Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 2)

[Hap Shaughnessy]

As Fat4all correctly pointed out, being more specific in what we write here is only inviting trouble. I've had issues with a specific staff member's post but usually just scrolled by. Once, in a politics thread (because of course lol), that staff member was arguing with a bunch of people, was clearly unfamiliar with some of the basic stuff discussed in that thread but was smug to everyone anyway. I quoted one of the posts that was full of blatantly incorrect information, corrected them and gave the necessary context to explain what was discussed in that topic.

Well, the staff member went through my post history and banned me in retaliation for something that was 2 weeks old at that time. The post was ripped out of context, misrepresented and misunderstood (further proving my original point in the other thread). A flimsy excuse was found and used to retaliate. I appealed the ban, but whoever looked at it just immediately dismissed it, stood by the other staff member and closed the ticket so that I couldn't reply again.

I hope this doesn't count as ban litigation and that I won't be threadbanned or something, but this incident goes a few months back at this point. Ever since then I simply want to remove that staff member from my Era browsing experience, because they don't give me anything positive. It's simply one of many things that have soured the atmosphere of the forum and given the utter refusal of apologizing even when blatantly wrong (like the DK BANanza), despite claiming that they'd do so if necessary, keeps making things worse. No idea who told staff that doubling down is a good strategy, all it does is increasing the frustration of the members. You know, the community. The ones who use, hell, who are the website.

https://thebire.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=336&pid=118437#pid118437

[Mar 9, 2025]

Edit:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/german-federal-elections-we-call-it-the-bundestagswahl-2025.1098015/page-29#post-136368291

   User banned (1 week): minimizing warcrimes

Shameful display from this man, wow.

[Feb 27, 2025]

IIRC this is cut out of context to make it seem much worse than it is. He has never defended the annexation of Crimea. He simply said that this event is different to the invasion of Ukraine, due to some legal scholars believing the former to be "justified" due to the Russian population in the area. Hasan has had plenty of bad takes over the years, but this one is just disingenuous and not in line with his actual stance on the matter.

As for the Hitler part what he said isn't controversial at all and makes perfect sense once you think about what is said instead of looking to be outraged:
There are myriads of reasons of why Hitler was bad. Of course annexing Austria is one of those reasons. But compared to the fucking Holocaust the Annexation of Austria doesn't top the list.