# The Ubuntu Forum Community > Ubuntu Community Discussions > Resolution Centre >  How to find a resolution if you are prevented from posting here

## Ubuntu_User

What am I supposed to do if an admin is simply refusing to answer what I think are relevant questions and instead chooses to abuse his admin powers?

Reference:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=139401&page=4
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=147933
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=147936

----------


## KiwiNZ

Again our position has been made very clear

----------


## Ubuntu_User

> Again our position has been made very clear


Again, I don't think my questions have been addressed in any way, shape or form.

But if I'm wrong here, why do you refuse to simply show me where I'm wrong?

----------


## KiwiNZ

http://ubuntuforums.org/faq.php?faq=...q_forum_policy

----------


## Ubuntu_User

> http://ubuntuforums.org/faq.php?faq=...q_forum_policy


Again, my questions are not addressed there.
If I'm wrong and they are, please show me where exactly.

Thanks in advance.

----------


## resolutioncenter

How is the resolution center supposed to work if the very same admin I have an issue with I'd like to discuss here prevents this by banning me indefinately before anyone but himself addressed the issue and now starts to delete my posts?

I'm refering to this thread here:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=147941

And rest assured, I only register a new user to discuss this, as it is beyond me how a resolution center is supposed to work if the one looking for a resolution is banned from posting.

----------


## kassetra

The admin in question is following the rules of this forum, which were created by the owner of this forum.

We are not a free speech or legal forum.  We are a technical forum, with the stated goal of providing technical support. 

As a privately owned forum, posts here are not subject to a right of free speech; we have policies and guidelines for what speech is allowed, and where it is allowed.  Posting is a privilege, not a right.

We have stated the policies and guidelines for posting on this forum quite clearly.  No one in this forum is under any obligation to answer any question posed here.

----------


## resolutioncenter

> The admin in question is following the rules of this forum, which were created by the owner of this forum.


By not giving answers but instead posting irrelevant drivel again and again, by infurating people, by banning people after provoking them even if they were in the process of taking this to the resolution center and by locking threads because he's seemingly unable to answer the questions posed there?




> We are not a free speech or legal forum.  We are a technical forum, with the stated goal of providing technical support. 
> 
> As a privately owned forum, posts here are not subject to a right of free speech; we have policies and guidelines for what speech is allowed, and where it is allowed.  Posting is a privilege, not a right.


I hope it is alright if I speak my mind freely, but this is really getting childish. 

I stated again and again and again that I agree with what you said (though you should of course also take into consideration that you are the official ubuntu forums, whatever may follow from that) and this is not the issue.

What is the issue here is first that the reasons given for the forum policy in question have been legal ones. Now if you do give legal reasons and people point out that your reasoning is on shaky grounds, to put it mildly, you should address these concerns.
Yet you showed again that you don't but instead will again and again and again repeat something that is not the issue and that nobody is disputing. 

Second, as should be pretty clear from my original post, the real subject of this thread is the behaviour of Kiwinz and I don't see how your statement addresses this in any way, shape or form.



> We have stated the policies and guidelines for posting on this forum quite clearly.  No one in this forum is under any obligation to answer any question posed here.


You are of course right, however I have a hard time seeing that posting irrelevant and off topic information again and again and again just to kill a discussion on the subject, arbitrarily closing threads, arbitrarily banning users, refusing to clarify the forum policy on this matter logicaly follows from the fact that nobody is under any obligation to answer any question.

----------


## KiwiNZ

We are not prepared to place these forums at risk for our 80,000 members for very small number of members who believe they are above the rules and policies they agreed to follow when they signed up for membership.

----------


## kassetra

> By not giving answers but instead posting irrelevant drivel again and again, by infurating people, by banning people after provoking them even if they were in the process of taking this to the resolution center and by locking threads because he's seemingly unable to answer the questions posed there?
> 
> What is the issue here is first that the reasons given for the forum policy in question have been legal ones. Now if you do give legal reasons and people point out that your reasoning is on shaky grounds, to put it mildly, you should address these concerns.
> Yet you showed again that you don't but instead will again and again and again repeat something that is not the issue and that nobody is disputing. 
> 
> Second, as should be pretty clear from my original post, the real subject of this thread is the behaviour of Kiwinz and I don't see how your statement addresses this in any way, shape or form.


