I nominate Tanfan for a two week banning.

Inasmuch as Mr. Tanfan Tanny Tanner, Esq. (Tanfan) is, was, and forever shall be a legend, originator from the days of tRCBM (hereafter referred to as "the old board"), held up the founding values of the old board through his Demanding Excellence, shutting down bonars and BWAAAAA-ing, and stayed true to his character when the old board fell apart during the dark days of 24/7 and the birth of tSwill by posting exclusively on tSwill and calling out the injustices of 24/7 while vowing to be a firm supporter of tSwill, let it be known that Tanfan has failed to uphold his support of the insurrection known as tSwill by returning to prominent posting on 24/7 through back-room dealings with the overlord of 24/7 who shall not be named. It is clear that Tanfan has violated the sacred trust established by completely arbitrary standards I just made up and is guilty in this kangaroo court.

I propose a 2-week banning of Tanfan. As this is OT season, a banning until 2-days prior to the Jacksonville State football game should send the appropriate message to Tanfan that tSwill is not a dullard that lies on the bed eating bon bons and watching soaps ignorantly while he traipses about town cavorting with his old girlfriends, she is a mean, jealous, angry domineering bitch (calm down, Miser) who will eat his lunch.

Asking for a second and a third to put it to a vote. Thank you for your time.

P.S. someone nominate ghost for banning too. Time to testify bitches.

Second. F uck tanfan.

meh.... tanfan gonna tanfan, he can't help but get a bonar over bonars over there.

Denied. F the sunshine blowers!

No ban. Slippery slope to excessive control and suppression of voice and personality. Other measures are available. Maybe take down the statue in front of Swill HQ in Topeka.

Rocinante wrote:Inasmuch as Mr. Tanfan Tanny Tanner, Esq. (Tanfan) is, was, and forever shall be a legend, originator from the days of tRCBM (hereafter referred to as "the old board"), held up the founding values of the old board through his Demanding Excellence, shutting down bonars and BWAAAAA-ing, and stayed true to his character when the old board fell apart during the dark days of 24/7 and the birth of tSwill by posting exclusively on tSwill and calling out the injustices of 24/7 while vowing to be a firm supporter of tSwill,  let it be known that Tanfan has failed to uphold his support of the insurrection known as tSwill by returning to prominent posting on 24/7 through back-room dealings with the overlord of 24/7 who shall not be named.  It is clear that Tanfan has violated the sacred trust established by completely arbitrary standards I just made up and is guilty in this kangaroo court.

I propose a 2-week banning of Tanfan.  As this is OT season, a banning until 2-days prior to the Jacksonville State football game should send the appropriate message to Tanfan that tSwill is not a dullard that lies on the bed eating bon bons and watching soaps ignorantly while he traipses about town cavorting with his old girlfriends, she is a mean, jealous, angry domineering bitch (calm down, Miser) who will eat his lunch.  

Asking for a second and a third to put it to a vote.  Thank you for your time.

P.S. someone nominate ghost for banning too.  Time to testify bitches.

The Court Jester wants to ban the King.   

tTito wrote:

The Court Jester wants to ban the King.   

I am aware you want my balls in your mouth Tito. Brig up the quality of your posts and we can discuss it.

Hmm, I'm very perplexed by this motion. One the one hand I am not inclined to support the motion of Rocinate, whom I have deemed to by a scoundrel and hyper liberal stooge. On the other the irony of this motion would be great fun.

Ah Hell. THIRD. Motion Carried. Lets Vote.

How's this shocking??? Like jilted lovers both him and ghost when ape when this place started posting at a sprinters pace that simply cannot be kept up. Then they both dia
Sappear and i m forced to fill their quotas yet again.

In the end, they got what they wanted: me, their #1 perceived threat permmabanned from their true love msg board. The rest of you were just pawns

Rook wrote:Hmm, I'm very perplexed by this motion.  One the one hand I am not inclined to support the motion of Rocinate, whom I have deemed to by a scoundrel and hyper liberal stooge.  On the other the irony of this motion would be great fun.

