[Discussion]Schuyler Colfax

[Stuart]

I guess you're right. I'm just reluctant to suggest flushing somebody who might need help. Even if he does act like something that should be flushed. Tough love might well be the best solution here; perhaps the shock of having to go cold-turkey on the attention-mongering might do the trick.

[Connor MacLeod]

I'm with Edi and others. I feel sorry for him, even if he is (essentially) someone who contributes little of value to the board. Being a worthless contributor is, howver, not a crime, otherwise we could have done something about quite a few people on this forum (including some of SC's detractors, in my opinion.) But he also news to, bluntly put, grow the fuck up. If people have tried to explain and educate on him on how he should be and if he hasn't gotten the picture, then he needs to go away until it DOES sink in. Also, and I would like to say this is a BIG point: I don't think he can make any improvements while he actually remains a member here. I suspect there are certain people who view him as nothing other than a perpetual chew toy (or maybe more accurately THEIR perpetual chew toy) and they don't want their fun taken away, so they take great fun in baiting him or mocking him (the fact he actually rises to the bait is part of the problem here. Its partly but not wholly his fault shit like that happens, after all.)

Also, while I don't oppose the idea of Mentoring or rehabilitation, RI brings up some good points. I don't think doing so PUBLICLY in a thread is the place for it. People should do that privately, personally, and away from the board. If there are people who want to do that, I applaud and encourage them to do so, but doing it here is just asking for trouble (or more mockery/bitching/dogpiling/whatever. We dont need more of that drama on display. Edit: Plus RI is also right that he seems to crave or live off some of that attention, which is something he needs to be cured of if he's to hang around here - another reason NOT to keep him or his antics in an actual thread, but to deal with it away from the board, privately.)

I'd say temp ban and leave his name, but rathre than think of it as an actual ban, consider it an exile or leave of absence until he can come back once he's - basically - "grown up". Those who choose to mentor him (I would like several to do it at least) should agree he is ready, and then bring that forward, with evidence, and then we can lift the ban. Hopefully, by that time, we can also be rid of the inevitable dogpiling/mockery/other BS that invariably gets tied to him.

But, basically, he's been brought up before the Senate too many times and I don't think forgiving him or giving him a pass will work this time around. So he's got to be gone, at least in the short term.

[Stuart]

That's an excellent case Connor, I've no choice but to agree with you.

[Ghost Rider]

This is where for me the divide comes from.

He has not changed from anything except stop pestering admins who threatened him with banning if he didn't stop spamming their PM boxes daily. All three(excluding Mike who if he did, likely deleted and never looked back) in turn got this and ultimately let have Pablo and the moderators chose his name. So, he's far from a clean slate, in fact...that he's lasted this long is testament that we either do not care, or there's bigger issues.

This is where he starts for those people and his only improvement is from there he stopped making Youtube posts, along with a variety of pointless variation of what he saw off a 2/4/whateverchan. And hell I was one of the few who agreed that testing was likely too harsh. Now? He enters a topic as some blustering retard. Yes, they were still harsh, but now he gets uppity with whomever and thinks he's right even wrong. Perhaps temp banning will help, but I feel it's just a rename again. The core of who he is has to either grow up or shut up.

[The Yosemite Bear]

he's a baby rot/tough guy, ok. (refering to the flame warrior types)

[Coyote]

Well, I've gotten a PM from two people willing to mentor him, should it come to that. I'd be willing to help, myself, although I generally haven't had much contact with the kid.

I still think a mentoring thread isn't necessarily an automatic pillory, although a lot depends on the attitudes of the mentors as it does on the person receiving guidance. Obviously, if it becomes evident early on that the experiment is doomed to fail, then the plug can be pulled. And remember, he's already humiliating himself on his own.

But a public thread can also show someone that it isn't just one or two peoples' opinions about him, it's many people. I see such a thing as similar to the "how do I approach/talk to girls" thread in ARSE, except it's helping one person with his social relationships in general (at least as far as this board goes) rather than general Q&A that anyone can deal with. Having more than one person give an answer, even contradictory answers, can show that there is no one "right" way to deal with everything... but dealing with it with maturity can make many answers "right" in their own way.

Actually, having a general 'why am I not well liked' type thread open to any of the Village Idiots seeking honest, positive critique might help.

