### (closed) rDigital reinstatement debate thread ###

[krispos42]

This discussion thread was locked by krispos42 (a host of the Gun Control & RKBA group).

Last edited Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:48 PM - Edit history (3)

On November 3rd of this year, member rDigital was blocked from this Group after posting an original post which equated gun-control advocates with those that enabled the Holocaust.

The post is here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117284156

rDigital appealed the blocking, requesting to be unblocked from the Group. As this occurred shortly before the election, I opted to wait until things has quieted down before proceeding with this issue.

After our victory and the delicious, schadenfreude-filled aftermath, I opened the discussion to create a reinstatement process.

That post is here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117287894


This original post is the official discussion thread for reinstating rDigital. Here you can present opinion, facts, evidence, and whatever else you feel is required to advocate your point of view and convince others of the merits of your case.

After a week of discussion, I'll lock this thread and open a 24-hour poll, where voting will occur. At that point, majority rules.


Regards,
Krispos42, Group Host

On edit, corrected month.



On second edit:

Voting is here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117290298

[NYC_SKP]

1. I appreciate your skills as a host, and I support reinstatement/unblocking the member in question.

Robust discussion is not only healthy, but fundamental to this topic.

Beware, however, whenever equating anything to the Holocaust, to Nazis, and to other sensitive topics or historic matters or individuals.

I applaud the open-mindedness of the administrator(s) of this group.

[immoderate]

2. Reinstate.

Wrong to ban people for citing incidents that provoke emotional reactions.

Some things are in "bad taste" and people who reference them should be admonished. But not banned.

--imm

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Let him back

He has publicly posted that he understands why and has shown no petulance. I cannot say that of others who have been barred.

[slackmaster]

4. rDigital's behavior in exile has been impeccable. Please pardon rDigital.

[jbgood1977]

5. Reinstate.

Don't think he should have been barred for that.

[mike_c]

6. do not reinstate....

That thread demonstrated remarkable insensitivity and belligerence, neither of which foster an open, respectful discussion about RKBA and gun control issues on DU. Anyone who can't tell the difference between honest discourse and deliberate flame bait should refrain from posting until they demonstrate they've improved. I've seen nothing that indicates rDigital has learned anything yet.

[Common Sense Party]

9. Belligerence?

How so?

[Jenoch]

14. Although I have not been

here a long time, it has been my experience in reading these threads that those opposed to RKBA are more often writing posts with belligerence and deliberate insults directed at those who support RKBA.

[Warren Stupidity]

40. rdigital's transparency page is open for viewing. nt.

[Clames]

7. Reinstate.

I think what he started is no worse than what has been posted by others who seem compelled to equate gun owners with all sorts of criminals among other things. If they are allowed here then so should rDigital.

[Common Sense Party]

8. Reinstate. There is a difference between holding or posting an unpopular view

and being a hostile, belligerent jerk.

rDigital's crime was the former. I think only the latter are deserving of banishment.

[ileus]

10. As an actual group regular I approve this message. +1 for RD.

At least he contributed to the group, and wasn't an ankle biter.

[petronius]

11. I propose that we cut to the chase and unblock everybody, and then not block

anyone else in the future. The individual tools provided by DU are sufficient to allow all DUers to avoid posters and threads they find unappealing, and IMO having formalized rules for blocking/unblocking is more distracting and contentious than it's worth in a topic-Group...

[darkangel218]

48. +1

I completely agree.

[DonP]

12. Reinstate

There's a difference between getting "over your skis" some days and saying something you think better of later ... and being a total jerk.

rdigital, like many of us, has on occasion done the former, but isn't the latter.

We've/you've banned some of the real jerks we had and they're still squealing every chance they get. rdigital has handled it well and respectfully.

[Remmah2]

13. Amnesty for all previously banned.

Set an example.

[darkangel218]

15. Let him back in please. Thanks.

[safeinOhio]

16. reinstate, but

on double secret probation.

