The Ban of GuyFawkes

[MADXSTER]

What are your thoughts...

[Masterofreality]

No offense meant, madX, but....

A thought on this subject would be a waste of brain power.

[BBC 08]

I'm all for making it permanent.

[SixFig]

If I said something so stupid it becomes a disgrace to Xavier, I would hope to be banned.

[danaandvictory]

I don't think anyone ought to be banned solely for having an unpopular viewpoint, but Fawkes' services to jackassery have probably earned him a time out.

[SixFig]

More importantly, when are the "Free Guy Fawkes" t-shirts coming out?

Shortly after the "Final 5" shirts right?

[Snipe]

Guy Fawkes should have been banned for acting like liberaltarian is actually a workable political concept.

Pure balderdash for pseudeo intellectuals.

[bobbiemcgee]

http://www.newser.com/story/77709/man-gets-penis-stuck-in-steel-pipe-firemen-called.html

[Tardy Turtle]

Guy does not offer unpopular opinions to spur discussion, he does it to antagonize.

He is contrarian simply for the sake of being contrarian.

He is an asshole simply for the sake of being an asshole.

Those who say he should not be banned b/c he's exercising his "right" to "free speech," spare me. There are no guarantees here. The proprietors decide what is acceptable and what is not. Liken it to a casino where "advantage players" can and are banned from the premises even through they are not doing anything wrong in the eyes of the law.

He brings nothing to the table and we are all a little bit worse off because of it.

Admins, please apply this to Guy's face:

http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID21699/images/BANHAMMER.png

[BBC 08]

And Tardy for the win.

[Michigan Muskie]

Like a toddler, antagonizing/taunting is this person's way of seeking attention. Whether it is positive or negative feedback is immaterial. Therefore, banning forever is feeding right into this need. (So is participating in this poll, so I'm just as guilty for contributing.)

If you don't want to give him/her the satisfaction of the spotlight, then remove the ban and use the ignore feature. (someone else mentioned this in a different thread.)

To an attention seeker, nothing is more fulfilling than what is happening right now. By the same token, nothing is more infuriating than no response at all, which is why parents are taught to ignore temper tantrums.

[nuts4xu]

**** Guy Fawkes. Ban him forever. Don't back down, don't be weak, just eliminate this ****ing douche bag.

[muskienick]

I second nuts' motion!

[nuts4xu]

It is interesting to note, Pablo once banned the legendary Filthy Conservative for comments he made about Sr Rose. In Pablo's honor, I respectfully request this board follows precedent and blocks GuyFawkes IP address from the board.

All in favor.....

[xuwin]

I suggest that the board ban the 11 posters who voted to ban GuyFawkes forever because their intolerance is definitely not the Xavier Way.

[Juice]

I miss GuyFawkes. I enjoyed his posts (saying this knowing that I could be banned just for letting this out in the open).

But I disagree with him about Sr. Rose and I understand the week ban, anything longer and it seems a bit ridiculous.

[MADXSTER]

There is a need to have crazy people around just to remind us that we're all sane. lol

[XUglow]

I suggest that the board ban the 11 posters who voted to ban GuyFawkes forever because their intolerance is definitely not the Xavier Way.

So you favor being intolerant to support tolerance?

[MADXSTER]

So you favor being intolerant to support tolerance?

Is that what I'm supporting? LOL Mostly I take enjoyment in watching Guy say something sooo stupid, idiotic and outlandish, and then watch him be trampled like a grasshopper in a field during a UD watermelon hunt.

[xuwin]

So you favor being intolerant to support tolerance?

I have that option since I'm not a member of the Xavier Nation. I'm just a basketball fan.

[XUglow]

I have that option since I'm not a member of the Xavier Nation. I'm just a basketball fan.

We all have the option to not practice what we preach, but in this case it totally changes your message. You are just an advocate for Guy and not an advocate for tolerance. Being an advocate for Guy is fine, but you should limit your message to that subject. Calling out a group of people for doing something that you are apparently willing to do is just hypocritical.

[Masterofreality]

Since he's banned from here, he's taken his act on the internet road....

...to that other board.

[Snipe]

Guy will be back. That other board sucks.

[vee4xu]

I did not vote, but offer the following. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

[chico]

I don't really understand xuwin's comments but when it comes right down to it I really don't care. If he's banned it's fine - if not, no big deal either. I think most people now know what he's about and will ignore him. He'll probably try to rile things up again at some point if he's back, but I hope people just treat him like a troll and ignore his stuff - that's what I'll probably do.