[Edi]

I agree with RedImperator on most points. I don't see any merit in any kind of public mentoring thread for the reasons he he cites. I also have a suspicion that any private mentors are likely going to need a lot of patience with SC, because of his tendency to fly off the handle the second he is told something he does not want to hear.

The Writers' Guild incident came about precisely because of that. I was brusque perhaps, but not malicious and I handled it privately at first precisely because I knew how it was with him and the other board members. I wanted him to know what his behavior looked like to an outsider without all the hurf-hurf bullshit, but I was not going to go out of my way to take any ego or hurt feelings issues into account. I aired the dirty laundry in public once it was clear that it was going to be an issue behind my back otherwise.

I wonder what number and degree of similar incidents any private mentoring would spawn, whether the mentor handled him with kid gloves or just plain matter of fact. Note that I am not volunteering for it. No time, no inclination and probably no aptitude for it on my part either. I don't wish SC any ill, but I do not see how this could end very well.

It is my opinion that he needs a break from this place. Hell, I did myself, once, for different reasons, and that was at a time when I had nearly ten years of experience and far more maturity under my belt. Wasn't a ban, I just stayed away until I got my worst problems sorted out. Others have had problems too. I remember RayCav, and now that Red mentioned him, jenat-lai as well. But how to go about it, that is probably best decided by others. I have no direct solution.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Taking the action of on-board mentoring implies that evidence exists that he would listen to it long enough to benefit from it. Unfortunately, if there's one thing that SC/EP doesn't seem to be very good at, it's listening. His socialization and acceptance issues seem to go beyond what an online intervention from interested laypersons can really hope to help with. Especially since he seems to seek out, and gets, the wrong sort of attention around here. By that, I mean his status as the Testing's perpetual chew-toy.

If folks want to try to mentor him, I feel that would work better as an off-board effort. As for on-board action, the only thing we can really do for him, at this point, is temp-ban him until he grows up. Titling him, or changing his name back, will only serve to gather him further negative attention.

I suspect there are certain people who view him as nothing other than a perpetual chew toy (or maybe more accurately THEIR perpetual chew toy) and they don't want their fun taken away, so they take great fun in baiting him or mocking him (the fact he actually rises to the bait is part of the problem here. Its partly but not wholly his fault shit like that happens, after all.)

Don't we have a rule on this board against vendettas or similar behavior? If there are certain people habitually provoking him just to get a reaction out of him, should we consider giving them a discussion of their very own in the Senate?

[Connor MacLeod]

I just want to be clear here that mentoring him or trying to rehabilitate him and removing him from hhis board temporarily are NOT mutually exclusive. If there are people (however many) willing to work with him (and on him) and if Colfax can get it into his head at last that we don't care for his behaviour and want him to improve if he is to remain here, that is good. But I don't think he can be rehabilitated while we allow him here for the reasons I've stated, and its hoped that maybe he will indeed get the hint if he is tempbanned. The real beauty of a tempban is that his return is precisely contingent upon him proving that he has in fact changed and will remain changed - we are perfectly wililng to accept him back when he has. He just has to make the effort and demonstrate that he is worth bringing back. I believe that's how its been handled before in the past as well.

And getting rid of him also gets rid of the inevitable dogpiling and drama that usually ensues when he does something stupid, which is also a huge plus. If anything I get tired of people going "HEY COLFAX WAS DUMB LETS GET IM!" since that's about as spammy as the stupid shit he DOES post.

Don't we have a rule on this board against vendettas or similar behavior? If there are certain people habitually provoking him just to get a reaction out of him, should we consider giving them a discussion of their very own in the Senate?

I'm not sure I'd call it as something as consistent as a vendetta, and I am doubtful as to how it could be proved, which is why I dont bother naming names. I dont feel like going through the effort of proving what is essentially my own suspicions.

I suspect its just that you have a certain segment of the board population who have nothing better than to hang around looking for easy targets to try and score points off of (or maybe they just get off on yelling at the foolish, I dont know.) either way, I don't see it as being very useful - bitching about spam is still spam.

[Tiriol]

I suspect there are certain people who view him as nothing other than a perpetual chew toy (or maybe more accurately THEIR perpetual chew toy) and they don't want their fun taken away, so they take great fun in baiting him or mocking him (the fact he actually rises to the bait is part of the problem here. Its partly but not wholly his fault shit like that happens, after all.)

Don't we have a rule on this board against vendettas or similar behavior? If there are certain people habitually provoking him just to get a reaction out of him, should we consider giving them a discussion of their very own in the Senate?

