So VPF is a church, and TheManFromPost a holy man. And PN is a rowdy bar and Jon just another thug.
Bob, I know the difference. Though you over state it, I understand you. All I ever want is understanding as well. If I went to church, and suggested that the steps were adjusted so so many people would not stumble on their way in, I should not have beer bottles thrown at me and I should not expect it.
I want my membership at VPF returned to me. If I did one single thing to deserve a ban, I would not ask for it back. But I don't deserve to be banned for reactions to being attacked for making suggestions that would make the place better, for putting up a picture of a hand flipping a bird, when it came down only to save my membership, or for reactions to insults. Insulting someone that insulted you is a natural reaction, except maybe in a church, and VPF is no church.
I want my membership given back to me. There is no reason not to do it. Thinking that I am going to insult the staff again is not even reason, and you can be sure, if there is any doubt, that that will happen, and in a sharp and pointed way, but you can also be just as sure that it wont, if I am not subjected to that myself. What is wrong with that? What is wrong with that is that some of you think that is wrong, and it is not. Some of you think the staff can do nothing wrong, and if they do that it is barely wrong, and those are the same people that feel that anything I do is very wrong, regardless of what they do.
It's easy for you to say that I am banned for something I did, but it's very hard to come up with a single example, isn't it? "General stuff, Shockman". Yes, I have read that. "It's nothing you did specifically just now, it's the pile of stuff from the past" Yes, I have read that before. "The staff attacked you because you attacked them" Without any consideration to what happened first.
If it was true that I started any of this, then why was I not banned when I did those things. I would have been, can't you see.
To ban me for a reaction to an action that was made to cause a reaction is not right, and there is no reason for me to accept that nd move on. Having a staff that is doing those things is not a reason for a contributing member to want to leave, it is a for the member to want changes.
And the only change I want is not who is staff, I don't care who is staff, it is for the staff to not attack me for making a suggestion, to not insult me, to defend their actions like using my whole real name in an insult and defend that action, even after it is clear that the rest of the staff agrees that it is wrong, and not going to stand, though no harm. Reporting posts. Give me a break there. It is following the guidelines and trying to nip problems in the bud. Even those post that were by me and reactions that you called over-reactions were reported, and the official response to that was, "so what", so I don't see why I should be banned if I take matters into my own hands.
Telling TheManFromPOST to stick his ice cream up his ass was not an over-reaction, it was an under-reaction, and should have went by as easy as the name calling and the staff insulting me on my profile page.
I want my membership returned to me where it belongs, because there is no reason why I should not have it. Unless you think I should have to take that crap without a reaction at all, and I know that not a single staffer thinks that's the way it should be other than Tom, because it is used, to brush off their part in this, and an excuse why they can do their part.
I want my membership returned to me, because it's mine, not yours, and you have no reason to take it away.
I used Blue text once. That was posted as something I did that was not a reaction, but offencive. OK, I used Blue text once. How did that harm the forum in any way. I got that responce when I was asked what I did this time or last to deserve it, and that happen a long time ago and I served a D/A for that.
This ban, I have no idea what it is for, and have asked many times and will ask again many times. I did not call TheManFromPOST a bigot. But as time goes on without any other explanation, I think more that is could be. I served the past infractions, including using Blue text, so they should be marked as served. I want access to the AC, but I should have access to the AC. Was I banned for asking for access to the AC, or expressing anger at being banned for something I did not do, or for suggesting that locking all the Obama threads seemed bigoted? If it was not the Blue text again, then it must have been one, two, or all three of those things.
I was banned without any warning at all this time. Without any explanation, and without any time frame. But lifting that ban would be a bad thing? I don't think so.