[xuwin]

I don't really understand xuwin's comments but when it comes right down to it I really don't care. If he's banned it's fine - if not, no big deal either. I think most people now know what he's about and will ignore him. He'll probably try to rile things up again at some point if he's back, but I hope people just treat him like a troll and ignore his stuff - that's what I'll probably do.

That sounds like a good plan. My only point is that banning people on a message board just because you don't like their message is not a good thing unless there is profanity or serious personal attacks involved and I didn't see that his post about Sr Rose was that bad. There are a lot of posts and posters on this site that I don't necessarily agree with, but, I'm not in favor of banning them. If message boards get moderated too tight they lose their effectiveness. GuyFawkes thread created a lot of discussion which was almost all pro Sr Rose and that is a good thing.

[GoMuskies]

Didn't Snipe get banned for not showing up to a gamewatch? If that gets a timeout, Guy can ride this out for a week.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

What exactly did Guy do?

[MADXSTER]

He was dissing on Sr Rose.

[American X]

I suggest that the board ban the 11 posters who voted to ban GuyFawkes forever because their intolerance is definitely not the Xavier Way.


So you favor being intolerant to support tolerance?

There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and Dayton.



I did not vote, but offer the following. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

I think everyone else is in the clear on Sister Rose bashing.



My only point is that banning people on a message board just because you don't like their message is not a good thing unless there is profanity or serious personal attacks involved and I didn't see that his post about Sr Rose was that bad.

Oh, **** off. Buggerer.

[chico]

That sounds like a good plan. My only point is that banning people on a message board just because you don't like their message is not a good thing unless there is profanity or serious personal attacks involved and I didn't see that his post about Sr Rose was that bad. There are a lot of posts and posters on this site that I don't necessarily agree with, but, I'm not in favor of banning them. If message boards get moderated too tight they lose their effectiveness. GuyFawkes thread created a lot of discussion which was almost all pro Sr Rose and that is a good thing.

The thing with guy, though, is that he is always speaking ill of things. Check his past posts and see all the "I hate" threads he's started. I understand the need for allowing things to be said, but at some point when someone's doing nothing but making crazy statements whose only purpose is to upset people you probably need to do something. My guess is the posters you disagree with aren't starting threads like he is and not dissing past and current players.

Again, I'm pretty laid back on this sort of stuff but I can easily understand why people want him gone.

[blobfan]

Like a toddler, antagonizing/taunting is this person's way of seeking attention. Whether it is positive or negative feedback is immaterial. Therefore, banning forever is feeding right into this need. (So is participating in this poll, so I'm just as guilty for contributing.)

If you don't want to give him/her the satisfaction of the spotlight, then remove the ban and use the ignore feature. (someone else mentioned this in a different thread.)

To an attention seeker, nothing is more fulfilling than what is happening right now. By the same token, nothing is more infuriating than no response at all, which is why parents are taught to ignore temper tantrums.
You nailed it on the head. Banning isn't the answer. This is what we have an ingnore feature for.

I did not vote, but offer the following. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Thanks! I just might do that.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Well there needs to be repercussions for bashing Sister Rose. Maybe a thoughtful and well written apology letter on here addressed to Sister Rose, the University, and Xavier nation or something. If anyone knows Brock Lesnar, we could put Guy in the cage to wrestle Brock for 5 minutes.

I don't know the full extent of what he said, but I think he adds variety to this message board (sometimes good sometimes bizarre sometimes bad - but he contributes in one way or another).

I say give him the opportunity to show remorse and to ask forgiveness. Give him the opportunity to go before the esteemed leaders of Muskie, Snipe, PM, Khan, American, and the others of this prestigious board to apologize.

“The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.” Mahatma Ghandi

[Xman95]

I suggest that the board ban the 11 posters who voted to ban GuyFawkes forever because their intolerance is definitely not the Xavier Way.

As I have pointed out in another post, that's not totally true. I believe Xavier has and will continue to boot students who do not meet their standards. That could be academically or otherwise. The decision to get rid of a student usually wouldn't come after the first offense, so there would be some tolerance. But, eventually, things build up and it becomes obvious what kind of student they are dealing with.

The GuyFawkes situation is similar. He has been a douchebag for a long while. We have been pretty tolerant. But enough time has passed and we have a pretty good idea of what type of person/poster we are dealing with. For the good of the board he got the boot. For the good of the board it might make sense for the ban to be permanent. (And we wouldn't have to look at that stupid spaghetti-eating cat anymore!)

