue with the words civil and polite there, Talon. I think Sneaze pointed out already how Apost was definitely guilty of baiting, and whether or not Sneaze fell for it, that is not civil or polite. Also, trying to abuse the case of my interactions with him to make himself seem the victim despite the fact that literally everyone was telling him they weren't buying it is not civil or polite, it was a blatant attempt to be manipulative (another thing he likes to do).

In any case, we wanted him gone because his presence was nothing but a detriment to the community. He continued to be solely self serving, and was outright attempting to make FB trainer battles into new!ASB, which is the most roundabout way of circumventing a ban known to man. Hell, we told Meetan as soon as he reared his head exactly what kind of behavior to expect from him and she can tell you herself that from her own experience, such warnings were entirely justified.

Anyway, if there is any rule that should never have to be written down that goes across the entirety of any forum, it should be don't harass the userbase. A great many of the people who were in FB during the time of Apost's stay will tell you that if Apost wanted something of theirs, he would never stop asking for it, because as has been said many times, Apost didn't know the meaning of the word no. I'd imagine you'd hate the guy too if he decided to pester you to no end for a Pokemon you'd been going after for a long time once you finally got it. That behavior is what has gotten Apost banned at this rate, because he can't keep from pestering anyone and everyone around him for his own benefit. Because let's face it, if Apost had just been breaking rules in FB specifically, Jeri could have just banned him from FB specifically, like he did ASB.
The ban was not for FB specific behavior, because it was the same behavior that got him banned from ASB. In simpler terms, it wasn't because he expressed these behaviors in a specific game, it was because he expressed them repeatedly despite being told he should not by several warnings and a ban from ASB. Sure, he was supremely disliked, but that tends to come with the territory of problematic behavior.
Because, you know, if it didn't bother anyone at all, it probably wouldn't be problematic, ya get me?
__________________
Confidence (Some Assembly Required): Because NQNH's save file is now RIP
Spoiler: show

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy View Post
Quoth the Honchkrow (nevermore!).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Things One Is Not Allowed To Do In Exalted
244) While not FORBIDDEN, my Midnight is to keep in mind that using an army of animated skeletons in order to fill the town square with a rendition of "Spooky Scary Skeletons" is going to be considered odd at best.
WF Things
Heather is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 11:36 AM   #36
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
It doesn't matter if you stick your head in the sand and ignore all the shitty things the person is saying about you or indeed doing to you. That person is still around. They're still whispering in people's ears. They're still spreading misinformation. They're still sowing discord.
I put up with this+, but it's to my face and not online:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger
For example, I am the most complained about employee at my workplace, by far, despite receiving the highest ratings on my performance evaluation. The reason is simply that I don't participate in the petty complaint pissing contest, so the totals for the other employees are lower, while mine look higher.

With regard to the pissing contest, I should clarify a bit: I am, probably, the only person in the hospital who is liked by everybody across the departments. I know for a fact that my coworkers hate one another because I hear the badmouthing personally behind the other's backs. But that doesn't mean I'm still not a target for the petty things like not buying dish soap or not brewing coffee. My boss didn't let such stupid complaints taint her impression of me during the performance evaluation.
I operate in a small town community where this is no privacy and everyone wages passive aggressive war on one another - the horrible kind where people time your bathroom breaks to determine if you went #1 or #2, then text others in the hospital to investigate the bathroom for something to make fun of you with (like what you ate the day before).

It's funny to me because of how childish it is, but the toxic environment has taken its toll as people leave and no one gets hired. That, rather than the verbal harassment, is what will ultimately doom these circumstances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Ostracization doesn't work when less than 100% of the community engages in it. Everyone has to be on board for ostracization to really work. You've already demonstrated this, with your principled defenses of Aposteriori signaling that you would not have agreed to ignore him had you been approached and asked to do so by the ASB memberbase. Even if he had been successfully "banned" (read: ostracized) from ASB and FB, you would have still rolled out the welcome mat for him in the other corners of the forum. He wouldn't have moved on with his life, or allowed others here to move on with theirs. He would have continued to linger, for better or worse, and found new acquaintances with whom to discuss.
This isn't true. I agreed to ignore Blastoise - who is one of my oldest friends on UPN, albeit one I've grown fairly distant from - as an effort to keep the community from splintering. I had him on my list before his ban and kept him on long since he was unbanned. Only in late 2016 after he had behaved himself for a while did I finally feel it was safe to remove him.