Ah Hell.  THIRD.  Motion Carried.  Lets Vote.

  

Exactly my point.  (LooseGoose gave me the idea, btw, so this fun transcends politics).  I just want to shake things up around here.  It's been boring lately and fuckers are migrating back to 24/7 (which is still lame).

So thanks!

Robert J Sakimano wrote:why would we ban people for doing what they do? What did you think he was going to do?

Who cares? Is this the wild west of the internet or isn't it?! I just want to have fun and piss people off and watch the fallout!


Can you of all peopl blame me for that? Bob? really... You?

Rocinante wrote:

Who cares?   Is this the wild west of the internet or isn't it?!  I just want to have fun and piss people off and watch the fallout!

In other words, you want be like the mods on tCock.

tTito wrote:

In other words, you want be like the mods on tCock.

Yeah that's it.  

NIGEL!! Get to work, fucker!!

Rocinante wrote:

Who cares?   Is this the wild west of the internet or isn't it?!  I just want to have fun and piss people off and watch the fallout!


Can you of all peopl blame me for that?  Bob?  really... You?

If this was the wild wild west, there would be a dual instead of a banning. So, it looks like a message board dual between you and Tanfan over participating on this board. You know he will have gHost shooting from the roof of the saloon.

Turtleneck wrote:

If this was the wild wild west, there would be a dual instead of a banning. So, it looks like a message board dual between you and Tanfan over participating on this board. You know he will have gHost shooting from the roof of the saloon.

No worries, gHost only owns a BB gun.

Turtleneck wrote:

If this was the wild wild west, there would be a dual instead of a banning. So, it looks like a message board dual between you and Tanfan over participating on this board. You know he will have gHost shooting from the roof of the saloon.

Ohhhhhhhh. I nominate (or whatever) that we vote to ban either tanfan or rocinate. Only one gets out of the vote alive and there will be no "minimum number of votes" thing. Someone gets banned no matter what for no reason at all.

In accordance with the Charter of the Swill, a temporary ban of Tanfan has been moved and carried by second and third and therefore the Board Steward is required to constitute a formal vote on the proposed ban. See Charter language below. Your arguments would be best presented in the thread representing the formal voting process where you may present arguments before the Geronte as to why they should or should not vote for the proposed ban.



Bans – Members of the Gerousia may NOT be banned by forum moderators*. A Geronte may only be banned by a vote of his/her peers meeting the following conditions:

• Temporary ban – A simple majority when at least half the Gerousia is represented in the vote. Ban durations are determined by the sitting Board Steward at the time of the ban.
• Permanent ban – A two-thirds majority when at least half of the Gerousia is represented.

[edit SRC - 4/25/2014 - ommission] Only a member of the Gerousia may propose a ban on another Geronte. Bans shall be proposed in the public forum and require a second and a third (with both endorsements also being by member of the Gerousia) accompanied by a reason for the proposed ban. A Geronte may not be subjected to a banning attempt more than once for the same offense (i.e. the same post, the same incident) but may face a banning vote more than once for the same reason (i.e. racism, aggressive behavior). Interpretation and application of this stipulation will be done by the sitting Secretary General Ephor at the time the ban is proposed.[/edit]

I demand trial by combat. Who will be Tanfan's champion?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Ohhhhhhhh. I nominate (or whatever) that we vote to ban either tanfan or rocinate. Only one gets out of the vote alive and there will be no "minimum number of votes" thing. Someone gets banned no matter what for no reason at all.

I would be fine with this.  But 1). you should start your own thread, and B). if you ban me, a true swiller, while leaving that fickle backstabbing douchecanoe to shit all over what this place was founded for, you are a fool signing the death warrant of tSwill. BWAAAAAA!

 

[quote="Travis of the Cosmos"]

Interesting. I hereby Second this Motion to Amend the Original Motion to state that a vote to Ban either Tanfan or Rocinate for two weeks. However, I don't believe our charter permits any ban without the requisite number of supporting votes and thus that provision would be null in this motion. Do we have a third to support the amendment?