I have addressed the matter, as the admin was following the rules that every user registered here has agreed to abide by; KiwiNZ has followed them to the letter and the spirit.  We are under no obligation to discuss the legal matters of the running of this forum.  Our reasoning is neither on shaky grounds, nor will it be discussed outside of our legal counsel.

If you choose to view our policies as irrelevant drivel, that is your choice.  If you choose not to follow them, we have our choices.

If, by doing our jobs, we are provoking and/or infuriating people, then they should read the policies again.  It is within our policies that we reserve the right to jail/close/edit/remove any post or thread that violates our guidelines.  We have guidelines in place to ensure consistency in these actions, but it is ultimately our decision after speaking with our legal counsel.




> You are of course right, however I have a hard time seeing that posting irrelevant and off topic information again and again and again just to kill a discussion on the subject, arbitrarily closing threads, arbitrarily banning users, refusing to clarify the forum policy on this matter logicaly follows from the fact that nobody is under any obligation to answer any question.


We have done nothing that is arbitrary, as the guidelines clearly state what we do, when, and why.  Feel free to read the staff guidelines, as they are also included in the policies.

If you wish to discuss the law-associated policies of this forum, feel free to contact ubuntugeek@ubuntuforums.org with your legal counsel's contact information to setup a phone conference with our legal advisors.  You will of course be required to pay the appropriate legal fees.

----------


## ubuntulove123

Seeing that both kassetra and kiwinz proofed beyond a reasonable doubt that they are unable to engage in any form of grown up discourse, I just wanted to declare that I give up.

You did not address one of the issues I raised, neither initially, nor in the resolution center, instead you chose to misrepresent anything I said in order to avoid confronting the issues.

To further embarrass yourselves, you also chose to make it impossible for me to reply to your false allegations, be it in private or publicly, by either banning me (and thereby making a farce of the resolution center), or by ignoring my pms.

Clearly, you have shown that you can and should not be treated as grown ups.

But you won, I give up, as playing your little kindergarten games is really a rather dull experience.

Rest assured however that I feel free to register new accounts whenever I feel the need for it and that I will behave myself according to the high standards you have set with your examples. After all, acting like a spoiled child might be fun sometimes I guess.

Reference:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=147941
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=147951

----------


## kassetra

I am very tired and while your reply deserves no response because it is hostile, I will nevertheless answer it. You were not banned, you *were* simply confined to the resolution center because your posts were out of line.

We are under no obligation of free speech, and as such, civil disobedience, the "right" to discuss illegal matters and such are not covered. You disagree that KiwiNZ followed the rules, but in the posts you state, he answered your questions and locked threads that were flamebait, as is our policy. The only problem I see from you is that he didn't answer them the way you wished, which is our prerogative.  We do not have an exhaustive list of what is and is not illegal; but we do discuss every topic that we see that may be questionable - until the staff, as a whole, arrive upon a solid decision.

The ban on the user in question was not simply for stating that he thought codecs were legal, but since that is all you wish to see, it remains an unanswered question to you. 

In all your actions, you seem to be wanting to provoke the administrators of this forum into a ******* match regarding legalities. Your questions have been harassing, confrontational, and demanding. We do not respond to these kinds of attitudes.

The only thing we have done "wrong" is not answer your questions in the way that you wish. We have not avoided anything in any way, and after every attempt to explain to you that we do not discuss legal matters, we have been ignored for what we say, and assailed for not answering you with what you want to hear, when you want to hear it.

It is quite clear that you do not wish for a resolution, only a confrontation.  

What truly saddens me is that instead of directing your energies toward helping to rewrite laws such as the DMCA or the mind-bogglingly outdated patent system in the USA, you have chosen to attack us for having the nerve to want to keep this community out of legal entanglements.

Have you made any impact in the laws that are being used by ominous corporations to bully people into doing what they wish by harassing the staff here? Have you helped to bring light to the millions of people that do not understand that they do not have to be subject to invasive practices by software companies in the name of stopping piracy? No. You have chosen instead to call us names.