UPN has successfully ignored a poster before. User "Link" from last January was ignored by everyone, then banned after repeated rule violations. The only difference being that Link, unlike Aposteriori, had not infiltrated the community as deeply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Even when somebody is permanently banned from the forum, if people from the community decide to keep in touch with the offender elsewhere, he's still going to feel a connection to the community and he's still going to stick around on the fringes. We have demonstrable proof of this. I don't know why I should even have to explain to you the limitations of ostracization as a tool for punishing offensive members.
People know UM IRL, which is how people continue to keep in contact with him, because he's largely withdrawn himself from Pokemon-related communities and never made an attempt to infiltrate UPN again.

I've made a lot of effort to try and maintain connections to UM, but they've largely failed, especially since MSN was shutdown for Skype. Hence why my fears of AIM's someday shutdown will - potentially - drive me away from this place as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Banning a member can be as much about providing relief to members of the community as it can be about punishing the offender. While no degree of banning can ever truly stamp out communications between the banned individual and lingering members of the community (unless of course no one wants to continue their relationships with the banned member, in which case you have achieved your 100% ostracization scenario), it can at least mitigate the damage. The banned member isn't as easily able to sow discord as before; they aren't as easily able to offend as before; they aren't as easily able to disrupt as before. Even if you can't fully remove their toxic presence, you can greatly reduce it through a hard ban.
I know you've gone through the Blastoise situation, but honestly that cannot compare to an honest-to-god determined troll, where a ban is little more than a speedbump. I recall the jihad I waged against Answerman a decade ago, where I spent 12 hours a day doing nothing but trolling or appealing to others to troll him.

I did real damage to Zac Bertschy, eventually forcing him to step down as Answerman, because I was one of the first people to turn opinion against him, so every column he wrote he had to defend in the forums. And because of the nature of his column he was obligated to swallow baits, which attracted additional trolls. He would eventually incriminate himself and that was that, but before I was banned I was also cross-boarding (with 4chan, AnimeSuki, Arlong Park) and soliciting help through the PM system.

UM was unintentionally offensive. Blastoise was sadistic. Aposteriori may have been either, but I was neither - my end goal was total destruction at any cost. ANN routinely dealt with the former two kind of trolls but wasn't prepared for my strain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
All of this stated, I am inclined to agree with you rather strongly that this scenario appears to bear more resemblance to the situation with UnownMew than it does with other members we have banned in the past. If you look at most of his final posts in the Fizzy Bubbles' Time Out thread, you can see a lot of similarities in how they composed themselves.

First: Aposteriori was civil, polite, and rational in most of his writing, whereas his critics were frequently immature, impolite, or irrational in theirs. That's not to say that they are wrong or he is right, just that, I see a lot of similarities in terms of how the two composed themselves. UnownMew had that faultless Mormon disposition to him where, no matter how harsh you were to him, he would always maintain his composure and respond with kind words. He didn't call people "douchenozzles", "scumbags", or "sacks of excrement" the way that many of his critics here have done to him in the last few weeks.

Second: it is clear that, from the wing(s) of the forum pushing for his ban, this was an almost universally unpopular member. It's not so much that he broke rules (I won't speak for ASB but I can't think of any flagrant rulebreaking he engaged in in FB) as it is that he engaged in practices which made people resent or despise him. In essence, people wanted him GONE. No matter the means. Any excuse would do. Any excuse to be rid of his presence once and for all. It feels similar to UnownMew, where the justification for his ban (his outspoken pedophilia on a forum which was only just then starting to cater to the under-15 crowd) came second to a long-brewing desire to be rid of the guy due to posts he had made in other discussions.
Civility is a weapon common to experienced trolls because someone who is immature or ad hominems often makes for an easily justified ban. From what I've heard of Aposteriori, that definitely sounds like a calculated move, while in UM's case that was just his default personality.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 12:57 PM   #37
deoxys
こばやし だいすき~
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 私の尾を食べてください OwO
Posts: 6,482
There seems to be much conclusion jumping is happening here in regards to a member, and a situation, you have fully admitted you know very little about.

It seems to me the notion of banning someone on UPN in general is something that makes you uncomfortable, which is understandable given how the issue is somewhat personal to you due to past history, and because it's very, very seldom someone active gets wholly banned from the community due to how normally laid back everyone is. So I'm assuming that may be why you feel the need to take a stand on this issue... one that, again, you have admitted you only know the most barebones details of.

I can assure you that as someone who by default has no horse in this particular race one way or the other due to my extremely limited personal interactions with Aposteriori over the years and no direct tie to the communities he frequented, that, as an outsider who has been looking in on this for a while now, it's pretty clear to me that the banning of this individual is wholly appropriate at this point. And if I didn't feel that it was, I would probably say something, as I'm sure you're well aware by now I am not afraid to do...

