Will Somebody UnBan Tribesman?

I have offically run out of things to talk about.

The frontroom is in a massive decline and is only saved by the merits of sexting and your it guys moral responsibilty to not hack your mail

Louis is 5 staring every thread that has a hint of sexual deviancy

The backroom has turned into a circle jerk, there are no more personal attacks no more hyperbolic nation bashing. Hell you can't even take a run at gingers anymore without the whole forum losing there mind

I thought about maybe recuriting new members to the tavern (I hate new people though, if you joined after 2006 I probably still hate you) and that's just so much work.

So here is my solution.

Unban Tribesman

Thank you

I thought the problem was he decided to leave... if not, unban him now! The more Irishmen I have to fight, the better!

To the best of my knowledge, he is not under a ban. He left on his own accord.

Doesn't Louis change posting style every 1K posts? Maybe for his next thousand he could emulate Tribesman. There has been a definite lack of :laugh4:'s in the Backroom.

Thanks to my counter-harassment of him, I think I made him leave. :smartass::laugh:

Tribesman found Fragony's positions unacceptable and said he wouldn't want to be on a forum where such people are allowed to talk openly.
Fragony was really sorry etc. but it didn't help so Tribesman left, unfortunately. I) miss him, too but I don't know any way to get him back and I don't want to ban Fragony either, so. :shrug:

Tribesman posted a while ago in a very similar thread saying he wasn't interested in returning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Tribesman found Fragony's positions unacceptable and said he wouldn't want to be on a forum where such people are allowed to talk openly.
Fragony was really sorry etc. but it didn't help so Tribesman left, unfortunately. I) miss him, too but I don't know any way to get him back and I don't want to ban Fragony either, so. :shrug:

---

That's more or less correct, yes he left voluntary. I had a mail forwarded asking him to get out of eachothers way. On a personal note, he was much harsher on me than I deserved, posted something (really) bad he couldn't let go and I don't miss him. New members also said things they couldn't have known and he posted weird messages on pm and profile page. But he's a loss for the backroom alright.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

I thought the problem was he decided to leave... if not, unban him now! The more Irishmen I have to fight, the better!

---

If ye like I could ring Tribes and get a few tips and how to post with more venom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiKingWarmanCake88

Thanks to my counter-harassment of him, I think I made him leave. :smartass::laugh:

---

dream on young fella seen it all before we have

Tribesman was a troll and completely intolerant of the opinions of others. If you had an opinion opposed to his own he took it as a personal attack and preceded to flame you so that no real discussion could take place. When he was around things were 'exciting' because there was lots of trolling, flaming, and fighting. Unfortunately, he would discourage any real debate, and instead just troll and flame everyone else away.
If you ask me, it is a good thing that he is gone.
You wonder why there is little discussion? It is a combination of two things. First of all, those with contraversial opinions (which are the big conversation starters) are discouraged from posting. When everyone agrees, there is no debate. Second of all, most of the more mature, adult members who used to post real debate or interesting topics in the FR are too busy, have left, or have just given up posting because of people like Tribes. It is a dilema caused both by the members and the moderation. Hate me all you want for saying it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

Tribesman was a troll and completely intolerant of the opinions of others. If you had an opinion opposed to his own he took it as a personal attack and preceded to flame you so that no real discussion could take place. When he was around things were 'exciting' because there was lots of trolling, flaming, and fighting. Unfortunately, he would discourage any real debate, and instead just troll and flame everyone else away.
If you ask me, it is a good thing that he is gone.
You wonder why there is little discussion? It is a combination of two things. First of all, those with contraversial opinions (which are the big conversation starters) are discouraged from posting. When everyone agrees, there is no debate. Second of all, most of the more mature, adult members who used to post real debate or interesting topics in the FR are too busy, have left, or have just given up posting because of people like Tribes. It is a dilema caused both by the members and the moderation. Hate me all you want for saying it.

---

I have to say that, although I disagreed with him on virtually every point of view he had, he was open enough to be engaged in a debate. I got the better of him a couple of times. Argumentative? Yes. Troll? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

It is a dilema caused both by the members and the moderation. Hate me all you want for saying it.

---

If anything, IMO the moderation has been toned down over the last few years. Maybe its because I see the people I used to consider equals, as the moderators now. There is no fear aura.

