'Rogue Mod' thread deleted?

[Smart No More]

I'm suggesting it could have that result yeah but couldn't say. A chat timeout is a timeout period mods put on members that do something that's considered crossing a line. I think warnings come first, then timeout of varying proportions followed by a ban. Something like that anyway.

 

[BrokenBliss]

I'm suggesting it could have that result yeah but couldn't say. A chat timeout is a timeout period mods put on members that do something that's considered crossing a line. I think warnings come first, then timeout of varying proportions followed by a ban. Something like that anyway.

Atari said he was banned from chat for a week, I believe.

 

[Cathy Ames]

And now I am seeing that @atari's name is crossed off. I'm sure we'll be told that he deactivated himself.

 

[symphony]

Yikes. Regardless of what the truth is, it would be so much better to have heard the full story transparently.

 

[BrokenBliss]

Yikes. Regardless of what the truth is, it would be so much better to have heard the full story transparently.

As of now we haven't heard anything. Hope we do because he was too much of a presence to just be disappeared.

 

[Smart No More]

Atari posted earlier. It was somewhat passive aggressive I think but not wild or anything. Think it was just a hint at being a victim. Was only one line post. I forget which thread it was in.

 

[BrokenBliss]

Atari posted earlier. It was somewhat passive aggressive I think but not wild or anything. Think it was just a hint at being a victim. Was only one line post. I forget which thread it was in.

That was on Monday.

https://sanctioned-suicide.net/threads/the-things-this-site-hates.87223/post-1554145

 

[waitingforrest]

What is even going on? I just don't think @atari would fabricate evidence just to stir up some drama. I wasn't here when the "Rogue mod" post was still on.

I just want to know if he is alright and what happened. I know it is too early to say, but I do hope we get some more info.

I don't want to make baseless claims when Atari isn't there to defend himself, and truly, I still believe that Atari wouldn't say things just to cancel someone.

I know that given the Sherri situation, people can turn out to be different from what they present. I still trust that Atari had legitimate reasons to say what he had to say, after all, he is a regular on this site. It doesn't make sense that he would randomly do something to get himself banned, I feel like SS was a safe space for him. There has to be a serious reason on why he made that post, knowing that he could get banned.

It may be naive, but I don't believe Atari would do something just to cancel someone. He has said that there are some members of SS that don't really like him, but I haven't seen him try to publicly call them out just for revenge.

I just hope that we get closure on the situation, chat doesn't feel the same without Atari. I don't even know if he would want to come back even if he was unbanned.

It's just, something feels off about how the thread was deleted. I don't know, I hate that we lost another member.

 

[BrokenBliss]

What is even going on? I just don't think @atari would fabricate evidence just to stir up some drama. I wasn't here when the "Rogue mod" post was still on.

I just want to know if he is alright and what happened. I know it is too early to say, but I do hope we get some more info.

I don't want to make baseless claims when Atari isn't there to defend himself, and truly, I still believe that Atari wouldn't say things just to cancel someone.

I know that given the Sherri situation, people can turn out to be different from what they present. I still trust that Atari had legitimate reasons to say what he had to say, after all, he is a regular on this site. It doesn't make sense that he would randomly do something to get himself banned, I feel like SS was a safe space for him. There has to be a serious reason on why he made that post, knowing that he could get banned.

It may be naive, but I don't believe Atari would do something just to cancel someone. He has said that there are some members of SS that don't really like him, but I haven't seen him try to publicly call them out just for revenge.

I just hope that we get closure on the situation, chat doesn't feel the same without Atari. I don't even know if he would want to come back even if he was unbanned.

It's just, something feels off about how the thread was deleted. I don't know, I hate that we lost another member.

Since his name just got crossed off, I'm hoping within the next day they'll give us some info, at least. We certainly heard a lot about Sherri's situation after the fact.

 

[Smart No More]

I's say start a thread (respectfully) and ask for the info surrounding his outing. There was a thread were cbinaski had been banned but got it tuened around with respectful request to do so. Mod in question wasn't over the moon about it but the thread worked. We all have a say here an I think it's true to say that mods and admin are open to input. That thread and his recovery back to active member worked out.

 

[CommunistAndProud]

Perhaps not a rogue mod after all since this second thread stayed

 

[BrokenBliss]

Perhaps not a rogue mod after all since this second thread stayed

I don't know about that, since this thread has been going the entire week and no higher-up has given us any feedback on the matter. Now atari's name is crossed out and we haven't gotten an answer in the user discussion megathread on that yet. It's a big void that I wish would be addressed.

