Close Topic Options

Given the idea that we should open this question to public vote and discussion, I have taken the liberty of creating this poll. Please take a moment to vote based on your personal opinion and/or experience with Flohtingpoint. If you have anything to say to support your vote, please talk about it here. We have NOT decided that this vote will determine Floh's ban status. Until further notice, assume that this poll is just for the purpose of getting the public's general opinions.

Uhh... floh WAS banned, this is like having a poll as to whether the Titanic should sink. Agree or disagree, the banhammer has been swung, maybe not forever, but rules are rules. All things being equal, floh worked hard to get banned, he knew what he was doing.

EDIT: Updated "The Banning Of Flohtingpoint" thread, not going to touch the above post, but I thought Kyonpalm was "off the reservation" sorry if I come across as harsh Kyon.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

This post has been edited by Mazda ina Ford guy on Jun 27 2012, 09:04 PM

Mazda ina Ford guy, think of this as a presidential approval rate poll. Sometimes a little direct democracy doesn't hurt. Of course, we can't always please everyone on the forums. I admit I was guilty of that before, trying to please everyone. It just doesn't work sometimes. We'll see where this takes us to, for better or worse.

I can't see this revealing anything other than what we already know. He wasn't publicly popular, and this is just going to be a gauge of that. Anyone who he's mildly offended can and will simply use that as an excuse to ignore anything and everything he's contributed over the years. It's called a personal bias and it's not allowed in courtrooms, which in my mind means it has no place in a vote/decision like this.

Cross posting from other thread.


I say community vote. Simply put, I was given the same treatment for being a long time member. At least that was my interpretation of the situation.

If majority votes he should come back then they understand the way he is and are not at all bothered by it. However, this is under the notion he is made aware of the circumstances and makes a conscience(conscious) effort to keep his attitude in check to an extent, at least towards those who will take offensive to it.

People can change their attitudes on how they post after coming back from being banned. Many on this board are living, breathing, and typing examples of it.

-Mike

To add @Spaz: I was in the same position awhile back with plenty of community bias...look at where I am now. The F$cking Mayor! There is hope!

Personal bias exists everywhere. How can one stay truly neutral? We try our best in courtrooms by having jurors that are from all walks of lives. But on the forums, everyone is associated and interacted with each other in some way. Like you mentioned, all we have on the forums are context and words. The moment you see one's posts, you already create an image of the person behind those words. We are all biased in this sense.

I like the idea of a community poll. And like I said before, I know exactly who voted what. We can dissect the poll results in Staff Area if we are going to use this to make another case on flohtingPoint.

Thankfully this 'personal bias' you speak so harshly of had absolutely nothing to do with what actually got him banned. It will hopefully keep him banned, but he got himself banned by violating the forum rules repeatedly and treading around the edges knowing full well what he was doing. He was banned on his own consequence, not because the members here don't like his attitude.

Right. What you're saying, Spaz, would make sense if all his prior warns were based off of subjective bias, but almost all of them were not - they were objective violations of forum policy. In most cases with him, there isn't even room for bias...

Pretty much what I expected, both in the results and who voted for what. It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood, a beautiful day in the neighborhood...

I only vaguely recall seeing some of the guy's posts a few years ago. I never post enough, not in the right sections for sure, to have him post anything to provoke me.

Just based on what the moderator team has posted in the other thread, I'm not seeing a reason why he should be an exception to the guidelines of expected behavior here. I do agree that a poll may not be very revealing based on not knowing the reasoning behind the votes. Is the sample vote big enough to truly gauge the community? Is it merely those that personally like or dislike the guy? Are the votes being made by those that would like to be able to get away with trolling or breaking community guidelines?

While I like the argument of trying to weigh someone's actions against their contributions to a forum, at some point you have to figure out what use these guidelines are if you're unwilling to hold people to them. When you allow exceptions, then don't be surprised when more people engage in similar behavior.

Either he violated forum guidelines or he didn't. Or maybe the rules should be changed.

Rest assured that there was no vote cast in bias. No one who voted on Floh's ban was biased against him because of personal experience. Tessou even voluntarily nullified his vote to make sure there would be no bias because he knew his past digressions with Floh would influence his decision.