The old backroom mods, for example, were scary and unknown to me, but CountArach is a guy my own age who i've talked to a bit, so hes not this unknown force ready to ban me, in my mind.

maybe i'm just crazy. Doesn't matter either way, I hardly post in the backroom anyway, not smart enough. :wink:

I thought the thing with Warman did have something to do with him leaving, I remember something about them spamming each others visitor messages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

If ye like I could ring Tribes and get a few tips and how to post with more venom.

---

Can't you just pop down the road or something...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

I have to say that, although I disagreed with him on virtually every point of view he had, he was open enough to be engaged in a debate. I got the better of him a couple of times. Argumentative? Yes. Troll? No.

---

The amount of times that he could just pull this or that UN resolution or some other evidence you care to mention to demolish some peoples post made me laugh sometimes.

People probably didn't like the fact once he had done that he would then dismiss you and your entire arguement as based on some lie.

Such robust and skewering debate is quite common in Ireland hence politicians in Ireland have extremely thick skins and take no notice of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

I thought the thing with Warman did have something to do with him leaving, I remember something about them spamming each others visitor messages.



Can't you just pop down the road or something...

---

Tribes was a builder if I remember correct doubt he has time to post here anymore I seriously doubt WArman was anything other than a mild irritation to him.

It's a hour an a half drive to Galway and it looks like rain tonight a text should do.

Quote:

---

Tribesman was a troll and completely intolerant of the opinions of others. If you had an opinion opposed to his own he took it as a personal attack and preceded to flame you so that no real discussion could take place. When he was around things were 'exciting' because there was lots of trolling, flaming, and fighting. Unfortunately, he would discourage any real debate, and instead just troll and flame everyone else away.

---

Meh, The man brought the facts.

I swear to god asking for a link these days to back some asserition is like asking for nude pics of the posters mother.

But when can one excpect from a broad which has devolved into pseudo philosiphy minus the logical proofs.

Wasn't going to say it but I agree with Vuk he could get very unpleasant and never presented a view of his own. Good at it, yes

edit, and I like the current status of the backroom, calm debate over controversial issues. Old guard would love it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Meh, The man brought the facts.

---

He always had some different angle he brought to a discussion, he was contrary just for the sake of it, I think. I was always waiting for the thread in which everyone would finally agree the sun rose in the east, and he would jump in, call bollox, and tear everyone's points to pieces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

The amount of times that he could just pull this or that UN resolution or some other evidence you care to mention to demolish some peoples post made me laugh sometimes.

---

My idealized vision of Tribesman in real life: A man with his friends in the pub, typing away on a laptop. His friends included an ex-diplomat, a "retired" intelligence officer/journalist, and a history prof. The group would spend the evening drinking and winding up people from around the world on a games forum. For the lulz. :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Tribes was a builder if I remember correct doubt he has time to post here anymore I seriously doubt WArman was anything other than a mild irritation to him.

It's a hour an a half drive to Galway and it looks like rain tonight a text should do.

---

Are you traveling by stagecoach? It shouldn't even take that long to drive from Wales.

But yes, more feisty Irishmen in the Backroom. You've got potential so have at it! :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

My idealized vision of Tribesman in real life: A man with his friends in the pub, typing away on a laptop. His friends included an ex-diplomat, a "retired" intelligence officer/journalist, and a history prof. The group would spend the evening drinking and winding up people from around the world on a games forum. For the lulz. :yes:

---

Thats possible Drone my good man Galway is one of those rare places in the world where the mugger is a struggling artist who drags you down an alley to recite bad poetry at you till you crack.

If you have never been it's quite a small on a world scale but it has culture and art far beyond what it should.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Are you traveling by stagecoach? It shouldn't even take that long to drive from Wales.

But yes, more feisty Irishmen in the Backroom. You've got potential so have at it! :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

---

Typical he looks at the map and draws a straight line mentally to Galway an thinks to himself no prob I'll do it in hour from London, that is a classic noob tourist mistake the roads and roadsigns in Ireland will leave you with nightmares. :yes:

Indeed :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Indeed :bow:

---

:laugh4: dont tell me ye went to the races in Ballybrit and the horror has not left ye how crowded or complicated Galway is Yes/No

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

If anything, IMO the moderation has been toned down over the last few years.

---

Nah, quite the opposite actually, which is part of the reason the backroom is dead.

Hopefully tribesman will return one day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

Nah, quite the opposite actually, which is part of the reason the backroom is dead.

Hopefully tribesman will return one day.

---

I meant in general, I don't know the backroom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Meh, The man brought the facts.

I swear to god asking for a link these days to back some asserition is like asking for nude pics of the posters mother.

