READ THIS

Yeah it is; the ban's twelve hours too so there's no real reason to care that much.


plus the images were silly

it's still a ban for something that they couldn't have possibly known was wrong

I mean I'm all for banning them, but just going out and doing out of the blue? come on now, that's not very fair

that's what this topic is for

don't see anything about reaction images

that would be in the rules under spam


let me guess, this is where you try to loophole now, correct?

and if so, somehow attempt to explain that it's not loopholing?

what loophole? I don't see how what they posted were spam, Zash's meant "hey i trolled you guys" and crashman's was "no you didn't, you're just trying to save face."

I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't really think of them as spam, and if you guys know you're going to ban them, why not just tell us

Do you honestly think we're singling them out? And do you honestly think they didn't know posting fairly meaningless reaction images isn't against the rules?


They broke the rules. We banned them.

I don't think you're singling them out, I think just going out and banning someone, anyone, for something that's ok one day without warning isn't fair.

and you're the one who brought it up

"LET'S TRI IT AGAIN"

It may not be 'fair' but at least maybe they'll learn not to do it again!


I know it's a bit harsh, but we have to start somewhere.

all the more reason to remove the posts and show them that kind of posting is bad!

just like i said, attempting to explain how "it's not in the rules"

we did tell you - in the rules, long ago

this applies by the way.

wait reaction images are bannable now?

I'm not though.

I'm JUST SAYING

banning for something that was OK just a few days ago without a warning is not cool

in the rules or not? eh who cares really, the rules never seemed to matter much to you guys to begin with

Well now they do; tyvm for answering your own question

So we're bad peeps because we ban?

look I know you're frustrated but we have to start somewhere. They will get posting powers back soon, and then they'll see why they were banned and if they want to reason with us they are more than free to do so.


Also it was only ok a few days ago in the most platonic sense, where we didn't ban simply because we were too lazy or we ignored it or we didn't see it or whatever. That kind of posting's been against the rules for some time. So it's our fault for not enforcing said rules sooner.

They (the moderation staff) can put virtually WHATEVER they want in "the rules" because "the rules" are so broad and extremely encouraging to "interpretation" (even with their healthy supply of adjectives).

I'm very surprised that you made this Tri, even if it was generally agreed up by the rest of the staff. This isn't something I would have ever expected from a green member of a staff supposedly trying to help the forum members.

this topic is the warning


wait didn't i say this already

ban with no warning, yeah.

I still don't see anything about reaction images...
It's great you consider them spam and all, some don't, and if you're going to be vague about it you can't really blame people for not following your set of rules

This post has been edited by Comrade Kesha on Jul 23 2009, 03:38 PM

the biggest problem is that you guys have the ABSOLUTE power to label pretty much everything we do as bad.

This is cumbersome. I want to help you, but I'm not sure if you think that I meant siding entirely with the members [which would be "ideal" since I'm in staff now] in the recurring staff-members arguments is your idea of 'helping'. It really isn't.


We're not doing this to harm you. We're doing this to fix a ****load of problems that we have both on your end and our own.

people say it's vague, they find an exploit, no matter how miniscule-like specific the rules are


in order to be more specific, the rules then become longer, then people don't read them


so put posts under general categories, and then ensure they think before posting