If I've understood correctly, it might be hard to gather evidence of any particular vendetta, since much of it consists of Testing posts, which get auto-deleted. Although it might be possible to find other sources of evidence around the forums.

[Thanas]

Well, I have monitored Colfax and testing for quite a long time. The problem is that he provides an easy target either way. His debating skills are practically nonexistent, which allows even otherwise clueless nobodys to pound him to a pulp. As such, he is getting flamed in about 100% of the threads. The problem with proving any vendetta is that - IMO - most of the flaming is entirely warranted. Not how I would go about responding to him, but most of the flaming he received is self-inflicted. It does not take any baiting at all for SC to enter into a thread and immediately conduct himself in a manner that is flame-worthy.

The fact that he is getting flamed by the same members over and over again might be evidence of a vendetta, but it might just as easily be explained by the fact that SC mostly posts in testing and that testing is usually only visited by the same group of people.

Now, what is a bit concerning is that everything he says is immediately interpreted in the worst way possible. Might be a vendetta, but it is also all to easy not to give him the benefit of the doubt anymore, because almost everytime someone did, the end result was the same - that he did not warrant it.

That said, I agree with pretty much everything said in this thread.

[Connor MacLeod]

If I've understood correctly, it might be hard to gather evidence of any particular vendetta, since much of it consists of Testing posts, which get auto-deleted. Although it might be possible to find other sources of evidence around the forums.

Partly, but its not just that. alot of it is that Colfax simply isn't innocent. To an extent he does say stupid shit and does deserve it, no excuse can be made for that. Where it becomes a problem is that Colfax has basically gotten a perception as a perpetual chew toy. Its more like a.. I dunno.. a bias. Anytime he says something stupid, it seems to me its like a green light for people to just jump on him and beat him up, and that never works because he always responds foolishly to it, which feeds the mockery, which leads to more ego from him... it just seems to become a self perpetuating cycle until a mod steps in. It becomes like him digging a huge hole for himself and then not being able to get out because other people keep piling dirt on top. that's still a simplification (because he is an attention grabber too, which is also part of the problem.) but its one of the things I think that has to be addressed.

[Connor MacLeod]

Well, I have monitored Colfax and testing for quite a long time. The problem is that he provides an easy target either way. His debating skills are practically nonexistent, which allows even otherwise clueless nobodys to pound him to a pulp. As such, he is getting flamed in about 100% of the threads. The problem with proving any vendetta is that - IMO - most of the flaming is entirely warranted. Not how I would go about responding to him, but most of the flaming he received is self-inflicted. It does not take any baiting at all for SC to enter into a thread and immediately conduct himself in a manner that is flame-worthy.

That's kinda it, but the problem is then it becomes flaming for flaming's sake, and that grows tiresome quickly. to me its like all that "RAR LOOK AT WHAT DARKSTAR/STEWART/RANDOM TROLL POSTED!! LUZL WHAT A MORON!" At some point it just becomes pointless and repetitive and as spammy as anything the idiot in question says.

The fact that he is getting flamed by the same members over and over again might be evidence of a vendetta, but it might just as easily be explained by the fact that SC mostly posts in testing and that testing is usually only visited by the same group of people.

I don't think its evidence of a vendetta per se, I just think they feel like they can get away with flaming him because he is, as you say, an easy target. Let's face it, some people come to this board solely to yell at people, regardless of the person or the reason or whatever. At this point I fele like I could go into any Colfax thread where he's said something stupid and he got dogpiled and I could reasonably make guesses about WHO it is yelling at him. As I said, it gets repetitive and pointless after some point.

Now, what is a bit concerning is that everything he says is immediately interpreted in the worst way possible. Might be a vendetta, but it is also all to easy not to give him the benefit of the doubt anymore, because almost everytime someone did, the end result was the same - that he did not warrant it.

I don't thnk its a vendetta so much as a mindset. He's always made himself an easy target, so its very easy to see him as ALWAYS being one, and as I said, it just becomes self perpetuating after a certain point. At this point, its so utterly predictable that you can tell its become pointless.

This I think highlights one of the big reasons why we might have to get him away from the board, regardless of the duration. He's too incendiary a presence and he isn't willing yet (if he ever is) to change enough to warrant coming down on dogpiling (because he DOES say stupid shit, that still can't be ignored.) If people can fix him, I applaud and encourage them to try and do so, but he's going to have to prove that he HAS changed before I'm willing to let him back again. Its just too much trouble for the rest of us otherwise.