But when can one excpect from a broad which has devolved into pseudo philosiphy minus the logical proofs.

---

Sometimes he did, but after a while I realised he wasn't as brilliant as his posting style might intimidate people into thinking. I remember one thread on the effectiveness of militias or something like that, wher he kept doing the bollox and giving vague half-answers routine, and when he finally revealed his point, it was really lame and everyone called on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

First of all, those with contraversial opinions (which are the big conversation starters) are discouraged from posting.

---

I would like to roughly repeat what I stated in a recent thread - making offensive and insulting statements is not necessarily the same as stating a controversial opinion.

Ideally, the latter is done without resorting to the former - this often leads to interesting discussions that do not immediately turn into "flame wars". I do not think that we are discouraging this kind of discussion (I am of course happy to learn where we might have done so).

We often have cases were both go hand in hand - these are often threads with wasted potential that are closed early on as the attention of other posters quickly focuses on the tone of the post rather than on the (often) valid discussion point.

If the "controversial opinion" is pretty much limited to (in a nutshell) e.g., calling a group of people idiots this would rather fall under the definition of trolling and/or flame baiting and I personally feel comfortable discouraging it - even if that might be boring.

:bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ser Clegane

I would like to roughly repeat what I stated in a recent thread - making offensive and insulting statements is not necessarily the same as stating a controversial opinion.

Ideally, the latter is done without resorting to the former - this often leads to interesting discussions that do not immediately turn into "flame wars". I do not think that we are discouraging this kind of discussion (I am of course happy to learn where we might have done so).

We often have cases were both go hand in hand - these are often threads with wasted potential that are closed early on as the attention of other posters quickly focuses on the tone of the post rather than on the (often) valid discussion point.

If the "controversial opinion" is pretty much limited to (in a nutshell) e.g., calling a group of people idiots this would rather fall under the definition of trolling and/or flame baiting and I personally feel comfortable discouraging it - even if that might be boring.

:bow:

---

I am talking about the policy that one person's opinions are considered more legitimate than those of another. If a persons views conflict with those of the moderator, they will sometimes be deleted or the poster end up with warning points/a ban. For instance, such opinions as "Islam is a religion that encourages violence and teaches terrorism.", "Muhammad was a murderer, child molester, and bandit.", etc. Does it not occur to moderators that people can sincerely have these opinions and not just be 'flame baiting'? (Yet moderators have allowed discussion accusing the Christ of being a rapist, a sodomite, etc., allowed people to post pictures of Jesus being portrayed as a pig, etc.)

Ser Clegane, if you are going to seriously try to say that a double standard has not been applied, then I am afraid that I will have to come straight out and call you a liar. Ban me for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

I am talking about the policy that one person's opinions are considered more legitimate than those of another. If a persons views conflict with those of the moderator, they will sometimes be deleted or the poster end up with warning points/a ban. For instance, such opinions as "Islam is a religion that encourages violence and teaches terrorism.", "Muhammad was a murderer, child molester, and bandit.", etc.

---

How are those comments constructive?
Are they even necessary?
Do they contribute positively to the conversation?

That is the big issue, it isn't about 'such opinions', it is the fact they are also expressed in such a manner which is unacceptable. They are as unacceptable as some one posting "Vuk is a murderer, child molester, and a bandit", "Vuk's post encourages violence and spreads terrorism".

I could also go into arguments on the basis of things such as 'context', 'hypocrisy' and 'inaccurate sweeping statements' on those examples themselves, but I hope you understand my point and why such remarks are not approved.

Quote:

---

(Yet moderators have allowed discussion accusing the Christ of being a rapist, a sodomite, etc., allowed people to post pictures of Jesus being portrayed as a pig, etc.)

---

I have to be perfectly honest with you, Vuk, within my two year stay at the Org, I haven't witnessed any statement like this on at least one occasion. On the other hand, I see your earlier examples frequently from one poster at least who is still residing on this forum around once a week, perhaps even a month latest.

Even then, for those who speak against 'religion' on the forum, they speak against all religion, and not one in particular. Only reason a secular or atheistic leaning poster may target Christianity more, is because there are Christians in the audience it is understood by default that this includes any other religion.

So I have to completely disagree with this comment of yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Meh, The man brought the facts.

I swear to god asking for a link these days to back some asserition is like asking for nude pics of the posters mother.

