# Curious Question...



## Halasían (Jan 12, 2022)

I was browsing about the archives today and came across a couple things about member accounts I am curious about.

Some banned members lose all identity and have their name replaced with 'Deleted User #xxxxxx'
Some banned members keep their identity and are tagged 'Banned User'
My question is, why the difference? If you are bad, you are banned but keep your identity, and if you're _really_ bad you lose your identity along with being banned? Just curious.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jan 13, 2022)

I think it's the method a mod used to ban. For example, when I ban a spammer I use an option called 'Spam' that just bans them and puts a strikethrough their name. The only way I can see to change a user to 'Deleted' is to log into the Admin console and choose 'Delete.' I've never done that so it must have been mazzly or a previous admin that had done that.


----------



## Ealdwyn (Jan 14, 2022)

Halasían said:


> I was browsing about the archives today and came across a couple things about member accounts I am curious about.
> 
> Some banned members lose all identity and have their name replaced with 'Deleted User #xxxxxx'
> Some banned members keep their identity and are tagged 'Banned User'
> My question is, why the difference? If you are bad, you are banned but keep your identity, and if you're _really_ bad you lose your identity along with being banned? Just curious.


I'm curious, how bad do we have to be to be _*really*_ bad?


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jan 15, 2022)

Ealdwyn said:


> I'm curious, how bad do we have to be to be _*really*_ bad?


You have to be so bad 😂


----------



## Halasían (Jan 15, 2022)

Ah, I see. Thanks for your answer Erestor. I guess I was away elsewhere rangering and missed any drama when Merroe got 'deleted'. He always seemed pretty good in Tolkien discussions. 

I think I was more curious about the workings of the Xenforo platform. I know when I registered to a roleplaying site recently, a mod messaged me after a month saying I had two accounts. Apparently I had registered there years ago. When they merged my accounts, the new one became, 'Deleted User #xxxx'


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jan 15, 2022)

I think he asked to be, if I remember correctly, definitely wasn't anything behavior-related.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jan 18, 2022)

Yes, he made the request himself, and it's the forum's loss.



Erestor Arcamen said:


> definitely wasn't anything behavior-related.


Unless it was _other _people's behavior. *

BTW, another member, who hadn't been on since years before I joined, reappeared some time ago, asking not only that their membership, but _every post they'd ever made, _be deleted. Aside from the work involved, doing so would have made an incoherent shambles of a number of old threads, so we were unable to comply. 

*I'm looking in the mirror. 😥


----------



## Halasían (Jan 19, 2022)

Delete every post? seriously??? Wow!


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jan 19, 2022)

They seemed to have had a major change of heart or something.

I don't believe there's a function here for deleting all of a member's posts, though EA or mazzly might know. And I can't imagine under what circumstances such a thing would happen. I don't believe a "vindictive option" was built into the original. 😄


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jan 19, 2022)

Using the Spam button does it but only is available for members under a certain membership age, e.g. if a member has been here for 6 months and very active it's not available to me anymore but a member who is a day old and has five posts, I can spam clean them


----------



## Halasían (Jan 22, 2022)

Feel free to make me a Deleted User if you wish.


----------



## Thorin (Feb 16, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> They seemed to have had a major change of heart or something.
> 
> I don't believe there's a function here for deleting all of a member's posts, though EA or mazzly might know. And I can't imagine under what circumstances such a thing would happen. I don't believe a "vindictive option" was built into the original. 😄


I wonder if it was Harad? ha ha! He was horrible and got banned during the height of the LoTR movies being released. No book purist was immune from his vitriol.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Feb 16, 2022)

I don't believe so. I checked some of their posts, at the time, and they seemed fairly innocuous.

Edit: And thinking about it, I'm sure that wasn't the username.


----------



## Olorgando (Feb 17, 2022)

Thorin said:


> I wonder if it was Harad? ha ha! He was horrible and got banned during the height of the LoTR movies being released. No book purist was immune from his vitriol.


From how you describe him, after my first cinematic viewing of PJ's "Fellowship", I would have gone to unrestricted thermonuclear carpet bombing against Harad - meaning my membership on TTF back then would not have exceeded five minutes (or however long it took the mods to become aware of me).
My wife and I went to the cinema in early January 2002 to see "Fellowship". The first time. I came out of it with something of a volcanic rage at this huge "pile of bovine drippings", having unceasingly internally screamed the uncensored version. We went back to see it a second time two or three days later, when I had told myself "this has almost nothing to do with JRRT" - and this was "Fellowship"!!! That this trilogy may have been a nice run-of-the-mill, or cut above, fantasy blockbuster that millions and millions of people my have enjoyed - good for them. It just had very little to do with JRRT.


