Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead at 87

rena35

Meister Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
cyber space
I said I would not comment again but...
In light of reading more posts about this i have came to the conclusion that Ben has never been forgiven for his other transgressions when let back in. Why let him back in the first place if he had no chance of ever having the slat wiped clean. Ben was a member here and yes he had a way of speaking that could be considered brash. He seemed an honest enough fellow which was refreshing. I would rather know where someone stood instead of being fake. He was not judged on this post but on previous posts. No matter what anyone says i will never think anything other then unfair. I have been here since 2012 and never felt so upset by something before. Of course no one has to explain decisions made by CM to any of us members but please try to understand how this looks to us. The poor fellow never had a snow balls chance in (you know). I guess my use of the word snow balls could be report worthy. I can not stand by and see someone else treated like this. He probably has nothing to do just like me during this time and feels out casted by a place he felt was a second home. He most certainly contributed more to CM then i have because he was able to play and review the casinos. It is a very sad day to imagine how he feels.
 

danofthewibble

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Location
UK
On the flip side - it’s just a forum. He can still read it, but it’s someone else’s property. They don’t have to let him in anymore. Hopefully he isn’t too down about it, but ultimately nobody has a right to post here.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
... In light of reading more posts about this i have came to the conclusion that Ben has never been forgiven for his other transgressions ...
Please consider two things:
  • it was Bryan who made the final decision and veteran readers here, like yourself, will know that he is very much NOT prone to vendettas or grudges. Quite the opposite in fact, he is renowned for his leniency and even-handedness.
  • as I've said several times here (because it is directly applicable to this case) and repeated many times over the years, if someone is too much of a PITA for us as the forum managers then their chances of sticking around are severely diminished. It's even written into the Forum Rules, item 1.18:
    1.18 - Don't be a PITA Members who just don't have a clue on what is socially acceptable, or are just too annoying will have their accounts closed. The administration and moderators of Casinomeister reserve the right to close accounts at our discretion. This may be a public forum that encourages freedom of expression, but it's still our house. Abuse it and lose it.
I'll freely admit that I have in the past and again recently advocated for his removal from the forums, for exactly the reasons given in that rule 1.18: "no clue what is socially acceptable", "just too annoying". I found him to be racist, misogynistic and overly fond of hate-mongering statements in public on these forums. Take that as you wish but I assure you that I'm in pretty good company in feeling that way. Call us "snowflakes" or whatever if you must but I believe he behaved appallingly and unacceptably, on endless repeat.

I believe the bottom line here is that we were forced to choose between letting him do his dirt and thereby implicitly support it, or say "enough is enough" and put an end to it. Obviously, and until further notice, we chose the latter.

I get that some of you were fans of his and had little or no problem with his manner of conduct but at the end of the day I (for one) believed he wasn't worth the effort and the collateral damage he caused. I'm most definitely not speaking for Bryan or the other mods here, only for myself and the vote I have, did, and would again cast (assuming circumstances were unchanged).
 
Last edited:

rena35

Meister Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
cyber space
Please consider two things:
  • it was Bryan who made the final decision and veteran readers here, like yourself, will know that he is very much NOT prone to vendettas or grudges. Quite the opposite in fact, he is renowned for his leniency and even-handedness.
  • as I've said several times here (because it is directly applicable to this case) and repeated many times over the years, if someone is too much of a PITA for us as the forum managers then their chances of sticking around are severely diminished. It's even written into the Forum Rules, item 1.18:
I'll freely admit that I have in the past and again recently advocated for his removal from the forums, for exactly the reasons given in that rule 1.18: "no clue what is socially acceptable", "just too annoying".

I get that some of you were fans of his but at the end of the day I (for one) believed he wasn't worth the effort and the collateral damage he caused. I'm most definitely not speaking for Bryan or the other mods here, only myself and the vote I have, did, and would again cast (assuming circumstances were unchanged).
Not a fan. I have never spoken directly to him or 98% of the members here. I comment sometimes or make a post every now and then (usually years apart) but I only know a few people here from past crossings. I understand the rules and hope to never be on the end of breaking any of them. The only thing i can do is stick by my post . I do hope CM views these posts and find it in him to agree that Ben's past transgressions should not be the reason he is banned now. I also agree that from what I have seen CM has always been fair. If anyone should read my past posts they will see how remarkable it is that I am posting this now. If i even thought for a moment Ben got what he deserved i would have done what i always do and move on the the next post. I can not in good conscious by pass this. For those who do know me, they also know i would never put myself in the middle of something like this without good cause and thought. What ever is decided will be accepted but i would hope that CM will give it thought before the final hammer falls.
 

geordiecolin

Meister Member
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm4
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Location
Near Newcastle
I can't for one minute believe it was that post that caused this.

IMO it's more likely his streamer posts over the weekend have done this (towards one in particular). It's not uncommon for people who feel aggrieved by a forum member to threaten the site owners with legal action. In this instance the owner's hands become tied. As stupid as it sounds. So ultimately the whole situation becomes not worth the aggro.

It's a real shame. Ben is a top bloke who simply speaks his mind.
I agree. It is open people like Ben that are the lifeblood of forums because they provoke others to interact and increase traffic.
A forum for likemindedness would just die as will fora that are too heavily censored
 

geordiecolin

Meister Member
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm4
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Location
Near Newcastle
It has nothing to do with being a "fan" but is everything to do with fairness and being seen to be fair and without prejudice.
In this instance casinomeister appear to be the antipathy of fairness.
And I used the word Vag in a post in response to Playford. Why have I not been given an infraction?
 