---

Are you talking about Tribesman? What facts? What links? I don't recall Tribesman ever offering a link to support his argument. He simply acted like he was privy to some superior knowledge source that we weren't and we'd take it as "fact". I also never recall Tribesman offering an opinion. He'd create a thread with only an article link, but no commentary on his part. Then he'd wait for his usual victims to comment on the article and proceed to tear their opinion apart. But I don't recall him ever offering up his opinion first for someone else to counter. He could tear up his opponent's argument and the validity of their links, but he would not expose his opinion to attack nor provide links to support his "facts" so that his opponents could question the validity of his sources. I personally found his style counter productive as one could not effectively debate with him. Yet thread after thread, our patrons would line up to take shots at his "tar babies".

The part I always found most frustrating is that he seemed to know a lot and I felt like he could have done much to win over his opponents to his side of the argument. All he needed to do was to provide supporting links like most of his opponents did - I'm assuming here that his sources were indeed as superior as he led us to believe. Alas, he never took the time to properly educate us on the fallacy of our side. Because of this, to me he was nothing more than a real life Argument Clinic. 'Tis a shame.

Tribesy is not banned.


With Tribes one has to take the good with the bad. He has an agressive, confrontational style, which is behind both his posting excellence and his...slightly unconventional manners. I myself was not always interested in a lengthy exploration of a subject together with him. I have, however, always considered him a fine asset to the Backroom. A one man force of nature. :laugh4:

Tribes also did a great job in keeping the peanut gallery at bay. He made it difficult to get away with bollox.



I'll have me a pint in Tribes' honour! ~:cheers:

I will add the following, take it for what it's worth. Right after Tribes' legendary spat with Frags turned ugly he was banned for a few days, he came into the chat a few times. Suffice to say it was...... not pretty. His behavior, attitude, and conduct was deplorable and nothing how one would expect a well-educated person to act. It got to the point where we were going to ban him from the channel and report it to Tosa, but it stopped just short of that.

Never been active in the chat but I heard he could be very eloquent as well. Think he had troubles of some sorts, nasty divorce something like that (and too much alcohol), things weren't always like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

I have to say that, although I disagreed with him on virtually every point of view he had, he was open enough to be engaged in a debate. I got the better of him a couple of times. Argumentative? Yes. Troll? No.

---

Him and that Glenn guy was more then immature, especially when I was banned. Surprise that the adults on this forum still think he's not a troll. :laugh4:

I cant say that I liked tribesman too much, but he had that certain charm that meant that even though I hated his guts sometimes I still could not imagine a Backroom without him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiKingWarmanCake88

Him and that Glenn guy was more then immature, especially when I was banned. Surprise that the adults on this forum still think he's not a troll. :laugh4:

---

That glenn guy rubbed me the wrong way.

Thankfully, ignore list works. :yes:

People should be repectful of one another. Even if opinions and lifestyles are different. But that's just me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregoshi

Are you talking about Tribesman? What facts? What links? I don't recall Tribesman ever offering a link to support his argument. He simply acted like he was privy to some superior knowledge source that we weren't and we'd take it as "fact". I also never recall Tribesman offering an opinion. He'd create a thread with only an article link, but no commentary on his part. Then he'd wait for his usual victims to comment on the article and proceed to tear their opinion apart. But I don't recall him ever offering up his opinion first for someone else to counter. He could tear up his opponent's argument and the validity of their links, but he would not expose his opinion to attack nor provide links to support his "facts" so that his opponents could question the validity of his sources. I personally found his style counter productive as one could not effectively debate with him. Yet thread after thread, our patrons would line up to take shots at his "tar babies".

The part I always found most frustrating is that he seemed to know a lot and I felt like he could have done much to win over his opponents to his side of the argument. All he needed to do was to provide supporting links like most of his opponents did - I'm assuming here that his sources were indeed as superior as he led us to believe. Alas, he never took the time to properly educate us on the fallacy of our side. Because of this, to me he was nothing more than a real life Argument Clinic. 'Tis a shame.

---

Indeed.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

I will have to come straight out and call you a liar.

---

Oh well, as you have a track record of doing so... :shrug:

You had to derive Tribesman's opinion from his comments, of course he had one, he just didn't write essays to state it, he debated those with differing opinions (which could be people from "both sides" of a debate :laugh4: ).
Sometimes he was/is a bit too harsh but I wouldn't listen to Whacker either, he's just jealous. I remember debating with him about Fragony and defending Fragony but he wouldn't believe me, which was sad, but I don't really remember ever having a nasty fight with him. Perhaps that's because I'm a wuss without an opinion but then that isn't really true either.
He also had a funny side as can be seen in my signature (I hope I don't need to explain the context).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

That glenn guy rubbed me the wrong way.

