The prob with the argument "just ignore the posts" is that the posts are on an open forum that is read by many PNMs and others.

Nobody wants to be cyber-police, but we should have some accountibility about what we post on this forum. Banning is a small price to pay for being an in-your-face-jerk.

Mr. anal-retentive, I don't think anyone was talking shit by ordering your principles incorrectly

What exactly is the job of a moderator? If someone post something that he/she deems inappropriate or offensive, why doesn't the moderator of that forum just either:

1.) Delete the thread ?
2.) Delete or edit the post ?

After all, isn't this too a function of being a moderator? I know of some forums on GC where the moderators are very active in doing this and it has been very effective in keeping down the drama. Unfortunately, I can name a general forum where this is poorly executed and therefore stays full of mess and drama. Forexample, he did say some VERY nasty, mean, and disrespectful things to and about PM_Mama that I firmly believe the moderator should have deleted ASAP, but unfortunately those post are still there to this day. :rolleyes: And yes UF's post were finally deleted but that was only after the banning.

To everyone:

Granted some of you think UF_Pike was a jerk, but quite frankly there are a lot of you that I think are jerks too. However just because I think that doesn't mean that you should be banned. My point is that it behooves us to have many different points of views when it comes to discussions, at least if we are all the adults that we CLAIM to be. Ok, so if someone says something that you deem offensive, then report that post to the moderator of the forum. Hopefully, the moderator will step in not let the offensive post just sit out there for everyone to see.

Hey, or maybe a function can be added to where you can just ban people from a specific forum and not the board as a whole?

See, now that I'm offended by. It is not the same AT ALL. I would never even connect the two in any way. Yes, women have suffered and died at the hands at men but never have they seen a massacre as great as the one Hitler did to the Jews 50 years ago. To correlate the two is absolutely absurd.

Yes, UF_Pike did say something about Mexican girls coming after him and he found that scary. Why?

I was really offended.

John delted the post and banned UF_Pike because he broke the rules he agreed to when he signed up for his account. Plain and simple. Lets please drop the topic. We are beating a dead horse.

Uh...no actually, it is not the same AT ALL. UF_Pike did not orchestrate the genocide of millions. All he did was ruffle some feathers on GC. Not the best comparison ever.

As a woman who "stuck up for" UF_Pike, I think that both you and Valkyrie have blown it out of proportion. I am not gonna picket GC over him being banned, but I just don't think that the content of his posts warranted such an action. And I HARDLY think that disagreeing with UF_Pike being banned makes me less of a woman. His posts were misogynistic. And? I am not advocating the downfall of women. I am simply saying that it was unfair to ban a member of GC based on more-or-less the hypersensitivity of some other members.

I have read MANY more offensive posts on GC, heck, just mosey over to Greek Life where right now some of you all are engaged in a debate about homosexuals in Greekdom. Some of those posts (not necessarily made by anyone on this thread), have been unapologetically OFFENSIVE. No one is screaming for those posters to be banned. I have read more than a few profanity-laced, latently offensive posts here on chit chat. The difference is that I am fairly thick-skinned. If someone says something that I don't like, I am not going to lose sleep over it. If I disagree, I may voice my opinion, but I am not going to let it ruin my day.

Lighten up people. If you don't want to ignore him, fine. If you want to respond to him, fine. But the results are no one's fault but your OWN...KNOWING that he came SOLELY to get a rise out folks and y'all fed into it. And if you are honest, there are posters on GC that have been MORE abrasive than UF_Pike, and hey, most of them are still here.

stupid, but...

True...other people have been rude as all hell, but are generally good posters. For example....generally I think that UNF is a good poster....I don't necesarily think he's being exactly compassionate on the homosexual board currently going on, but as he is a generally good poster...he has some slack. The TKE guy maybe should be contacted and asked to clean up his act or prepare for banishment. The point being....UF was only controversial and offensive...he contributed nothing but the personal satisfaction of offending others. There lies the difference.

Ahh...so there are degrees? So if someone makes an insanely offensive post but then has a post that SOMONE on GC deems insightful, then it balances out? Sorry, this doesn't make much sense. It doesn't matter what a person has contributed in the past, if they begin to post offensive comments at any time, the treatment should be the same. Just because you (general you, no YOU specifically) do not agree with what someone says doesn't mean it doesn't have merit. I challenge anyone to search UF_Pike's posts and tell me that ALL of them were offensive.

I might just be very liberal, but I simply do not agree that anyone on GC should be "banished" due to the sensitivity of some of the members.

And hey, lol, if PM_Mama, who had the MOST trouble with him, is questioning the banishment, that means something!

Perhaps you somewhat miss my point. And we'll gop out on a limb and say there were two or three posts by UF that someone wasn't offended by, though that is likely to stretch the truth....Nevertheless, there is an enormous difference between someone who is offensive in 99% of his posts then someone who is offensive very seldom and only about one topic.....I believe that if someone is offensive regarding one topic then they should be asked kindly to not stir trouble there or there will be a threat of banishment.

Are there degrees? I'm not sure that is what I was saying, but for your word choice, we'll go with it....yes, there are degrees. Now wait....don't be an ass about it like your last post...there is a difference between an insanely offensive post....no, there is no balancing act to be done. But, if one person is always bad and the other one is occasionaly, but not generally...then they are leagues apart. There is no one on this board I feel deserves to have been banned more than UF and I was only wondering how many more people he'd have to offend before it happened.

John runs the site. He can ban who he wants to. UF_Pike broke the rules. John warned him but UF_Pike continued to "harrass". UF_Pike was banned because he did not listen to reason. Complaining that he was banned will not bring him back so whats the point?

The TKE guy maybe should be contacted and asked to clean up his act or prepare for banishment.

When I first read UF's posts, I was indeed insulted, but saw some of the replies that seemed to find humor so I just decided I didn't LIKE that kind of humor and never read is posts again.

The TKE poster has offended me a bit more for too many reasons to list.

Wil I be banned if say I don't believe a "John" really exists???

Comparing Ufpike to the anti-christ is not funny. Some how it does not surprise me that it came from DzRose93. She seems to have an excuse for everything and always a come back. You people ought to check out the pi kappa alpha forum and see what she had to say about him. It was not nice.


As for SigmaChiGuy, I will ask that he be banned and also the guy speaking offensive things about homosexuals. Both of you were offensive. That was breaking the rules. If a ban does not come out of it and only a warning, I will be watching you to report anything that breaks the rules after the warning. Ultimately it is up to this guy John, but if the rules do not apply to everyone and certain graces are given to those higher on the social latter of GC, it only shows non-greeks that they are right when it comes to greeks not being fair/justly.