 

[Simba]

Id like to know why he's gone ? I wasn't here when everything was happening..

 

[DeutscheKartoffel]

Did atari get silenced??
Why is their account become crossed out???

 

[Dot]

Atri dd nt d/ n.e.thng as drstc as Shrri bt h/ trggrd a fw ppl in cht on thnk ws Mndy nght & dd nt undrstnd or accpt y ws trggrng fr ppl

H/ sd tht evry1 on sasu = a vctm whch sme ppl agreed w/ & othrs lke slf & cple of othr ppl refusd 2 accpt tht labl / mntalty

Unfrtun8tly aftr mltple ppl tryn2 expln tht tllng evry1 thy r victms ws nt hlpfl h/ stll dd nt undrstnd & tld ppl tht thy wre in d-nial & fw ppl includng slf gt dstrssd & angry & emotns ran hgh - evrythng escl8d frm thre

Am srry 2 C tht h/ lft thgh - no1 wntd tht w/ wre jst angry/frstr8d

 

[Smart No More]

That makes sense. His last post was about being a victim. Clearly poking the hornets nest in a passive aggressive manner. I didn't find atari a very mature presence I have to be honest. Our only interaction, brief as it was, wasn't a positive one. Perhaps his crimes don't justify a full ban but we don't know the extent of his actions. I can imagine the unreleting nature he could display though. It's clear that atari is at least culpable for his initial chat timeout. To continue poking at it on the forum was never going to end positively for them. He could have spoke his mind in private with a moderator but chose to air it out on the forum. Much like running to mum after dad tells you off. Sometimes you have to know how to pick your battles whether they're just or unjust and you should always be prepared to take ownership of your actions and be prepared to question your opinions. Can't say I saw a lot of that displayed.

As I said at the start - if Atari posted the transcripts we'd have seen things as they are. Part of me wonders why, if you had such damning evidence why it wouldn't be the first thing you post. As he didn't it's hard not to wonder if maybe he knew that actually it's not so damning after all. Some people like to argue the toss until one side gives up. Right or wrong.

 

[BrokenBliss]

That makes sense. His last post was about being a victim. Clearly poking the hornets nest in a passive aggressive manner. I didn't find atari a very mature presence I have to be honest. Our only interaction, brief as it was, wasn't a positive one. Perhaps his crimes don't justify a full ban but we don't know the extent of his actions. I can imagine the unreleting nature he could display though. It's clear that atari is at least culpable for his initial chat timeout. To continue poking at it on the forum was never going to end positively for them. He could have spoke his mind in private with a moderator but chose to air it out on the forum. Much like running to mum after dad tells you off. Sometimes you have to know how to pick your battles whether they're just or unjust.

Yes, @Dot's info certainly adds to the clarity (thank you), but the initial Rogue Mod thread was not offensive and was even obeying the mod's direction to post his complaint in a different thread. If it hadn't been yanked, there would not be such a big to-do going on. Regardless of atari's maturity or lack thereof, that thread should not have been pulled. I repeat, when Sherri abruptly disappeared, because there was a great deal of interest and recognition of that member, we were given some background on why they were banned. I don't see why we can't be told some general info on the matter. If just to shut me up already. I don't understand allowing this to go on for the better part of a week now in utter silence.

 

[whatevs]

And now I am seeing that @atari's name is crossed off. I'm sure we'll be told that he deactivated himself.

The plot thickens. Atari was a very mild, amiable person in the chat, it's really bizarre why anyone would get offended with him (her?) over "victimhood". Apparently atari adamantly defended being a victim and other people combatively argued about how that's victimizing yourself or some shit. I can't see how that leads to this, but it did.

That makes sense. His last post was about being a victim. Clearly poking the hornets nest in a passive aggressive manner. I didn't find atari a very mature presence I have to be honest. Our only interaction, brief as it was, wasn't a positive one. Perhaps his crimes don't justify a full ban but we don't know the extent of his actions. I can imagine the unreleting nature he could display though. It's clear that atari is at least culpable for his initial chat timeout. To continue poking at it on the forum was never going to end positively for them. He could have spoke his mind in private with a moderator but chose to air it out on the forum. Much like running to mum after dad tells you off. Sometimes you have to know how to pick your battles whether they're just or unjust and you should always be prepared to take ownership of your actions and be prepared to question your opinions. Can't say I saw a lot of that displayed.