Thankfully, ignore list works. :yes:

---

Amen to that :yes:.

Tribesy is a guest now I think I saw on his account, so.... :juggle2:

You can say what you want about Tribesman, but he knew what he was talking about when he posted in the BR. I don't know how he did it, but he seemed to have a lot of knowledge about a whole variety of topics.

His style was... rude and seeing him posting something that resembled something that disagreed with what you just said, made you tremble in fear as you knew you were going to be spanked by endless strings of :laugh4:

IIRC, he explicitly asked to be banned himself. He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who will come back because we beg him to come back :shrug:

Alas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

You can say what you want about Tribesman, but he knew what he was talking about when he posted in the BR. I don't know how he did it, but he seemed to have a lot of knowledge about a whole variety of topics.

His style was... rude and seeing him posting something that resembled something that disagreed with what you just said, made you tremble in fear as you knew you were going to be spanked by endless strings of :laugh4:

IIRC, he explicitly asked to be banned himself. He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who will come back because we beg him to come back :shrug:

---

IMO he was the one would seem like he know a lot about things, but would ethier lie or whatever about his info + provoke you into a flame war, which would make his argument, accurate and correct or incorrect and immature look good.

In a way I'm happy he's gone, .Org is better place without him imo. But in another way, I do wish he was back ,not because I like some of the stuff he and I discuss but because he kept me from falling asleep from reading crap in the BR even if I hated his stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Alas

---

I'm pretty sure he was a lad. ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregoshi

But I don't recall him ever offering up his opinion first for someone else to counter. He could tear up his opponent's argument and the validity of their links, but he would not expose his opinion to attack nor provide links to support his "facts" so that his opponents could question the validity of his sources. I personally found his style counter productive as one could not effectively debate with him. Yet thread after thread, our patrons would line up to take shots at his "tar babies".

---

So true. I remember once during one of these "debates" I demanded to know what he thought of the issue. He refused to answer, and just assaulted with more questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

So true. I remember once during one of these "debates" I demanded to know what he thought of the issue. He refused to answer, and just assaulted with more questions.

---

This is why I think he just argued for the sake of it. That, and he seemed like a cynic of the highest order, if a thread went on for long enough it would come out that he usually had a bad opinion of both sides of the argument. He kept everyone honest, and usually had a "all politics are local" slant on most issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

This is why I think he just argued for the sake of it. That, and he seemed like a cynic of the highest order, if a thread went on for long enough it would come out that he usually had a bad opinion of both sides of the argument. He kept everyone honest, and usually had a "all politics are local" slant on most issues.

---

But that's not the same as not having an opinion, is it? :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

But that's not the same as not having an opinion, is it? :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

---

Bollox!

I think Tribes degenerated as a poster, when I first joined in 2005 and AdrianII helped me find God (no joke, funny story) Tribes was an abrasive but still eloquent debater who did offer opinions and even occasionally links. Generally however he was intollerant and he would expect you to go off and find the source yourself with Google-Fu, but if enough of us wer dim for long enough you eventually got the link from him.

Unfortunately, over the last year or two years he was here he gradually devolved to posting little more than "bollox" and about 50 laughing milies with virtually no substance. It was extremely hard to like him at that point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

when I first joined in 2005 and AdrianII helped me find God (no joke, funny story)

---

He did that with you as well? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

The backroom has turned into a circle jerk, there are no more personal attacks no more hyperbolic nation bashing. Hell you can't even take a run at gingers anymore without the whole forum losing there mind

---

it is less fun, whether that is due to Tribesmans absence is another question, but it's worth a shot!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregoshi

He'd create a thread with only an article link, but no commentary on his part. Then he'd wait for his usual victims to comment on the article and proceed to tear their opinion apart. I personally found his style counter productive as one could not effectively debate with him. Yet thread after thread, our patrons would line up to take shots at his "tar babies".

---

lol, it's always worth calling "BS" when you smell it, regardless of whether it was put out to 'troll' or otherwise.

arguing with tribesman was.......... invigorating, as it demanded a level of mental agility to keep up with his constant battery of abuse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

He did that with you as well? :inquisitive:

---

Ironic, isn't it?

Tribes left?

Well there goes the last good poster in this place.

He's worth the entire backroom members club and then some.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4049/...276b6bf4_z.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

I meant in general, I don't know the backroom.

---

Ignorance is not an excuse.