Rook wrote:

The motion has already been carried. This motion can be brought separately following the voting on Tanfan (and I really have no problem with it. ). Get to work you lazy do nothing NIGEL!!!   

Rook wrote:In accordance with the Charter of the Swill, a temporary ban of Tanfan has been moved and carried by second and third and therefore the Board Steward is required to constitute a formal vote on the proposed ban.  See Charter language below.  Your arguments would be best presented in the thread representing the formal voting process where you may present arguments before the Geronte as to why they should or should not vote for the proposed ban.



Bans – Members of the Gerousia may NOT be banned by forum moderators*.  A Geronte may only be banned by a vote of his/her peers meeting the following conditions:

• Temporary ban – A simple majority when at least half the Gerousia is represented in the vote. Ban durations are determined by the sitting Board Steward at the time of the ban.
• Permanent ban – A two-thirds majority when at least half of the Gerousia is represented.

[edit SRC - 4/25/2014 - ommission] Only a member of the Gerousia may propose a ban on another Geronte.  Bans shall be proposed in the public forum and require a second and a third (with both endorsements also being by member of the Gerousia) accompanied by a reason for the proposed ban.  A Geronte may not be subjected to a banning attempt more than once for the same offense (i.e. the same post, the same incident) but may face a banning vote more than once for the same reason (i.e. racism, aggressive behavior).  Interpretation and application of this stipulation will be done by the sitting Secretary General Ephor at the time the ban is proposed.[/edit]

"I just want to have fun and piss people off and watch the fallout!"

Yeah, this is great reason to ban Tanner.

Rocinante wrote:

I would be fine with this.  But 1). you should start your own thread, and B). if you ban me, a true swiller, while leaving that fickle backstabbing douchecanoe to shit all over what this place was founded for, you are a fool signing the death warrant of tSwill.  BWAAAAAA!

 

the foundation of this board is Turbo-Lax. therefore quite fitting.

tTito wrote:

"I just want to have fun and piss people off and watch the fallout!"

Yeah, this is great reason to ban Tanner.

Dude you are such a huge pussy. The reasons are outlined in the OP. Get off me nuts, stalker!!   

tTito wrote:

In other words, you want be like the mods on tCock.

This.

It would be funny if we had that old fucker banned before he even had a chance to get back on the board again.

Alas, I don't think I could pull the trigger on a ban vote. Just like I haven't been able to pull the trigger yet on ignoring Bob.

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:It would be funny if we had that old fucker banned before he even had a chance to get back on the board again.

Alas, I don't think I could pull the trigger on a ban vote. Just like I haven't been able to pull the trigger yet on ignoring Bob.

Pull the trigger this, pull the trigger that. Why are you trying to turn this into a gun control debate? The 2nd Amendment is clear. I can own as many firearms as a I want and I do not need the government telling me otherwise. Stop being an authoritarian.

Screw this, let 247 be the one ran like communist Russia.

I know this won't happen because of laziness, but lord would it be fun.

[circus music]

Blanch32 wrote:How's this shocking??? Like jilted lovers both him and ghost when ape when this place started posting at a sprinters pace that simply cannot be kept up.  Then they both dia
Sappear and i m forced to fill their quotas yet again.

In the end, they got what they wanted: me, their #1 perceived threat permmabanned from their true love msg board.   The rest of you were just pawns

Ah shit... we got swindled and now we're stuck with Blanch.

Rook wrote:

Third.
I have no idea what any of this means, but if Rook is for it... I'm for it.

 

Phil McCrackin wrote:


Third.
I have no idea what any of this means, but if Rook is for it... I'm for it.

tTito wrote:

In other words, you want be like the mods on tCock.

You are correct. Hypocritical **** he is

Rocinante wrote:I know this won't happen because of laziness, but lord would it be fun.

[circus music]

You pussy. I post here, tcock and the underground bunker. I'd post on your ass if it were in front of me. Let's hug it out