If in some future point he DOEs change, he stays changed, and people continue to treat him like a chew toy and/or dogpile him, THEN maybe it can be taken more seriously.

[Edi]

A view from the ranks of people who have a lot of experience with Colfax:

The problem with this mentoring business is that it's been tried in chat. Havok stepped up and defended him at every opportunity and gave the kid advice all the time until he finally got sick and tired of the little cunt throwing it back in his face like everyone else that ever tried helping him out.

The worst part? Summer vacation is coming up for him so he'll be off of school. That means we have more of his bullshit to look forward to in chat and probably the board. Any action you take short of a ban (permanent or otherwise) will just make him think you're just giving him shit and he's one of the cool kids and can give shit back. That's his entire modus operandi.

[Knife]

That's kinda it, but the problem is then it becomes flaming for flaming's sake, and that grows tiresome quickly. to me its like all that "RAR LOOK AT WHAT DARKSTAR/STEWART/RANDOM TROLL POSTED!! LUZL WHAT A MORON!" At some point it just becomes pointless and repetitive and as spammy as anything the idiot in question says.

That was more or less my point last page. I'm hesitant on doing the dog tired 'testing v Senate' bit, so didn't want to name it thus. However, SC faces a lot of grief in that forum and I beleive that indeed reinforces if not straight out enables his attitude.

I don't think its evidence of a vendetta per se, I just think they feel like they can get away with flaming him because he is, as you say, an easy target.

I'm not sure it is vendetta either but I'll be damned to come up with another word for it.

Let's face it, some people come to this board solely to yell at people, regardless of the person or the reason or whatever. At this point I fele like I could go into any Colfax thread where he's said something stupid and he got dogpiled and I could reasonably make guesses about WHO it is yelling at him. As I said, it gets repetitive and pointless after some point.

Well, if you follow where ever he is to bitch at him and he hangs out primarily in testing, then I'm still not quite sure it is classic vendetta but it sure the fuck a lot closer to it.

I don't thnk its a vendetta so much as a mindset. He's always made himself an easy target, so its very easy to see him as ALWAYS being one, and as I said, it just becomes self perpetuating after a certain point. At this point, its so utterly predictable that you can tell its become pointless.

This I think highlights one of the big reasons why we might have to get him away from the board, regardless of the duration. He's too incendiary a presence and he isn't willing yet (if he ever is) to change enough to warrant coming down on dogpiling (because he DOES say stupid shit, that still can't be ignored.) If people can fix him, I applaud and encourage them to try and do so, but he's going to have to prove that he HAS changed before I'm willing to let him back again. Its just too much trouble for the rest of us otherwise.

If in some future point he DOEs change, he stays changed, and people continue to treat him like a chew toy and/or dogpile him, THEN maybe it can be taken more seriously.

while it hardly constitutes an emergency for the board, it has been brought up to the Senate. Might as well look at it.

Edit; reading Edi's post....I'm not against a ban either. However, if he survives that, a look at the environment that fosters SC should be looked at.

[Knife]

He whom shall not be named but his initials are SC wanted to add via PM;

Okay, we need to get a couple of things straight. You all keep saying ‘attention’, ‘he wants attention’, ‘he seeks attention’, ‘he craves attention’, I do not want your attention, I can’t emphasize that enough.

This board has never and will ever be my main social circle. I do visit the board often (a little too often in my opinion), but I do have a life.
I just want to make that clear.
One thing that I’ve noticed is that I have always had a problem with conveying my tone when posting. So when I’m joking around or if I’m actually serious, no seems to get it. I suppose that is one thing I can work on.

Now I will admit that I did get sucked into testing. It has pretty been the only forum I’ve looked around for a while. When I’m bored, one of my solutions is really, to just to go and screw around in testing, until I have to do something.
Yes, I am an awkward, socially inept teenager, I’m willing to admit, and I have found myself in a room full of people who do not like me a few too many times this week (3 (you guys included), if anyone is curious).

My biggest flaw (in my opinion) is that I feel the need to be right rather than accept the way things are and be happy. Looking around the board I often wonder why is Coffee (just an example, not a cheap shot) allowed to be asshole to everyone and curse them all out, and yet when I do it (not trying to be like him at all), I get called an internet tough guy. Or why did I get so much crap for calling someone (insert expletive) even though when that same someone calls me (insert even worse expletive) no one bats an eye and it assumed that they were just joking (looking at you sdn chat). My answer to that is I don’t care anymore; I’m just going to go along with it.