As I said at the start - if Atari posted the transcripts we'd have seen things as they are. Part of me wonders why, if you had such damning evidence why it wouldn't be the first thing you post. As he didn't it's hard not to wonder if maybe he knew that actually it's not so damning after all. Some people like to argue the toss until one side gives up. Right or wrong.

Are you trying to pull out a Sherri here?

 

[BrokenBliss]

The plot thickens. Atari was a very mild, amiable person in the chat, it's really bizarre why anyone would get offended with him (her?) over "victimhood". Apparently atari adamantly defended being a victim and other people combatively argued about how that's victimizing yourself or some shit. I can't see how that leads to this, but it did.

Are you trying to pull out a Sherri here?

I will add, Atari practically lived in the chat. I have never gone in without seeing him there. Someone suggested he may have left because he was annoyed with the site. How much time do you have for a list of daily posters who feel the same? Despite that annoyance, I think this place was an important part of his support system. There's more to the story than that.

And now that my memory is being prodded about what took place in chat, I remember seeing the start of that "victim" conversation. I read some of the back-and-forth and didn't think much of it. Just about everything is met with some debate on here, as we're all coming from different backgrounds with different degrees and types of suffering. If we banned every member that contributes to the conversation, there'd be no one left. Again, there's more to the story than that, it would seem.

 

[Smart No More]

Are you trying to pull out a Sherri here?

No. I'm just airing my thoughts. I didn't see what happened with Sherri but I will say I saw through them from the start when everyone was holding her up as a becon of light with the overly positive posts and her blatant virtue signalling. I didn't say anything because tbh I never felt the need as it appeared so obvious and frankly I have more pressing matters in my life. It wouldn't have gone down well anyway. Similarly, I'm not trying to push things one way or another in this case. Just saying what I see from my perspective. I could be wrong. I'm open to that. As I pointed out, we don't have all the info to work with. I'm entirely objective. If there's any point to my post it's all to suggest we all remain objective rather than getting carried away by our assumptions or whatever. No agenda. Therr's nothing in it for me to try to "pull out a Sherri" or influence things one way another. And on that note I think I'm going to leave you gents to it.

 

[BrokenBliss]

Just an FYI – This was the catalyst for @atari's creation of the Rogue Mod thread on Monday (posted in User Discussion Megathread). He was doing what he was told so that he could "voice his opinions freely."

 

[Dot]

The plot thickens. Atari was a very mild, amiable person in the chat, it's really bizarre why anyone would get offended with him (her?) over "victimhood". Apparently atari adamantly defended being a victim and other people combatively argued about how that's victimizing yourself or some shit. I can't see how that leads to this, but it did.

Are you trying to pull out a Sherri here?

Atri ws nt dfendng hs own vctmhd - h/ ws tllng othr ppl tht thy r vctms

Thre = dffrnce btwn hvng bn victm of smethng & 'b-ing a vctm' - accptng th labl & mnd-st of 'b-ing a vctm' = dsempwrng - slf & othrs whlst havng bn thrgh mny thngs fnd strngth in refusng 2 b a victm of thm - tryn2 tll ppl tht thy r victms tkes tht strngth & agncy ovr out repsnss & situatn awy & = v dstrssng

Agn am nt syng tht Atri needd 2 b bannd ovr it or tht h/ ws b-ing as vtriolc as Shrri bt wht h/ sd ws stll triggrng fr mltple ppl

 

[whatevs]

Atri ws nt dfendng hs own vctmhd - h/ ws tllng othr ppl tht thy r vctms

Thre = dffrnce btwn hvng bn victm of smethng & 'b-ing a vctm' - accptng th labl & mnd-st of 'b-ing a vctm' = dsempwrng - slf & othrs whlst havng bn thrgh mny thngs fnd strngth in refusng 2 b a victm of thm - tryn2 tll ppl tht thy r victms tkes tht strngth & agncy ovr out repsnss & situatn awy & = v dstrssng

Agn am nt syng tht Atri needd 2 b bannd ovr it or tht h/ ws b-ing as vtriolc as Shrri bt wht h/ sd ws stll triggrng fr mltple ppl

Yeah yeah, no need to beat a dead horse with that, your point is self-evident and was made by others I spoke to, what isn't is how a seemingly not-vitriol-inducing disagreement led to an user getting kicked out or induced to self-ban.

It seems the likelihood of getting your name crossed in here is as high as catching the bus. I guess is for the best in the end, if you are not going to do it you're better off out of here.

