I have tourettes and so once in awhile a mod of the day feels my posting style misaligns with 2p2 policy or the associated subforum etc. and I get reprimanded for it.

But I seem to be under a heavy hand here because my punishments are often not justly scoped to my infractions I think.

Yet I don't seek to bypass/evade the restrictions and I think I have shown history of that.

Since its clear I have sincere intention to participate in the forum is there any way instead of continually increasing my ban time for similar infractions that we could instead just change it to cool down periods and a note that says 'don't ban otherwise'?

(also, its a little awkward because this isn't the sub most familiar with my account)

How exactly does tourettes manifest when you are typing.

Through my actions and participation etc...

What are your excuses for the other 95% of your posts.


The Tourettes typing victim card - nice try.

For other reasons, I recently created a syntax that is both human and agent readable and useful. For this situation I think it is de-monstrably so:

But imo, in all my recent bannings, x is so far from the infraction in relevance that my account should be freed from this order.

Peak Button ITT. Good stuff.

I had HAD Tourette's this is POST-Tourette's.

An example of the issues with my disability and the policies applied to me, that I think are unfair and unequal, arises when a mod in a sub forum changes the rules swiftly.

Then I can get banned for an almost indefinite period of time across THE WHOLE FORUM.

If I make a faux pas in a sub-forum, I accept the punishment locally, but isn't it silly that something I might have been slightly aware of now precludes my participation forum wide?

Isn't that giving every mod unscoped power in that regard.

This is something I've seen apply to many people. But if there was a specific sub related infraction, should the poster even be banned, and not just exiled from the sub for a period of time?

Post Tourette's is when you can't stop yourself from posting dogshit, right?

I hoping not to get into categorization and debate about my weakness until I can sort the issue of my account getting unfairly profiled. Then we could move any such debate to politics.

this is hilarious.

I think its re-relevant to consider the forum as consisting of 3 main interest groups:

(there is certainly cross over)

jmitchell42, as a mod (and a community member) who does it benefit that a subforum can apply subforum based rules global?

From a US constitutional framework perspective there are provisions to protect against this kind of thing no?

Constitutional violations ITT.

Well its not just that...

Its the same principle that constitution was drawn out of... IF there is no 'federal' framework of limitations then the owners have given full individual rights to the mods (they can snap change a local sub-rule and apply the arbitrary moderation against you forum wide.). And if the mods have those full powers, then the community has no actual framework for moderation.

That COULD be the intent of the owners (who in effect would be given their agency to the modership in totality), it certainly WOULD be the reality....

But what community could possibly be expected to want that?

Am I missing something?

Only a couple of sandwiches for your picnic.

Is it also unconstitutional if we don't recognize Nash as your emotional support animal?

not really looking to be made fun of for this.

Not sure when this place became irre-nashant (I have some ideas).

Its not about the unconstitutionality but rather the lack of implicit checks and balances. Simple deductions shows the owners don't have control over the moddership without such 'subforum limitations'. The moddership could either work FOR the 'spirit' of the community (concordant) or AGAINST it (discordant) .

Isn't there the possibility of foreign attack in this community? I think we can think of it as a game between two sides, blue and red (sincere vs invaders).

I think maybe if there is considered an over-reach with moddership then we can consider another color that is otherwise hidden. We can vote on the color, perhaps it can have inter-subjective (cultural) significance. I propose:



The idea is what happens when there is as if there is a 3rd party 'ghost' affecting proper coordination in the 2 player bargaining arrangements (debates) (and obviously considerations of games of coordination and agency for such scenarios).

To be clear, no one is making fun of you for having Tourettes. However, claiming Tourettes as the reason you keep getting banned from typing posts in a poker forum is very laughable.

And asking to be unbannable because of your constitutional rights and disability is very weak sauce.

pedants gonna pedant.
i work hands on with severe special needs kids, but don't see a way in the world irl Tourettes could be protected from the typing of a person on a forum.
if you like talking ****, and can't help post in a confrontational way, own that. don't try to use an irl disability as a crutch for shitty posting.
so, yeah, this is hilarious.

Its a simple request. If mods feel I'm getting heaty, coming outside of my usually candor and cadence etc. they could issue me a cool down period for a few days which, given my history, will obviously suffice.

Its kind of cruel and unusual instead to chain and multiply past bannings that are simply a product of the same small issue etc.

And its a different issue entirety imo that you can enter a sub forum and have such a record multiplied by new and arbitrary rules and applied forum wide.

edit: how long do you give for a timeout for an IRL special needs kid's tourettes outbreak jmitchell? do the punishment times compound?

Thats EXACTLY what trump would say.

i don't work with tourettes. but, we do have kids that cuss. we don't typically do a 'time out' for that.
however, i am trying to understand how tourettes could affect your typing. you don't seem to address that.
if you are a shitty poster, regardless of subforum, you should be infracted or banned. that's how forums work. 'first amendment' arguements aren't valid in a private place.
still in the phase though. this is great.