AntiRules187 Posted:

i’ve had a friend that was posting a lot in some RP thread that got stickied, so he stopped, yet got banned for the other posts he left.

Please point me to where this happened. It shouldn’t have, the posts should have been deleted after the sticky but no punishments should have been issued.

Unfortunately we don’t have a record of who stickied a thread or when it was stickied, but maybe one of us remembers.

eli for mod! rawr!

^^^ It’s called moving it to the non-rp section that already exists and putting “NSFW” in the title if it’s nsfw.

—-

I’m glad I didn’t empty quote gigerth’s first post in there! I was sure going to but something shiny must have distracted me. Perhaps my guardian posting angel? Log in to see images! 1337xxxxxxxxxlolololololololololxxxxxxxxx1337 edited this message on 04/17/2009 4:23PM

CrinkzPipe Posted:

I would like to ask. Who thought up this rule, and thought it was a good one? Or do you guys just don’t want to interfere with your fapping material? Because I fail to see why the rule was set ONLY to the Whores Just Wanna Have Fun! forum. It makes no sense.

http://www.forumwarz.com/discussions/view_post/556954

1337xxxlolololxxx1337 Posted:

was did purposely ban himself, but he sacrificed himself to expose the grave injustice that is a 2 month ban for gigerth, who 1) doubtfully knew the rule existed and, more importantly 2) was already messing around BEFORE the thread was stickied. Why do you people keep ignoring number 2? If you’re posting repeatedly in a certain thread, you’re not going to notice if it suddenly changes to a sticky. Just because he has a ban history doesn’t mean you should dish out excessive punishments when people aren’t breaking the rules on purpose, as most of us normally are.

Except #2 isn’t true. The report came in for “posting irrelevant images in a sticky thread” – 1) it wouldn’t have been reported if it wasn’t sticky 2) I wouldn’t have gone “oh hey! that big rule in bold applies here” and ask another mod how to proceed.

spacekadt Posted:

Except #2 isn’t true. The report came in for “posting irrelevant images in a sticky thread” – 1) it wouldn’t have been reported if it wasn’t sticky 2) I wouldn’t have gone “oh hey! that big rule in bold applies here” and ask another mod how to proceed.

I don’t believe his first post was before it was stickied, even though his later posts were. He posted less than half an hour after the first post. Ask whoever stickied it when they stickied it. I’m saying it’s unlikely that if someone decides to target a thread they’re going to notice if its status changes to sticky – they probably just keep on the page. Our protest is more over the fact it was 2 MONTHS for a rule he probably didn’t initially break and almost certainly didn’t know about.

CrinkzPipe Posted:

Then place a [NSFW] tag.

That doesn’t matter, nudity is still disallowed.

1337xxxlolololxxx1337 Posted:

Our protest is more over the fact it was 2 MONTHS for a rule he probably didn’t initially break and almost certainly didn’t know about.

That’s not actually what the protest was about, but I’m looking into this.

MC Banhammer Posted:

That doesn’t matter, nudity is still disallowed.

Then how do you explain all the “post your nudity here!” type of threads in contests?

MC Banhammer Posted:

But here: the only “written” rule against my revealing your alts, or how many Brownie Points you have, or what your current streak is and how many forums visits you have left, is this wording at the top of the mod page:

Note it doesn’t say I can’t reveal the information, only that I shouldn’t. So I guess you’d be okay with it if I did, since it’s not against the rules? Or would you prefer I stick with the intent?

And I certainly wouldn’t get banned if I revealed that information, right? Or be stripped of my mod status? Because nowhere is it actually specified that those would be the consequences. So I guess it’d be okay.

Based on what has happened in the past? Honestly, not only wouldn’t I expect a punishment to come down the line for it, I’d be shocked if it happened. I’m pretty sure I said as much in the thread from a couple months ago questioning the ethics of mods alt revealing.

The suggestion that those who are given power be held to no additional standards, is something I will always have a problem with. Yes, when a player does something out of line he should be smacked, that is the simple call. When a mod/admin does something off base it implies that the users are stupid, complacent and uninterested if no one questions it. If I were an admin I would be far more concerned with players not caring enough to question things. As long as people get riled up when something not quite kosher happens it means they are still involved and care about how things are done.

gig getting a 2 month ban for breaking a rule he was clearly unaware of, a rule that is rather silly given the nature of the site and the forums, is something that should be looked at and reconsidered. was protesting the rule, the ban, and the silly number of sticky threads by posting wacky pictures and lines of literature is simply a matter of pointing out flawed rules and the fact that it is possible the rule makers are suffering from testicular torsion.

I’m tired of arguing about things that should be obvious. If people can’t see why there is an occasional need to question how things work when they are working in a poor or unfair manner, there is certainly nothing I can say to change that situation.

The WJWHF forum still only states that no images should be posted, it seems like it wouldn’t be terribly difficult to update that to reflect the actual rule rather than relying on people psychically guessing the spirit of the rule. I wouldn’t want to break any unwritten rules in the future, so for the sake of clarity can someone please let me know if the spirit of the rule is to prevent the posting any sort of spam, to prevent posting off topic, or both in the sticky threads in the Whores forum?

MC Banhammer Posted:

Well if people keep breaking/pushing the rules, bans will keep happening no matter what.

Clearly this is an issue of interest to the community, and I though that yesterday I made it clear that we were talking about it. Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough.

Expect some changes. Just not super-quick.

With this being the case I think the rule should be suspended until a consensus is formed.