I see the same thing going around my school, ‘that guy is a complete asshole, but why does everyone like him?’ It’s not my concern so I’m not going to let it bother me (anymore).
Relating more the above paragraph I do have a problem with being told to ‘grow up’ by a person who made a thread about a wet dream he had which is why I flipped out last night. I’m willing to accept that, most of you are accepted for who you are, but I also get the feeling that you are exempt from certain things, because everyone has accepted you for being you. That is what I have a problem with.

My solution (for those who care).

I will agree to back way from the board for the summer, my summer break to be more exact. Which would I guess I could start early and back off now and come back on my birthday (Sept 7) even though school would started by then.
When I come back I would agree to stay out of testing (or at least don’t post in there as much). Honestly speaking, I can contribute to the board, I just never really felt the need to. That is something else that I will work on.

So essence,
I will back off the board (give or take a hand full of post) for the next 3 months.
I will get my shit together over the summer (I really do need to get out more).
I will give your mentoring thing a try.
And when I come back, I will show you how much I improved.
Sounds good?

I would prefer not to be temp banned, because I really do enjoy lurking the old HoS and ARSE threads (seriously).

And if I fall back into old habits, call me out on it.

I highly doubt that I’ve hit every point brought up, so ask me some questions.

[The Yosemite Bear]

for the love of dog, just keep sheppard from being his mentor....

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Temp ban for a year. I think he'll be in college by then and maybe he'll have grown up a little. Maybe he won't even want to come back by then. But regardless, it solves the problem neatly, and I don't mind revisiting the issue in 15 months with a perm-ban if nothing's changed when he comes back. I don't want the revert though because I utterly hated his prior user name. I'd suggest instead changing his username to a random combination of letters and numbers.

[Stark]

If SC can stick to that, I'll be both surprised and pleased. However, given his deteriorating conduct, I'm not certain this is realistic.

Since many Senators don't pay attention to testing (rightly so mostly) I think it's worth a bit of background. When EP came to the board he primarily posted in testing and GnC, and as is usual for teenagers he said dumb shit and was ribbed for it. A lot of people - myself included - tried to give him more-or-less helpful advice on his posting style and conduct, and this was not recieved well. While initially he responded to those like Ford and Hav who were 'nice' about it, changes to his conduct never emerged. Given the nature and motto of the board, over the time (years?) almost all of these people gave up on him and came to see his attention-whoring posts as simply that, and have no patience for it.

This is the guy who lied about asking to be banned and alternates between internet tough-guy and assmonkey with his mood. This is not just some kid who's a bit awkward - at least so far as such a determination can be made in text-only. Helping him has been tried by at least half a dozen people in certainly the largest outswell of assistance ('mentoring' wise anyway) I've seen on SDN. Finally, SDN is not a childcare centre. It's nobody's responsiblity here to improve the life of others, and frankly I really don't think it's the place for emotionally fragile kids in an identity crisis. Making him a pet psychology experiment is actually quite disturbing to me, when it's clear that he's the sort of person who will not leave, regardless of the negative impact poorly-thought-out 'mentoring' programs (or flaming) might be having on him.

It's important to note that those Senators who have interacted with SC (or been aware of his history) tend to be more negative in this thread than those who haven't and honestly want to help him. Many bridges have already been burned; I'll wait and see if this one works.

[Thanas]

You know, I would love to be optimistic in this case.

However, SC has made several promises like those in at least three threads. Result - three days later he flat out said that he never made such a promise. Now, admittedly, this was testing, but I don't think he would ever have promised to change without a senate thread.

Let us be realistic here - if the threat of a temp-ban would not be hanging over his head, how high do you think his incentive for changing would be? How much do you think that change stems from getting it and how much from being afraid of getting banned?

I really would like to be optimistic in his case, but I am afraid I cannot. Too many hours of advice have been wasted by countless people on him.

That said, I'd love to give him a last chance. I really would like to. Heck, I don't particularly fancy my first discussion thread in the senate being about banning anyone. But I have no reason to be optimistic.

EDIT: I'll also add that SC has been given more chances than any college student would have received and that he has squandered every last one of them.