You give someone a second chance, a third chance, a fourth chance, an eighth chance, a twelfth chance, and they fuck it up every time, it becomes clear there is probably no end in sight to the amount of times they will say "Sorry, won't happen again." At that point, you've issued multiple ultimatums, and they still haven't complied, what are you left with? They are bringing nothing to the community but toxicity and negativity and trolling and taking advantage of anyone they want, whenever they want, and it becomes clear they're just bringing down everyone around them intentionally.

But if you want to call it just "being loyal to King George" or what have you just because of my demi-admin status, then it's whatever, I guess :l
deoxys is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 03:13 PM   #38
Shuckle
Mage of Mind
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Land of Thought and Melody
Posts: 3,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
Rule of law, not rule of cliques, is how to run community. Or else people will find you unapproachable and rather than risk hostility, they'll keep their opinions to themselves. Not much of a community if nobody is willing to talk to one another.

*cough* Debate Forum *cough*

This doesn't make any sense. A second chance is getting another shot at playing StarCraft II, not moving to an entirely different game.
That comment was regarding the literal case of a "clean slate." Banning him from forums he rulebreaks in would be like banning someone from Zerg vs. Protoss in SCII because of cheating, and then saying "well we can't PROVE that he's going to cheat in Terran vs. Zerg!!!!!" And then when he does, "well we can't PROVE that he's going to cheat in Protoss vs. Terran!!!!!"

Quote:
Regardless of the guidance, warnings and indigence toward Aposteriori, nothing speaks louder than punishment, and the first punishment (as I am lead to believe) was a permanent ban from PASBL. There was no opportunity for what I see as an "honest" second chance. If anything, the ban may have been incentive for retaliation in the form of FB abuse. Illegal alts are almost always registered by a revenge-motivated individual.
Stop TALKING and start LISTENING and maybe you will do yourself a FAVOR.

...is what I would say if it didn't seem like you finally actually did that. So now my rage is directionless and will eventually fizzle out somewhere beyond the planet Mars, in the cold dead expanse of space.
__________________

Spoiler: show
[The Sorcerer's Ambition]A handy link, to be sure.
Level Acquisitions, sorted by level instead of name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoopes View Post
Shuckle's awesomeness level continues to rise.
Shuckle is offline  
Old 04-13-2017, 03:50 PM   #39
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
There seems to be much conclusion jumping is happening here in regards to a member, and a situation, you have fully admitted you know very little about.
I've made repeated appeals for clarification, and there's only been a few heeded calls. That I am not invested in Aposteriori should communicate that this is a principle problem because I don't know anything about him. Heck, I had to discern that you guys already consider the banned posters one person because nobody here outright said it.

What's the problem? I don't understand the timid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
It seems to me the notion of banning someone on UPN in general is something that makes you uncomfortable, which is understandable given how the issue is somewhat personal to you due to past history, and because it's very, very seldom someone active gets wholly banned from the community due to how normally laid back everyone is. So I'm assuming that may be why you feel the need to take a stand on this issue... one that, again, you have admitted you only know the most barebones details of.
This is wrong. I dislike the process behind the decisions, and the drama they open up, but I'm okay with the bans. It's not like I was heartbroken after leaving ANN a smoldering demilitarized zone: if you break the rules, you deserve the punishment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
I can assure you that as someone who by default has no horse in this particular race one way or the other due to my extremely limited personal interactions with Aposteriori over the years and no direct tie to the communities he frequented, that, as an outsider who has been looking in on this for a while now, it's pretty clear to me that the banning of this individual is wholly appropriate at this point. And if I didn't feel that it was, I would probably say something, as I'm sure you're well aware by now I am not afraid to do...
Your mileage may vary. That's the slippery slope whenever one makes normative calls on a poster's behaviour. I would consider things from Aposteriori's position - is the guy just an obsessive compulsive griefer, or is he like UM in how his compulsions are ingrained and not deliberately weaponised?

Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
You give someone a second chance, a third chance, a fourth chance, an eighth chance, a twelfth chance, and they fuck it up every time, it becomes clear there is probably no end in sight to the amount of times they will say "Sorry, won't happen again." At that point, you've issued multiple ultimatums, and they still haven't complied, what are you left with? They are bringing nothing to the community but toxicity and negativity and trolling and taking advantage of anyone they want, whenever they want, and it becomes clear they're just bringing down everyone around them intentionally.
From personal experience, it probably wasn't intentional on the part of Aposteriori. Rule #1 of the art of trolling is you need to spend less energy than the person being trolled. By contrast, it sounds like Aposteriori exerted tons of effort to be annoying and venemous, and doing that intentionally over long periods is incredibly hard. An easier explanation was he was obsessive compulsive about games and went power mad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
But if you want to call it just "being loyal to King George" or what have you just because of my demi-admin status, then it's whatever, I guess :l
I didn't even know you were one. It was a joke because you are American, and loyalists opposed the American Revolution which at the top was motivated by Enlightenment concepts of rights and a rejection of tyranny.