No. I'm just airing my thoughts. I didn't see what happened with Sherri but I will say I saw through them from the start when everyone was holding her up as a becon of light with the overly positive posts and her blatant virtue signalling. I didn't say anything because tbh I never felt the need as it appeared so obvious and frankly I have more pressing matters in my life. It wouldn't have gone down well anyway. Similarly, I'm not trying to push things one way or another in this case. Just saying what I see from my perspective. I could be wrong. I'm open to that. As I pointed out, we don't have all the info to work with. I'm entirely objective. If there's any point to my post it's all to suggest we all remain objective rather than getting carried away by our assumptions or whatever. No agenda. Therr's nothing in it for me to try to "pull out a Sherri" or influence things one way another. And on that note I think I'm going to leave you gents to it.

"Pull out a Sherri" is exactly what you are doing, thanks for clarifying it. What is exactly POAS? After someone that wasn't remotely a bad person, but had flaws and had a run in with the mods or admin and was socially disgraced (not as clear in this case, but you tested the waters with your remarks), people like you proclaim "that was a rotten apple from the start, I could tell". This is the definition of virtue signaling.

Here's is why. It doesn't matter that much if "Sherri" was transphobic or not when it comes to the whole. Her supportive posts were constant and visibly homogenous across years. She wasn't a bad person, and the one's actually virtue signaling are the people that shit on her once she cannot defend herself, going as far as claiming she was actually a man, all because she was actually a shit person on the forum for one or two days.

So you saying above that "well I only interacted once with atari and it wasn't good, probably the ban/self-ban was justified ", is POAS through and through.

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

True, but they often actively call for censorship, they don´t just disagree or attack you.


Here´s the thing though, there is more freedom of speech than in other places of the Internet, but as everywhere there is power there will be selective bias in those that yield it. For example, try to explain concisely why you personally against trying to change your sex and see what happens.

Just gotta be mindful of that. but it´s a nice place to hangout for the severely depressed, suicidal and what have you.

I really appreciate your ability to make important distinctions and explain things in an intelligent manner. Just thought I'd share that. I'm too much of a hothead, I always feel like people are playing at being ignorant.

 

[whatevs]

I really appreciate your ability to make important distinctions and explain things in an intelligent manner. Just thought I'd share that. I'm too much of a hothead, I always feel like people are playing at being ignorant.

Thanks, it's always nice to get a psychological jerkoff, haha!

Sometimes I have a thing for exposing fallacies and frauds. Hypocrites get used to burying the inconsistencies and nonsense in the showy envelope of rhetoric, and it's fun to grab the facade, throw it aside and see what kind of goblin is dwelling behind.

It's too bad we literally live in a society where the biggest liars and frauds are the richest and most loved/admired. The good news is that this shitshow cannot go on much longer sustained on illusions, and there is going to come a breaking point very soon.

 

[Dysgenic Pup]

@Hass confirmed @atari self-banned.

 

[Dot]

Yeah yeah, no need to beat a dead horse with that, your point is self-evident and was made by others I spoke to, what isn't is how a seemingly not-vitriol-inducing disagreement led to an user getting kicked out or induced to self-ban.

It seems the likelihood of getting your name crossed in here is as high as catching the bus. I guess is for the best in the end, if you are not going to do it you're better off out of here.

"Pull out a Sherri" is exactly what you are doing, thanks for clarifying it. What is exactly POAS? After someone that wasn't remotely a bad person, but had flaws and had a run in with the mods or admin and was socially disgraced (not as clear in this case, but you tested the waters with your remarks), people like you proclaim "that was a rotten apple from the start, I could tell". This is the definition of virtue signaling.

Here's is why. It doesn't matter that much if "Sherri" was transphobic or not when it comes to the whole. Her supportive posts were constant and visibly homogenous across years. She wasn't a bad person, and the one's actually virtue signaling are the people that shit on her once she cannot defend herself, going as far as claiming she was actually a man, all because she was actually a shit person on the forum for one or two days.

So you saying above that "well I only interacted once with atari and it wasn't good, probably the ban/self-ban was justified ", is POAS through and through.