[Stark]

To be honest, Thanas, I think it's a strange case for the Senate. I'm not aware of any rules he actually breaks - especially since it's all in testing regardless - and yet here he is with disciplinary action/self-help. If he's got real psychological or developmental problems, there's nothing anyone can do on a forum. If he's just trolling everyone for laughs, he won't stop.

[Thanas]

To be honest, Thanas, I think it's a strange case for the Senate. I'm not aware of any rules he actually breaks - especially since it's all in testing regardless - and yet here he is with disciplinary action/self-help. If he's got real psychological or developmental problems, there's nothing anyone can do on a forum. If he's just trolling everyone for laughs, he won't stop.

Well, I think it is a case for the senate, as several users have received titles (most popular: Retarded Spambot) for being no-content posters. And he definitely fits that charge.

[Knife]

To be honest, Thanas, I think it's a strange case for the Senate. I'm not aware of any rules he actually breaks - especially since it's all in testing regardless - and yet here he is with disciplinary action/self-help. If he's got real psychological or developmental problems, there's nothing anyone can do on a forum. If he's just trolling everyone for laughs, he won't stop.

Well, I think it is a case for the senate, as several users have received titles (most popular: Retarded Spambot) for being no-content posters. And he definitely fits that charge.

Indeed, as well as the idea that the Senate can discuss any portion of board policy even if it is not spelled out particularly well. Plenty of people have been booted from this board in years past without a clear cut violation of stated rules. Some have been retained even though violating said rules. Keep in mind this primarily a discussion of what to do with SC, not a forgone conclusion.

[Stark]

Oh I didn't mean to imply that it was strange to bring it up in the Senate, but that it would be difficult to make a decision on without the guidance of 'broke xyz rule'. I agree that if people have a problem with him it's worth discussing.

[CmdrWilkens]

Having read his PM and having read everything else I have to feel that a temp-ban (nowhere near so long as Marina is asking for) would be the ideal route for a couple reasons:

1) This thread is already a very public and dispassionate review of his past actions and the need for change...but the response has been, as Thanas pointed out, more of the same promises that have been made before. In other words I think this thread in and of itself is a test case of how anything like public menotring just won't work.

2) A stint away from the board allows the short term memory of everyone to grow a bit fuzzy, if he left and came back and contributed positively I think the fresh start would be all that more noticeable for the lack of shit during the interim

3) A temp ban doesn't stop lurking, it stops posting. I'm 90% sure, and maybe someone could answer more certainly than I can, but the temp ban will prevent posting under the username (or IP if we so chose) while there woudl be no bar to lurking. If SC/EP really wants to lean back away from the board but still be able to lurk for a few montsh then a temp ban is no bar to that.

4) A temp ban doesn't carry with it the long term stigma of a name-change or a title. While we've rescinded titles before and name changes do happen they tend to be long-term rehab projects. A temp ban ends when it ends and the user returns as they were beforehand. Its obviously a bit rough upfront in the sense of severing them from the board but it carries none of the more lasting reprucussions that a name-change or title tend to carry.


My recommendation would be to temp ban him from the date a vote is final to continue through the end of summer, call it 1 Oct, to round things out.

That would be my recommendation...from my standpoint as Chancellor I don't want to initiate a vote until we've had a chance to fully air everything so Sunday evening is the earliest I will post. That gives the entire weekend for an opinion to gel.

To be honest, Thanas, I think it's a strange case for the Senate. I'm not aware of any rules he actually breaks - especially since it's all in testing regardless - and yet here he is with disciplinary action/self-help. If he's got real psychological or developmental problems, there's nothing anyone can do on a forum. If he's just trolling everyone for laughs, he won't stop.

I think this falls under the category best described by IR.3

These rules are here to tell you what you can and can't do, but they do not define "rights" which you can throw in the faces of the administrative staff if they have agreed that you've done something wrong. We have added retroactive rules in the past (eg- the rule about large sigs or harassing females via PM) due to the actions of individual members, and rest assured, we are perfectly willing to do so again. In other words, this is not a court of law. If you find a loophole in our rules, don't be too pleased with yourself because we will simply close it, and then shove it up your ass.

So yeah consider it a retroactive form of "stupid trolls may be punished" rule without getting into whether his posts actually violate the PRs and DRs. The point with the rules has always been to serve as a guideline with a reminder that if you do stupid shit we may do shit back to you.