You know the famous, faux Voltaire quote?

Quote:
Originally Posted by notVoltaire
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Pretty much sums up my approach to this topic.

Also, I didn't want to talk anymore because I considered the matter cased closed, but whatever. I got to talk about different things this time.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-15-2017, 10:22 AM   #40
dirkac
Did I f-f-fucking stutter
 
dirkac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Some shitty keep.
Posts: 1,366
Oh Apost definitely was fucking power mad more than they tried to be a troll, but honestly it was much worse than a troll because while a troll you cna ignore, someone who was as incessantly power-oriented as Apost you can't because they will always work behind the scenes, behind whoever put him on Ignore, and just would not stop because of it.
They often targeted newer members and really groomed them so that they would effectively become their tools to use to get ahead i the game, making the entire game pracitcally revolve around him and giving him much more power than any normal member should have.


I should not that I myself have very little real knowledge of this either though, as I barely ever really was involved with all this shit, but when Apos did approach me it was very persistent and manipulate


so i petition to unban the both of them because the fallout was funny
__________________
dirkac is offline  
Old 04-15-2017, 12:39 PM   #41
Mew The Gato
Smile
 
Mew The Gato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,702
What you have said has been all over the place, so I will just refer to it from the beginning. If your stance has changed in any of the below cases before this post, feel free to just say so.

It is a very real tactic for abusers (whether physical or emotional) to abuse someone, then apologize and go right back to abusing them, rinse and repeat ad nauseum, or deny that what they did constituted abuse in the first place. Either way, the abuser in question continues doing what they have been doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
My logic is consistent if you start with the first post.

1. Jeri should have issued the global ban from the very beginning, after the PASBL disaster, if the crimes warranted it. Nobody has outright said Aposteriori was threatening the community's foundations, but if that was the case, he had to go. This is 100% on Aposteriori.

2. Aposteriori repeating the same behavour in FB becomes unfair because, same action, different (more severe) punishment. You can't argue that Aposteriori didn't learn his lesson, thus justifying the harsher punishment, because the temp ban from the whole forum did not offer any guidance for rehabilitation at all. It might as well have never been levied. FB is also traumatized. Jeri had to violate his own precedent (consistency dictating a ban from FB only) to set things right, but in doing so had to exercise discretionary authority.
Your principle dictates that the abused should either

(i) cut all ties with the abuser the first time if possible (the equivalent in this case being the "global ban from the beginning" that you mentioned); this is perfectly justified, if, as you said, the abused deems the offense severe enough to warrant this.

(ii) bear with it if they do not deem the offense severe enough the first time. This is where the problem begins. What if the abused do not deem it fair to cut all ties the very first time? This is also perfectly fair, because people are not always capable of reading exactly where a situation will go. There is a very real chance that the abused may want to give the abuser a second chance (as was given in this case, even before the permanent PASBL ban, and as you yourself suggested through your mentions of a "second chance" and "rehabilitation" over the course of this thread).

Now, this becomes the testing ground for determining whether the abuser in question is inclined to mend their ways or to continue as they have been. You have stated that repeated offenses warrant only the same degree of disciplinary action, that a more severe ban on a repeated offense (or, one could say, an entire streak of repeated offenses) is unfair.

This stance is myopic -- it fails to account for the fact that each offense does not, in fact, exist in a vacuum, and that punishment does not erase traces of previous offenses. Instead, offenses accumulate. The severity of a repeated offense is not just of itself, but the sum of itself and previous offenses. This means it is automatically more severe, and, even going by your own ideal of "appropriate punishment according to offense", justifies the fact that a global ban was not levied the first time, but was after the offenses continued flooding in.

-----

This is aside from the fact that your attack on a "discretionary" ban is itself questionable. As Snorby has previously pointed out in this thread, UPN does not actually have a set of codified and regularly enforced rules. There is, therefore, no set of rules to stick to in the first place, and this intrinsically means that every ban would be based on discretion.

Your statements are also contradictory in that you point out that such a ban might be justified in some situation: one wherein the offender is "threatening to split apart the forums"... except that deeming whether the offender is doing so is in itself subjective, discretionary. There would probably be those who would, in fact, say that Aposteriori was threatening to do so.

Ah, except for another thing Snorby (among multiple others) pointed out -- the one rule we have is "don't be a douche".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
That doesn't matter though! Being a douchebag is not a crime, and if that is the "real" reason he was banned (much like the constant baiting to get UM to self-incriminate) you all should feel bad, because that's pathetic. Not because the poster was trouble, but because the solution is very easy and effective if everyone cooperates.
Contrary to what you said, "being a douche" is literally the crime that we have a rule in place against.

