I'm pretty much done here...

[Peter De Smidt]

Disagreement does not justify uncivil behavior, nor does banning uncivil behavior discourage disagreement concerning topics apropos to this forum.

[David R Munson]

I really wonder about people finding the LF forum to be a negative enough place that they find the need to leave it. Have they ever really encountered the sort of negativity-run-amok that so characterizes so much of the internet in genreal? Of course, I'd rather we didn't have all the bullshit and petty bickering that we do, but compared to some of the forums I still follow, this place is an incredibly positive oasis of good information and nice people who genuinely want to contribute to productive conversation. It remains the most useful, friendliest forum I've ever followed, and to my mind it hasn't even changed all that much since way back when.

Negativity will dominate our view of things if we let it. I prefer to focus on the good nature of this community and all that it continues to contribute to my journey in photography.

[mikebarger]

Amen!

[jb7]

Originally Posted by gliderbee

There 's a saying in French that translates to : "If all the disgusted leave, there will be only the disgusting left."

Stefan

But that was not the case with the member banned...it was the 'disgusting' that was banned/left.

QED

[Vaughn]

jb7, sorry I am confused...what was demonstrated? Thanks...

[Kirk Gittings]

No matter how interesting they are or how original their work, if members persist in violating forum guidelines they become a nuisance and take up moderator time. They get warned and eventually banned.

In that case, with numerous warnings and two temporary bans before HE decided to leave "permanently". Yet he was back here under an alias a week later. We were not dealing with an adult here and our cutting him slack over the years just encouraged him like any child.

[Eric Rose]

With all due respect Kirk, I get the feeling that it was more a personal thing between you and Frank. Your language when speaking of him clearly illustrates this.

[Dan Fromm]

With all due respect Kirk, I get the feeling that it was more a personal thing between you and Frank. Your language when speaking of him clearly illustrates this.

Eric, I think you are mistaken. I found Frank's political comments completely out of place on this bulletin board, eventually got fed up and started reporting them.

Thread drift is a fact of life but resurrecting old disagreements will get us nowhere. Better to address the points made in the lady's swan song than to reinforce them.

[jonreid]

With all due respect Kirk, I get the feeling that it was more a personal thing between you and Frank. Your language when speaking of him clearly illustrates this.

Agree. Was there consultation between moderators or was it your decision alone Kirk?

Jon

[RichardSperry]

In my experience, bannings such as this one are due to personality conflicts rather than actual violation of any real rules. The moderator just doesn't like the poster.

And considering the overall general lax enforcement of real violations(which I have experienced personally on this board), I will continue to believe that is the case with respect to Frank.

When a person is banned for some thing political they post that a moderator disagrees with, and name-calling trolls are tolerated or ignored, something is wrong with the moderation system or personnel.

I've never read anything posted by Frank which was or is disgusting, as was stated in this thread. I have never read a post of his where he resorted to namecalling, attacking ad hominem, or being a general @sshat troll.

Many boards have a capricious unwritten rule, don't piss off the moderator. I am certain this is the only rule that Frank broke.