Last edited:

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Location
Saltirelandia
It has nothing to do with to do with being a "fan" but is everything to do with fairness and being seen to be fair and without prejudice.
In this instance casinomeister appear to be the antipathy of fairness.
And I used the word Vag in a post in response to Playford. Why have I not been given an infraction?
Where do I start? Obviously some people are fans of Ben, others aren't. So be it.

"fair and without predjudice"? We're not the courts or any such thing. Sure, we strive to be fair but we have no obligation to be "without prejudice". Obviously we do have our prejudices -- like the importance of being decent and not hate-mongering on our forums for instance, not to mention our prejudice against scammers and cheating casinos -- and so do you. Surely this comes as no surprise.

"the antipathy of fairness"? Nice accusation, prove it. And don't forget to include his endless Warnings and 2nd chances while you are at it.

"And I used the word Vag in a post in response to Playford. Why have I not been given an infraction?"
I have no idea but I can say that it may have gone unnoticed, and we -- like anyone -- have to pick our battles. Pragmatism may be the simplest answer.
 

danofthewibble

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Location
UK
Come on - they’ve been more than fair with him. He’s been banned so many times since I started reading this forum, I’ve lost count. Most people get banned and don’t get another chance.

How many chances should anyone get? Whatever the rights and wrongs of that particular post, it was enough for the site owner to decide enough is enough. No need to debate further. His gaff, his rules.
 

geordiecolin

Meister Member
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm4
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Location
Near Newcastle
yeah ok, so no transparency, and as usual you take any comment against you as a personal attack, what is wrong with you that you cannot just have a conversation with someone without accusing them of attacking you? I'm not a liar, I asked questions that you could quite easily answer, but you haven't, making people feel the ban was unjust.
I'm done here.
[/QUOT}
Edited
 

rena35

Meister Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Location
cyber space
Still judging on the past ? He was banned for the post in this thread I thought. Nothing else should matter. I keep seeing what he did in the past. It brings me back to why let him back in if his past was going to keep biting him. If his comment was the reason he was banned then why do i keep seeing what he did in the past. He had no chance IMO .
 

geordiecolin

Meister Member
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm4
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Location
Near Newcastle
Where do I start? Obviously some people are fans of Ben, others aren't. So be it.

"fair and without predjudice"? We're not the courts or any such thing. Sure, we strive to be fair but we have no obligation to be "without prejudice". Obviously we do have our prejudices -- like the importance of being decent and not hate-mongering on our forums for instance, not to mention our prejudice against scammers and cheating casinos -- and so do you. Surely this comes as no surprise.

"the antipathy of fairness"? Nice accusation, prove it. And don't forget to include his endless Warnings and 2nd chances while you are at it.

"And I used the word Vag in a post in response to Playford. Why have I not been given an infraction?"
I have no idea but I can say that it may have gone unnoticed, and we -- like anyone -- have to pick our battles. Pragmatism may be the simplest answer.
The only proof I need is the responses to casinomeisters banning of a member for no good reason and the inability to justify it on the grounds of the post they where banned for.
Advocate of fair play for over 20 years has not helped much in this instance
 
Last edited:

greylady

Behind every great man is a woman rolling her eyes
Joined
Jan 30, 2017
Location
Scotland
For clarity I am not a 'fan' of anyone on this forum!

Admittedly I have my preference as to who I converse with as we all do in everyday life but not being a sheep I would stick my head above the parapit for anyone I thought had been treated with bias and a closed mind!
 

paul7388

Meister Member
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Location
glasgow scotland
Come on - they’ve been more than fair with him. He’s been banned so many times since I started reading this forum, I’ve lost count. Most people get banned and don’t get another chance.

How many chances should anyone get? Whatever the rights and wrongs of that particular post, it was enough for the site owner to decide enough is enough. No need to debate further. His gaff, his rules.
I can agree with you in that he had been given loads of chances.

And if he had posted an offensive comment against a member or had made a racist mark etc. then getting banned would have been his own fault.

But in this case he has made a remark that is in no way offensive and against noone. So why the ban.

As Geordie said he used the same word and in fact commented more than Ben about the subject. Yet he never got as much as a warning.

As Max said it was probably because noone had noticed his use of the word.

Which is the whole point. People have been reporting anything Ben said. If they were that offended by the word how come they never reported Colin as well.

Because it was not the word or any offence. It was because it was any excuse to report Ben.

And like Greylady i do not particularly have friends on here. I say what i think and if someone doesn't like it no skin of my nose.

But if people are going to use the fair play bit then do it right. If you are going to say oh well Ben has had plenty chances and he has stepped out of line so we need to Ban him. Fair enough but to let another member use the same word and not as much as say that word is offensive please do not use it is wrong. That in itself shows that it was any excuse to take action against Ben as it could not have been serious if other members did the same with nothing said.

And no way do i want Colin in trouble. Merely stating what he said himself. After all there was nothing offensive in the first place.
 

greylady

Behind every great man is a woman rolling her eyes
Joined
Jan 30, 2017
Location
Scotland
It's interesting to note who has posted in this thread and didn't 'report' Ben. Food for thought as there are not that many prolific posters remaining who have not commented - if they found it so offensive, why have they not commented to explain themselves? :cool:

I for one wouldn't condemn them and I would stand my ground with anyone who did as I would have more respect for their transparency opposed to hiding behind a mod - community spirit, what a joke!
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top