Furthermore, your mention of "cliques" leads me to believe that you are ignoring the scale to which the problem had grown. This was not a vocal minority speaking, it was an overwhelming majority. This ban was not "tyrannical", as you seem to imply, because it represented the overall view of the community. It was not based on one person's principles, but nearly the entire community's. To be frank, this has been made amply clear in this very thread; you cannot be unaware of this.

Last edited by Mew The Gato; 04-15-2017 at 12:59 PM.
Mew The Gato is offline  
Old 04-15-2017, 08:45 PM   #42
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mew The Gato View Post

Now, this becomes the testing ground for determining whether the abuser in question is inclined to mend their ways or to continue as they have been. You have stated that repeated offenses warrant only the same degree of disciplinary action, that a more severe ban on a repeated offense (or, one could say, an entire streak of repeated offenses) is unfair.
That isn't correct. I don't think Aposteriori deserved a slap on the wrist for what he did in FB; if you consider what he did in PASBL as a global-ban worthy offense, he deserved a global ban, not a temp ban + permission to enter a new RP.

The problem was twofold:

Jeri deemed the first offense not severe enough to warrant a global ban, even though it was one. In order to downgrade a global ban to an RP ban, there had to be some (1) guidance Aposteriori was to follow and (2) some connection between the poster's interest and the punishment to negatively reinforce that behaviour.

(2) was never a thing in this case. Aposteriori's criminal history should have had no bearing on his offenses in FB.

For example, had he immediately stopped using the name "Aposteriori" and merely registered under a different account for FB, he should have received the same punishment Aposteriori was given in PASBL. Not because he was a first-time offender (as according to you all, he was warn-banned before) but because Jeri set a precedent that the offense wasn't grievous enough for a global ban. If you global ban one poster but temp ban another for the same offense, that is discretion/favouritism/corruption or what have you.

I would argue, because of how Jeri went around punishing Aposteriori for PASBL, he should have been treated as a new poster for purposes of his FB crimes. And as I just mentioned, the new poster shouldn't get a more severe punishment than the older one.

People forget that jail - or, in this case, banning - is an old time punishment for the community's benefit more than the offender, though Talon mentioned as much. If anything, a ban might make the poster more likely to repeat offend unless they have a clear incentive to change (like they want to maintain friendships). A temp ban knowing Aposteriori was not going to change is reckless. A temp ban without some plan in place for encouraging Aposteriori to change is foolish. Ergo, it should have been a permaban or there should have been some clear connection between.

Like, I think had UM been banned from the Debate Forum, which was hardly his only interest on UPN and was the only place he was griefing others, he'd still be with us today. It's not a guarantee, but if he kept his talk to anime, video games and whatnot I think he'd be alright.

A certain friend of mine was a militant homophobe who I was able to turn into an LGBT tolerant, only because I was able to maintain conversation due to shared interest in anime/manga. It's important skill to not only determine who is open to change but how to approach them in a way that isn't confrontational.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mew The Gato View Post

This stance is myopic -- it fails to account for the fact that each offense does not, in fact, exist in a vacuum, and that punishment does not erase traces of previous offenses. Instead, offenses accumulate. The severity of a repeated offense is not just of itself, but the sum of itself and previous offenses. This means it is automatically more severe, and, even going by your own ideal of "appropriate punishment according to offense", justifies the fact that a global ban was not levied the first time, but was after the offenses continued flooding in.
I don't like this viewpoint, and I find it dangerous. You are advocating punishing someone multiple times for the same offense, which is blatantly unfair. That doesn't happen in real courts where prior criminal history is inadmissible evidence for conviction of a current crime.

Like it or not, communities cannot bar child sex offenders from living in an area where children are present. They are added to a list and the community members are notified, but barring them from an area is further punishment for the sex offense, and so is disallowed. This is basic, first-world legal jurisprudence.

UPN cannot claim to be a welcoming place it if can't even meet this standard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mew The Gato View Post

This is aside from the fact that your attack on a "discretionary" ban is itself questionable. As Snorby has previously pointed out in this thread, UPN does not actually have a set of codified and regularly enforced rules. There is, therefore, no set of rules to stick to in the first place, and this intrinsically means that every ban would be based on discretion.
There are dozens of bans every year for blatant TOS-violating criteria, like spambots, alts or trolling. There's only been a small handful (like 3 cases in 5 years) and that have involved someone being offended. You know the cases because people have gotten into big arguments over them for the same reasons, starring different debaters.