Am nt 'beatng dd-hrse" - u sd u dd nt undrstnd y ppl wld b offendd s/ slf answrd ur qustn

Whlst wht Atri ws nt vtriolc h/ wld nt lt it g/ evn thgh mltple ppl mde it clear tht hs assessmnt of thm ws trggrng & bordrng on gs-lghtng - intentlly or nt

Ppl bcme increasngly angry & h/ wld nt stp & thn sd h/ ws b-ing bulld bcse ppl wre gttng irrt8d w/ hm - ths escl8d resltng in hm havng temprry exlusn frm cht & hs rspnse 2 tht ws 2 slf-bn

Slf d/ nt hve n.e. answrs as 2 y othr frum psts wre dlted - am only abl 2 cmmnt on cht issu bcse ws prt of it

 

[Depressed Cat]

Man, I will miss @atari just as I miss @Sherri. They were both nice people from what little I knew of them.

Nothing, absolutely nothing can ever justify Sherri's shocking transphobic rant and horrible insults aimed at RainAndSadness. But at least she was triggered by a nasty misogynistic post/thread. It was a terrible, unjustifiable reaction from Sherri, but she was triggered by something genuinely nasty.

Atari seems to have been triggered by something much, much less. He was offended that people didn't buy his victimhood narrative for all SS members? That's very, very weird indeed.

Like I keep repeating, members of this forum are just a cross section of the worldwide population. So we have all kinds of people in here.

Many of us are victims, no doubt! There are also many who aren't victims of whatever. Some may even be perpetrators who don't admit it openly, and quite understandably so.

It's just weird & inexplicable to believe everyone who wants to CTB is somehow a victim of something. Even Hitler and most of his coterie CTB, that doesn't make them victims by any stretch of the imagination.

Why would he get triggered by something so trivial? I don't know. I seldom visit the chat room. I know he was a constant presence there.

 

[Dot]

Man, I will miss @atari just as I miss @Sherri. They were both nice people from what little I knew of them.

Nothing, absolutely nothing can ever justify Sherri's shocking transphobic rant and horrible insults aimed at RainAndSadness. But at least she was triggered by a nasty misogynistic post/thread. It was a terrible, unjustifiable reaction from Sherri, but she was triggered by something genuinely nasty.

Atari seems to have been triggered by something much, much less. He was offended that people didn't buy his victimhood narrative for all SS members? That's very, very weird indeed.

Like I keep repeating, members of this forum are just a cross section of the worldwide population. So we have all kinds of people in here.

Many of us are victims, no doubt! There are also many who aren't victims of whatever. Some may even be perpetrators who don't admit it openly, and quite understandably so.

It's just weird & inexplicable to believe everyone who wants to CTB is somehow a victim of something. Even Hitler and most of his coterie CTB, that doesn't make them victims by any stretch of the imagination.

Why would he get triggered by something so trivial? I don't know. I seldom visit the chat room. I know he was a constant presence there.

= ws bcse ppl wre gttng mre & mre frstr8d w/ hm

Atri = nt mlicious persn bt = v senstve persn wh/ ds nt tke crticsm v wll & th cnvrsatn tht evnng cre8td lts of crticsm twrds hm whch h/ dd nt undrstnd & h/ ws upst b/ it

Ths knd of thng hd happnd fw tmes & slf thnk tht ws 'strw tht brke th camls bck' fr hm

 

[BrokenBliss]

Man, I will miss @atari just as I miss @Sherri. They were both nice people from what little I knew of them.

Nothing, absolutely nothing can ever justify Sherri's shocking transphobic rant and horrible insults aimed at RainAndSadness. But at least she was triggered by a nasty misogynistic post/thread. It was a terrible, unjustifiable reaction from Sherri, but she was triggered by something genuinely nasty.

Atari seems to have been triggered by something much, much less. He was offended that people didn't buy his victimhood narrative for all SS members? That's very, very weird indeed.

I believe you're getting that backward. Atari was not being triggered, rather he was triggering the other people in the chat by claiming that not just he was a victim, but everyone on the site was a victim, too. Which is a broad assessment I can see him making, valid or not. It is a suicide forum, after all. There were others who really took issue with his claim, but he was insistent on his point. I didn't see where it got so out of hand as to require banning him from there.

But that was just for one week from the chat. It does not explain why his posts were removed from the User Discussion Megathread – because they "didn't fit the thread" topic (??), and it sure doesn't explain the erasure of the Rogue Mod thread that he was literally told to create by same mod – so he could "voice his opinions freely." None of that fits the "crime" which I still question the judgment of. It takes a lot to impose the very drastic measure of censorship on an Internet forum. You admonish the person, perhaps close a thread to further comment (tho not even that in this case would have been appropriate). He tried to be heard in two forums and that same mod deleted his posts both times. The more that comes to light actually makes it even more suspicious, and indicates that maybe atari was right about the mod having it in for him, even just a bit.