[PMI]

I don't really understand xuwin's comments but when it comes right down to it I really don't care. If he's banned it's fine - if not, no big deal either. I think most people now know what he's about and will ignore him. He'll probably try to rile things up again at some point if he's back, but I hope people just treat him like a troll and ignore his stuff - that's what I'll probably do.

This is really my whole point. What is the difference between him and the kind of troll who gets banned right away? If he's the kind of poster who most choose to ignore, why should it be on us to do that? The guy has a million posts and even if you ignore him you'll still have to deal with him because of all the responses his shenanigans draw. We've all fed into what he wants, which is the attention he likely lacks in his real, 3D world, but I think now is a good time to cut it out. I'll say this, I'd be supportive of letting him back under the condition that if he annoys again, he's done. If he really wants to be here for the Xavier basketball talk and can figure out a way to participate responsibly without being detrimental to our program, fine. I'm guaranteeing that if he gets this condition, however, it will only be a matter of time before he breaks it. He acts like I did when I was 13 and he's allegedly an alum of the same school as most of us. Forgive me if I don't feel the overwhelming injustice that some are sensing.


Didn't Snipe get banned for not showing up to a gamewatch? If that gets a timeout, Guy can ride this out for a week.

Yes, and Guy also got banned for a day when I used whatever magic word wasn't supposed to be said. That was funny.

[xuwin]

There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and Dayton.




I think everyone else is in the clear on Sister Rose bashing.




Oh, **** off. Buggerer.

Nice. Now I have a better idea of what is acceptable on here. I need to use more ****.

[American X]

Lighten up, Francis. Have some fries with your sanctimony.

Thanks for being a Supporting Member.

[Snipe]

Didn't Snipe get banned for not showing up to a gamewatch? If that gets a timeout, Guy can ride this out for a week.

It happened. He even called me from Mulligans to gleefully tell me that I was banned. Boy did the power go to his head. Xeus is a bigger threat to this messageboard than Guy Fawkes. Don't turn your back on that guy.

He even disabled my Jesus Christ account so I can no longer rep myself. The man knows no shame in his bloodthirsty quest for power.

I await the triumphant return of Guy Fawkes.

[xeus]

It happened. He even called me from Mulligans to gleefully tell me that I was banned. Boy did the power go to his head. Xeus is a bigger threat to this messageboard than Guy Fawkes. Don't turn your back on that guy.

He even disabled my Jesus Christ account so I can no longer rep myself. The man knows no shame in his bloodthirsty quest for power.

I await the triumphant return of Guy Fawkes.

That was funny. Even funnier is that I received more rep points for banning you than anything I've ever posted.

[Muskie]

That was funny. Even funnier is that I received more rep points for banning you than anything I've ever posted.
It's not every day you get to ban JC.

[Snipe]

That was funny. Even funnier is that I received more rep points for banning you than anything I've ever posted.

I would not doubt that. I want Guy Fawkes back because having him exist takes a lot of heat off of me.

[GuyFawkes38]

I feel like I should make some sort of response to this thread.

But I don't really think it's necessary. Most people who read the posts on this thread must feel a little uncomfortable at all the talk about being a "proper" representative of a Jesuit university and being a "true" Xavier alumni and all that crap.

And of course, there's the fact that the vast majority of posters who responded to this poll don't care about this situation.

If everyone posted like PMI, Muskienick, Xudash, Nuts4xu, etc...this board would be a boring place. And that's not to criticize their contribution to this site. I appreciate them. But their posts often fail to spark conversation.

And then there's the fact that 95% of my posts are mundane, if not geeky (lots of posts on stats).

blah, blah, blah, blah. ENOUGH ABOUT ME.

[MADXSTER]

In case anyone who didn't get their vote counted.

[GuyFawkes38]

ok, who banned me this morning.

Heh, I was really pissed at the time.

Big time thanks to Muskie, who I think cleared it up.

[xu2006]

I think I found video of Guy:

http://deadspin.com/5535220/fake-yo+yo-trickster-fools-every-tv-station-everywhere

[PMI]

That guy is way too brilliant to be Guy. That guy is hilarious! He just totally played all those local news channels and did it in a simple yet clever way. The last one was the best. "My dad used to spank us and I'm terrified of him to this day." You'd think that would be an easy red flag that this guy was playing you but since he's an alleged yo-yo pro dressed the way he is nobody questions him, and he had a good, long run of pulling off his little prank. Good work. I know some people won't like it but I find that kind of stupid stuff hilarious when it's pulled off like that.

[Kahns Krazy]

I'm a huge fan of the non-destructive prank. Everyone needs to be able to laugh at themselves every now and then.