As I pointed out before, I acknowledge that it's impossible for anything involving judgment to be discretion-free. But there is a clear preference toward minimizing it and in this particular case, I think a proper judgment call earlier would have prevented having to make a more ambitious judgment call later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mew The Gato View Post

Your statements are also contradictory in that you point out that such a ban might be justified in some situation: one wherein the offender is "threatening to split apart the forums"... except that deeming whether the offender is doing so is in itself subjective, discretionary. There would probably be those who would, in fact, say that Aposteriori was threatening to do so.
When UM was banned, there wasn't anything specific in the rules about pedophilia, but Talon pointed out that allowing someone spouting such views would destroy the credibility of a community wanting to open itself to young posters. Everyone agreed, and I think while not explicit for UPN, and Jeri can provide input on this, most countries require that you not try to destroy them as a stipulation for earning citizenship.

Whether Aposteriori was this grave a threat, is not my call, as I am an uninvolved, uninformed third party. But from what I'm told, the RP community dropped the ball big time in policing itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mew The Gato View Post

Furthermore, your mention of "cliques" leads me to believe that you are ignoring the scale to which the problem had grown. This was not a vocal minority speaking, it was an overwhelming majority. This ban was not "tyrannical", as you seem to imply, because it represented the overall view of the community. It was not based on one person's principles, but nearly the entire community's. To be frank, this has been made amply clear in this very thread; you cannot be unaware of this.
Who are you speaking for? There are people in this topic who barely know who he is.

FYI, I have Clubs and Social Projects hidden. My last major sortie in there was 2013's Murder at Mahogany and Dangan Ronpa: UPN. The only time I ever bother to go in there these days is when there's a red alert for the Emotional Baggage Thread.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 12:22 AM   #43
Shuckle
Mage of Mind
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Land of Thought and Melody
Posts: 3,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
For example, had he immediately stopped using the name "Aposteriori" and merely registered under a different account for FB, he should have received the same punishment Aposteriori was given in PASBL. Not because he was a first-time offender (as according to you all, he was warn-banned before) but because Jeri set a precedent that the offense wasn't grievous enough for a global ban. If you global ban one poster but temp ban another for the same offense, that is discretion/favouritism/corruption or what have you.

I would argue, because of how Jeri went around punishing Aposteriori for PASBL, he should have been treated as a new poster for purposes of his FB crimes. And as I just mentioned, the new poster shouldn't get a more severe punishment than the older one.

People forget that jail - or, in this case, banning - is an old time punishment for the community's benefit more than the offender, though Talon mentioned as much. If anything, a ban might make the poster more likely to repeat offend unless they have a clear incentive to change (like they want to maintain friendships). A temp ban knowing Aposteriori was not going to change is reckless. A temp ban without some plan in place for encouraging Aposteriori to change is foolish. Ergo, it should have been a permaban or there should have been some clear connection between.
I'm pretty sure EmeraldGoblin and Darth Takuya are the same person as Aposteriori. So not only did he get numerous second chances on the original accounts, he went ahead and started over multiple times.

If 👏 you 👏 don't 👏 understand 👏 the 👏 situation 👏 don't 👏 pretend 👏 you 👏 do 👏
__________________

Spoiler: show
[The Sorcerer's Ambition]A handy link, to be sure.
Level Acquisitions, sorted by level instead of name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoopes View Post
Shuckle's awesomeness level continues to rise.
Shuckle is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 12:28 AM   #44
Zelphon
Happy October
 
Zelphon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: A Broken Mind
Posts: 2,146
Send a message via Skype™ to Zelphon
#BringBackDT
__________________
Life, but a series of paths and flows
Down many one can go
May yours run smoothly and be soft to your feet

