TUBSWEETIE Posted:

MCB’s quote about putting threads in the wrong place doesn’t apply when the poster has 6 previous bans for ‘out of place’ posts.

Was this thread in the wrong place, though?

For that to be true, then his thread must be viewed as a RPing attempt. But as SimplytheBest just pointed out, CZ has a love of easter eggs for this game, and as such, it is well within reasonable bumumption that this was a legitimate game discussion matter.

Tubs, by your above post, you are admitting that you were biased in your bumessment of any of Crinks’ posts because of his prior offenses. In other words, you began with the presumption that he was RPing in a non-RP forum. But as many of us have said, it is unclear if this was RPing or not.

Does this mean that the benefit of the doubt is no longer even an option if someone has prior offenses?

Does this mean that if Crinks ever posts with any sort of internet lingo, such as ‘lol’ or ‘hai guyz’, that means he’s automatically RolePlaying instead of simply using internet slang?

It’s obvious that you were pre-biased in your bumessment of the thread in question, based on Crinks prior bans. And I suggest that you overreacted. If a convicted bank robber doesn’t come to a complete stop at a stop sign, the cops don’t throw him back in jail for 20 more years.

Additionally, since it has not been proven that the thread in question actually was RPing (even with the second post by Crinks in the thread), then this was an unfair ban.

I’d like to say that I’m sad to see that this has happened, but I can’t. If I said I was sad, then I’m afraid that someone would insist that I was Role-Playing as an EmoKid. Because obviously the line between RPing and actual discussion is too blurry for some people. Maybe when Crinks gets back from his ban, he should just preface every non-RP post with ‘This is a non-RP post. Please don’t jump to conclusions.’

Bonkenhi Posted:

I don’t think two weeks was fair, and didn’t think the thread was bad either… ehh… *shrugs* I guess the previous offenses are the big factor here, and the staff made a desicion.

“i disagree with the mods but idk”

if you think that the ban’s unfair then say so

Well, your voices were heard. Thanks guys. Log in to see images!

Wylin Posted:

I wouldn’t expect us to react this way often if I were you. Maybe a year of being good might be a good idea.

However, think of it this way dude. Its become clear at least that prior bans are becoming weight on the record. Now, this normally shouldn’t matter when bumessing the offense, but it SHOULD hold weight when doling out punishment for said offense. I think this was sort of an eyeopener for how things should be looked at with a bit less bias than they have been.

Not accusing of Bias, however as the principles of science state, we are known to draw preconceptions based on our previous experience.

It was question asking about as stated in this thread a possible easter egg.(Along the lines of searching shallow on sentrillion) so I thought I’d see if there was a reason why he didn’t exist. Thought it would be ok to do it in the manner I did since I’ve seen a few questions in a similar matter/only moved.

Wow 3 weeks ban?

what does the link do anyway? Seems like he isn’t the only one posting it.

Banhammer / Tubs got a spyware warning when they visited his link. It was apparently asking for access to cookies/ect. from other sites.

Log in to see images!

There was a serious IE bug recently, and many AV programs put extra protection and thus there were many false positives. Wb btw!