What a waste.

----------


## ubuntu-geek

Your issues were addressed many times in the other threads you opened under multiple accounts. Please see those for the answers.

----------


## schnappy

> You were not banned, you *were* simply confined to the resolution center because your posts were out of line.


I was banned and I was not able to post in the resolution center.




> We are under no obligation of free speech, and as such, civil disobedience, the "right" to discuss illegal matters and such are not covered.


I never said you were, but it seems my arguments, though I have repeatedly tried to make them clearer, were a little to complex for some people to grasp.




> You disagree that KiwiNZ followed the rules, but in the posts you state, he answered your questions and locked threads that were flamebait, as is our policy.


This really is silly, but seeing I have no choice, I can only repeate an other time. He clearly did not answer my questions and my posts very clearly were not flamebaits.




> We do not have an exhaustive list of what is and is not illegal; but we do discuss every topic that we see that may be questionable - until the staff, as a whole, arrive upon a solid decision.


And now could you please tell me why it took almost a day, various bans, etc., to finally get this little gem of information?




> The ban on the user in question was not simply for stating that he thought codecs were legal, but since that is all you wish to see, it remains an unanswered question to you.


If it wasn't, why did KiwiNZ refuse to tell me so? If you would kindly refer to my posts, I repeatedly asked to please show me where I was wrong. So clearly, this is not a case of me only seeing what I whish to see, I even asked and nearly begged him to correct me if I was wrong.




> In all your actions, you seem to be wanting to provoke the administrators of this forum into a ******* match regarding legalities.


Read my inital posts on the subject and you'll find that this is obviously false.




> Your questions have been harassing, confrontational, and demanding. We do not respond to these kinds of attitudes.


Again, this is simply not true.




> The only thing we have done "wrong" is not answer your questions in the way that you wish.


No, you have not answered my questions, you have arbitrarily locked threads, you banned me without any reason whatsoever, you even tried to prevent me from taking this issue to the resolution center, not to say anything about constantly misrepresenting what I said in a derogatory manner, threatening me, insulting me, etc.




> We have not avoided anything in any way, and after every attempt to explain to you that we do not discuss legal matters, we have been ignored for what we say, and assailed for not answering you with what you want to hear, when you want to hear it.


This is amazing, as I was under the impression that I originally posted in a thread that was discussing these legal matters and in which you and KiwiNZ had participated that was several pages long.
Add to this that KiwiNZ not once told me that legal matters are not up for discussion and you'll see where the problem with you statement might be.




> It is quite clear that you do not wish for a resolution, only a confrontation.


No, it's not. That's only the way you want to see it and no matter what I did or will do, there isn't a snowballs chance in hell I will convince you that you are wrong here.




> What truly saddens me is that instead of directing your energies toward helping to rewrite laws such as the DMCA or the mind-bogglingly outdated patent system in the USA, you have chosen to attack us for having the nerve to want to keep this community out of legal entanglements.


You know, what truely saddens me is that once again you attack me for something that I haven't done as I have made clear again and have the nerve to portray me as immoral at the same time. Rather disgusting.




> Have you made any impact in the laws that are being used by ominous corporations to bully people into doing what they wish by harassing the staff here? Have you helped to bring light to the millions of people that do not understand that they do not have to be subject to invasive practices by software companies in the name of stopping piracy? No. You have chosen instead to call us names.


See above and I can only repeat myself, this is disgusting.

----------


## ubuntu-geek

I have read and evaluated the thread and based on my findings I feel you were answered in the correct fashion. Regardless of any Local, National or International Law the forums have a set guidelines in which they operate and as it states its the guidelines its the moderators sole discretion to edit/close/remove any post. IN this case the post on 32codecs the moderator felt crossed a line and was dealt with in a manner he saw fit. 

Unfortunately, your harassment towards Kassetra via PM required me to ban your account on the forums. At this time you are no longer welcome to an account here as your do not wish to follow the guidelines in which have been set. 

If you wish to discuss this further in an adult fashion please feel free to email me, however I will simply not reply to childish remarks or comments as seen here.

Have a great day.

----------