Zelphon is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 01:19 AM   #45
Talon87
Shenmue III, baby!
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,161
Send a message via AIM to Talon87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
You are advocating punishing someone multiple times for the same offense, which is blatantly unfair. That doesn't happen in real courts where prior criminal history is inadmissible evidence for conviction of a current crime.
Wait, what? When Mew the Gato wrote this (to which you're replying above):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mew The Gato View Post
This stance is myopic -- it fails to account for the fact that each offense does not, in fact, exist in a vacuum, and that punishment does not erase traces of previous offenses. Instead, offenses accumulate. The severity of a repeated offense is not just of itself, but the sum of itself and previous offenses. This means it is automatically more severe [....]
My immediate thought was of courtrooms in the real world. How can you say, "This doesn't happen in real courts" when prior convictions is 100% a thing that the courts look at when deciding how to sentence someone? "I didn't say sentencing, I said conviction" you might say ... but that's the thing: if you're going to focus on convicting rather than sentencing then you've improperly responded to MtG to begin with. MtG's quoted paragraph is totally describing sentencing here (an escalation of punishment meted out in response to a current offense and in light of prior offenses), not conviction (determining a party's innocence or guilt in some matter).
Talon87 is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 03:59 AM   #46
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
My immediate thought was of courtrooms in the real world. How can you say, "This doesn't happen in real courts" when prior convictions is 100% a thing that the courts look at when deciding how to sentence someone? "I didn't say sentencing, I said conviction" you might say ... but that's the thing: if you're going to focus on convicting rather than sentencing then you've improperly responded to MtG to begin with. MtG's quoted paragraph is totally describing sentencing here (an escalation of punishment meted out in response to a current offense and in light of prior offenses), not conviction (determining a party's innocence or guilt in some matter).
That is called double jeopardy and it is illegal. Invoking prior conviction is a courtroom drama meme that doesn't have much bearing in the real world. You absolutely cannot let "offenses accumulate", that is horrifying to even advocate.

For example, random Google response because I'm on break:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronx Defenders
3. How can my criminal history affect my chances at getting a job?
Under New York law, employers and state agencies that issue licenses cannot reject you simply because you have a criminal conviction. Instead, you may only be rejected if (1) there is a direct relationship between a conviction on your criminal record and the job or license you want; or (2) hiring you would pose an unreasonable risk to persons or property. C - See more at: http://www.bronxdefenders.org/employ....lK4tAc7A.dpuf
If you were convicted of grand theft auto and were going to work for O'Reilly Auto Parts, they probably wouldn't feel comfortable hiring someone to be around cars or car parts. But if you were convicted of vehicular manslaughter, well you're probably not driving a car while you're hawking tires.

IMO, FB should not have allowed Aposteriori to join in the first place, but that's neither here nor there.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 04:41 AM   #47
Talon87
Shenmue III, baby!
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,161
Send a message via AIM to Talon87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
That is called double jeopardy and it is illegal.
NO, IT'S NOT DOUBLE JEOPARDY! "Double jeopardy" is being tried for the exact same instance of a crime twice. "Double jeopardy" is not being tried for the same general crime twice, nor is it what you've quoted me discussing -- which was judges using a person's prior convictions, or "priors", to determine appropriate sentencing.

Example by way of O.J. Simpson:
  • Double jeopardy would be if he were tried in criminal court for the murder of his wife, found not guilty, and then tried again in criminal court for the exact same murder.
  • Double jeopardy would not be if he were tried in criminal court for the murder of his wife, found not guilty, and then at a later date tried in court again for a new, second murder
  • Double jeopardy would also not be if he were tried in criminal court for the murder of his wife, found guilty (in this parallel world), sentenced to life in prison with chance of parole in 15 years, makes his first parole hearing, murders someone else shortly after release from prison, goes back to court, gets found guilty of this new murder, and this time has the book thrown at him with a sentence of life in prison without chance for parole
You're either very confused right now, Doppel, or else you're misinformed. It is not double jeopardy if a judge decides to hand down a harsher sentence, or if a jurisdiction decides a harsher penalty bracket should automatically come into play, if on inspection they discover that the accused has previously been convicted of the same or similar crime.

Slam dunk evidence in the form of drug trafficking laws:

Quote:
The state of Alabama believes in second chances – not so much third ones. You would have to be caught in possession of more than a kilogram – 35.27 ounces – to be charged with a felony; however, Alabama’s not so generous if its authorities catch you again. Any amount of marijuana will earn a felony on the second offense.
Quote:
(Louisiana) It should be noted, however, that possession of small amounts of weed can still rack up serious jail time. Louisiana might not make you a felon, but it’s first-time marijuana possession is an unclassified offense that can land you in jail for up to six months. The second time? Up to five years. Third time? 20.
Source

Indiana is one of those states where first-time offenses can be misdemeanors whereas second or third-time offenses of the same crime can evolve into felonies. Suddenly you go from a slap on the wrist to house arrest or prison time. Even if the crime remains in the same category, as is the case with Louisiana and possession of small amounts of marijuana, the severity of the punishment escalates from a maximum of six months to a maximum of twenty years behind bars. The amount possessed can be identical. The crime itself, illegal possession, is identical. But the punishment meted out is severely different, and it's all because of the prior convictions.
Talon87 is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 08:34 AM   #48
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Yukinomiya City, Fukushima Prefecture
Posts: 11,238
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
nor is it what you've quoted me discussing -- which was judges using a person's prior convictions, or "priors", to determine appropriate sentencing.
Yes, it is.