----------



## Thorin (Feb 17, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> From how you describe him, after my first cinematic viewing of PJ's "Fellowship", I would have gone to unrestricted thermonuclear carpet bombing against Harad - meaning my membership on TTF back then would not have exceeded five minutes (or however long it took the mods to become aware of me).
> My wife and I went to the cinema in early January 2002 to see "Fellowship". The first time. I came out of it with something of a volcanic rage at this huge "pile of bovine drippings", having unceasingly internally screamed the uncensored version. We went back to see it a second time two or three days later, when I had told myself "this has almost nothing to do with JRRT" - and this was "Fellowship"!!! That this trilogy may have been a nice run-of-the-mill, or cut above, fantasy blockbuster that millions and millions of people my have enjoyed - good for them. It just had very little to do with JRRT.


Ha ha ha! That was pretty much my own impression. If you get the chance, you can find all my "A Purist Review"s of all the theater versions as they came out, as well as the Extended Editions. I will admit that despite some of the horrible changes, the EE of FoTR improved my opinion of it drastically. My rating went from a 4/10 to a 7/10. I didn't do the EE of The Hobbit movies though. And you should have been there at the inception. Boy, the sparks flew between us NPWs (Nit picking weenies) and FADs (Film Adaptation Defenders). Foe-Hammer, Harad, and markrob were the unholy trinity of film adaptation defenders against the purists like me, Ancalagon. Grond and Ciryaher as well as a few others. The battles were epic.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Feb 17, 2022)

Let's not forget Beorn!








My God, It Was Horrible!


All you doomsayers were right. It was absolutely horrible. I was crying in the theater. I wanted to walk out, but I didn't b/c my friends were there! All the party is screwed up, out of order, shortened. The trip to Bree was in 45 minutes or so...not 1.30 like it should've been. IT...




www.thetolkienforum.com


----------



## Olorgando (Feb 17, 2022)

Thorin said:


> I will admit that despite some of the horrible changes, the EE of FoTR improved my opinion of it drastically. My rating went from a 4/10 to a 7/10. I didn't do the EE of The Hobbit movies though.


I absolutely agree that the EE of "Fellowship" was a big improvement.
As to the EE's of all three of "The Hobbit" films, the only thing worthwhile about them was the "making of" stuff, basically. The paltry minutes of additional running time - especially that of AuP! - were the opposite of improvements.


----------



## Thorin (Feb 17, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> I absolutely agree that the EE of "Fellowship" was a big improvement.
> As to the EE's of all three of "The Hobbit" films, the only thing worthwhile about them was the "making of" stuff, basically. The paltry minutes of additional running time - especially that of AuP! - were the opposite of improvements.


I have the EEs of both the LoTR and The Hobbit movies. I don't even know what was theatre and what is EE anymore I've watched it so many times. I kind of wish I had done reviews on The Hobbit EE movies.


----------



## Thorin (Feb 17, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Let's not forget Beorn!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ah, yes. Beorn. One of the few extremists on the purist end. Ha ha ha! 😂😂


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Feb 17, 2022)

Interestingly, I was going through the Archived threads and moved one to Hall of Fire because the discussion was interesting. At one point, someone referenced the downfall of Harad...and I do remember some of these users in here too. I joined after this discussion but still cool seeing some of the old posts. 



> My apologies Bucky, I get heated sometimes, and that was the downfall of Harad and I don't want that to happen to me...











Did Sauron really know of the existence of the Balrog?


Sauron probably knew... ...the Balrog was in Moria. In the tale of Durin's Folk in ROTK appendices the Balrog destroyed the Kindom of Khazud-dum and forced Durin's Folk to flee. In the War of Dwarves and Orcs Dain tell's Thorin that he has seen the terror within Moria and knows that Durin's...




www.thetolkienforum.com





Just for the record, I'm going to be going through and adding more posts back into the forums as I find them, try to rekindle some of the lore discussions since we've all been so busy talking about Amazon instead. I think it'll be fun to see what current members can add to these old topics.


----------