[Glassunion]

47. °_°

?w=500&h=381

[oneshooter]

17. rDigital has taken his ban seriously, has not been insulting or hostile to

either those who banned him, or any others. He has been contrite and pleasant. I would say that he has learned the limits that are imposed on all of us here.

Reinstate him.

[spin]

18. I support reinstatement. (n/t)

[jeepnstein]

19. Who among us hasn't gone off the deep end at least once.

I say we should reinstate him and see how it goes. If it goes down hill again you can always drop the perma ban bomb.

[hack89]

20. Let him back. nt

[rrneck]

21. I would like to hear what rDigital has to say.

Perhaps a few words here so that hopefully the host won't be accused of a conflict of interest.

Generally speaking I favor unblock, but in the interest of procedural clarity I think the member who petitions for the unblock should make some sort of case to the group if the group is to vote on it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

34. where should he post these few words? the lounge? meta? how- here? wouldn't he have to be,

in fact, reinstated in order to post here?

[rrneck]

35. Good question.

Krispos could unblock him long enough to post I guess. Or Krispost could C&P an email as an OP or in the voting thread.

My primary concern is balance. If members are going to vote, the member petitioning for the vote should be present. I can't say exactly why, it just seems more according to Hoyle to me.

[rl6214]

22. I approve of his reinstatement

[appal_jack]

23. I support reinstatement of rDigital. N/T.

[CokeMachine]

24. Reinstate nt

[beevul]

25. Unblock him.

Habitual offenders on the other hand...Not so much.

[tularetom]

27. I don't even like the fact that this is subject to a vote - reinstate him right now!

krispos42, you are a good host and I appreciate your attempt at fairness, but I have read and re read the posts in question and the original post was so obviously satirical that no sentient being could have interpreted it as anything else.

[Kaleva]

29. Reinstate

[TPaine7]

30. Reinstate n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

31. 9 hidden posts in 90 days - seen the error of his ways? No.

And there is zero evidence that rdigital was "unserious" about his gun controllers are holocaust enablers post.

Perhaps you all should petition to reinstate glacierbay too.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

32. straight up question: do you subscribe to this group?

[Warren Stupidity]

39. "straight up question" as opposed to what?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

46. as opposed to Have A Nice Day and Peace Out, Mr. Stupidity.

Last edited Fri Nov 30, 2012, 10:43 PM - Edit history (1)

[Berserker]

36. reinstate glacierbay?

WTF why is he blocked? Did he get sick of the anti-gunners bullshit and tell it like it is?
Oh and Rdigital should be welcomed back to fight on.

[gejohnston]

37. glacierbay pissed off the wrong people in meta

and got the granite.

[Warren Stupidity]

38. Oh really?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=289093&sub=trans

glacierbay was shit-canned by somebody named EarlG as a "Previously banned disruptor".

MIRT only handles low post count newbs.

[gejohnston]

44. seems he called Mikeb a troll.

from his transparency page
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1489354
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=82800
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1240165789
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=87236


I'm guessing this is the one that sent him over the edge.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1240165789

[Kaleva]

45. He was a previously banned member who came back, drew the attention of Admin and got PPR'd

[Tuesday Afternoon]

33. reinstate rdigital and allow new baby pics. thanks

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

50. +1 :) n/t

[Eleanors38]

49. Oops, read this and forgot to weigh in...

The post was not offensive enough to ban anyone. Yes, rDigital should be Welcomed back.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

51. I am against blocking altogether...

...and in favor of reinstating anyone now blocked who would want back in.
Count me as a vote to reinstate rDigital.

[pipoman]

52. Looks nearly unanimous, let him back...

[gejohnston]

53. reinstate everyone, even Hoyt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

54. Not bongbong, please. He was very disruptive. Did he ever post anything of substance?

[gejohnston]

55. I didn't know he was blocked,

OK, everyone but bongbong. I don't think he has.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

56. here is the list:

1 bupkus
2 Hoyt
3 bongbong
4 rDigital


I can agree with the others because they, at least, tried to post substance and would make coherent discussion.