If you commit murder twice in your life, using the first murder as an excuse to make the second murder's sentence longer is double jeopardy. Because you are applying the second sentence's conviction + interest from the first, which is, in fact, further punishing the original sentence. You can't do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLO
Judges usually consider evidence of prior convictions for the same or a similar crime (as the one the defendant now faces) very prejudicial. For this reason, courts in many states won’t admit very similar prior convictions if the prosecution can use a different prior conviction to impeach the defendant.

Courts are more likely to admit evidence of crimes involving dishonesty than crimes of violence or those similar to the offense being tried. Federal courts and some state courts automatically allow evidence of prior crimes involving dishonesty without any prior determination of prejudice.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...-testify.html#

Why would a judge prevent criminal history as being admitted to a courtroom - to prevent undue prejudice against the defendant - if that prior conviction is already going to weigh on their own decision on the sentencing weightiness of the punishment?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Double jeopardy would also not be if he were tried in criminal court for the murder of his wife, found guilty (in this parallel world), sentenced to life in prison with chance of parole in 15 years, makes his first parole hearing, murders someone else shortly after release from prison, goes back to court, gets found guilty of this new murder, and this time has the book thrown at him with a sentence of life in prison without chance for parole
This is a trickier case than you probably sought to make, because Simpson is so famous that an unbiased jury would he hard to come by. Not to mention, if Simpson was handed a stricter sentence, you can bet that his attorneys would appeal and use double jeopardy as the justification for torpedoing the judge's credibility.

But see my murder example from earlier. The exact same murder, with the exact same circumstances, would stack as a crime but not make one crime heavier than the other. Otherwise, you run into weird situations where one person kills two people in a day, one in the morning and one at night, and another kills two with a 10 year period in between, but the latter gets a harsher punishment than the first due to the "prior criminal history".

THAT SAID, there are venues in place for more activist/discretionary punishment. You can get a much larger punishment for a crime by an activist judge for unrelated crimes, but they can't be one you've already been punished for - they must be uncharged or acquitted. An even then, the punishment isn't equivalent to being convicted of the more serious charge outright.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Indiana is one of those states where first-time offenses can be misdemeanors whereas second or third-time offenses of the same crime can evolve into felonies. Suddenly you go from a slap on the wrist to house arrest or prison time. Even if the crime remains in the same category, as is the case with Louisiana and possession of small amounts of marijuana, the severity of the punishment escalates from a maximum of six months to a maximum of twenty years behind bars. The amount possessed can be identical. The crime itself, illegal possession, is identical. But the punishment meted out is severely different, and it's all because of the prior convictions.
What you've provided evidence for is the existence of repeat offender/three-strikes laws. These are technically different from enhanced punishment for the same crime, especially since three strikes laws usually only exist for things like violence or drug use.

You are being charged as a "repeat offender: marijuana possession", and you can only be eligible for this if convicted and properly punished for the "marijuana possession".

At risk of deviating too far from the topic at hand, I will, again, point out that Aposteriori was inappropriately punished for his PASBL offenses, so he is not a true "repeat offender". In the definition of recidivism, we see:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
[1] They had either experienced negative consequences of that behavior...
[2] ...or had been trained to extinguish that behavior.
#2 clearly did not happen. #1 is vaguer. If you say "being a douche", then #1 qualifies for Aposteriori, as he was banned for that from PASBL then permabanned from UPN for continuing forward. I don't agree because the nature of Jeri's punishment established that Aposteriori's crime was not "being a jerk", but disruptive behaviour in PASBL. Because he was only banned from PASBL and was allowed to do other things in the forum. If being a jerk was the punishable crime, why unleash said jerk on the rest of the forum?

I'm going to keep hammering this because I've been saying it from the very first post in this thread: Jeri's initial punishment was inappropriate, for a number of reason, and he admitted so himself. The second punishment was a correction that shouldn't have had to happen, and actually jives with the precedent set by the first one.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 10:33 AM   #49
Ironthunder
The Uncultured One
 
Ironthunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Getting train rekt
Posts: 2,215
Send a message via Skype™ to Ironthunder
Dopp, the horse is dead. For the sake of everyone involved, stop beating it.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Squad summary here.
TL3, 129.5 TP, 37 KOs, 3 SP
C grade ref.

WF quest log here.

FB stuff here.
Ironthunder is offline  
Old 04-16-2017, 10:52 AM   #50
Zelphon
Happy October
 
Zelphon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: A Broken Mind
Posts: 2,146
Send a message via Skype™ to Zelphon
I don't know, it's kind of a naughty horse. Maybe it likes it.
__________________
Life, but a series of paths and flows
Down many one can go
May yours run smoothly and be soft to your feet

Zelphon is offline  
Closed Thread

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > UPNetwork


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:06 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.