The reasons that everyone had to ban him strictly pertained to violations of forum guidelines - as I said, there really isn't much room for bias when it comes to Flohtingpoint. His incidents are almost all clear-cut, and not at all subjective.

I think the vote had a good sample of the community, to be honest. As expected, the number of people who agree with Floh's status as banned are currently almost double the number of members who disagree. We'll see how the rest of the votes pan out. It has been genuinely interesting so far.

This post has been edited by kyonpalm on Jun 28 2012, 10:16 AM

I voted 'Other' because I think yes, he should have been banned, but hot-damn I'm going to miss the lulz he can bring when he goes off at someone.

I think he was banned on a bad note. Not that there's a good note when it comes to banning people. On another forum I'm on, a guy got banned somewhat recently for making a threat toward another member. Banning him for calling somebody a silly name like cockbag isn't as cut and dry as a threat, so it's sticky.


Yes, I realize that post wasn't why he got banned, but the fact that something silly and irreverant was the last straw just doesn't sit well with me.

Yes, because aside from contributing one thread that is pointless because it's nothing but common sense, all he ever did was try to bait and troll folk. Pretty much see what I posted in the other thread about this subject.

I don't know how he was back in the day, but he's a total doucher now. Not entirely sure why anyone would want him back in the community.

I can say with 100% certainty that I cast my vote believing fully in the community guidelines and forum rules. I act the way I do and have been warned in the past. I never expect to be able to 'get away with' breaking the rules. When I break a rule, I know it, and I expect a warning in return.

There have been times when I have not gotten a warning for such things but that was not because I asked to be spared or gave sexual favors to those on the Staff to avoid it. I guess what I'm trying to say is... as far back as I can remember I was the one yelling for unilateral application of the rules. It's the only way to be fair to everyone.

So, yes, I vote he should stay banned for breaking the rules. Bring on the warns, I welcome them.

This is one of the best posts I've ever read. You have my attention.

Disappointing poll results in my eyes.

It looks like a lot of people would benefit from reading the Forum Guidelines

I voted other - mostly because I feel a temp ban of 60-90 days would suffice.

This post has been edited by backalleyracer on Jul 7 2012, 12:19 AM

i remember him. but i don't remember if i ever got into a verbal tussle with him. as for my opinion: i don't know. maybe he was trying to inject some livelihood into the forum.

Is this thread still alive?

Why all the hoopla?

If he wants to be back, he will be back, this is IDWF, after all. Heck, knowing Perry, he is probably back already.

If he doesn't want to be back, whoever would want him back has him on AIM, MSN, or whatever, so I just do not see why this is a big deal at all.

I've got to say, I'm actually quite surprised by the results of this poll. Out of everyone who has a "yes/no" opinion on Flohtinpoint's banning, an alarmingly large 39.2% of them think he should not have been banned. I did not even think 25% of people would think he should have been able to continue posting here, let alone almost 40%!

I haven't really heard anyone's thoughts on why he shouldn't be banned, aside from the odd "he was contributive and knowledgeable" here and there. There are 11 of you, so would one of you care to explain your reasoning?

To be honest, the only reason we even started a thread about his banning in the first place was because it was only appropriate to be open and transparent about such actions.

This post has been edited by kyonpalm on Jul 8 2012, 06:01 PM

Im not as surprised as some of the other folks are here about the results (Nulled my vote to see the results). A lot of the newer members here will hardly know Floh for much more than "that guy who races gokarts and is a hot-headed D-bag".

Id be willing to best most of the people who voted no are the older members here who remember floh back from years ago- He was (And to a large degree, still is) one of the most "helpful members" when it came to automotive subjects to anyone who asked legitimately (and legally, hes always scorned street racing and was quick to point it out. Anyone seeking automotive advice ON the track, he was a gem). Mind you he was still rough around the edges to people he deemed "asshats" (Those who pretended to be car people, those who were in it for the scene of being in it, those who did things largely illegally and more importantly- rather stupidly, etc), he just wasnt as blunt as he was today.

For the record im both for and against his banning, for multiple reasons. He did break the rules and as a staff member I cant really overlook that and defend him there, but at the same time i still know him as the guy with a wicked s13 with some neat nurburgring footage that was stupidly helpful to members who asked sincerely.