StarGateWars Forums

WTH ??

Haz wrote:Your sig violation was already changed by yourself, and the mod action should have included a verbal warning. This is notification of said verbal warning.

this is for something that i changed ages ago and received no warnign whatsoever !

so haz has decided to post date a verbal warning in the hopes of a quick ban , this is unacceptable !

ok then

Guild wrote:WTH ??

Haz wrote:Your sig violation was already changed by yourself, and the mod action should have included a verbal warning. This is notification of said verbal warning.

this is for something that i changed ages ago and received no warnign whatsoever !

so haz has decided to post date a verbal warning in the hopes of a quick ban , this is unacceptable !

There is no 'hope for a quick ban', I can guarantee you that, Guild.
However, when it comes to the protocol regarding signature size excesses, the PM you get (asking you to change it) comes accompanied with a verbal warning. That was not done (not only in your case, in a few others as well). This is merely setting the record straight.

I highly doubt you will get a board warning for your signature any time soon since you changed it to fit the rule, and this verbal only affects things related to your sig. You will be fine.

CCexyDCapedCrusader wrote:ok then

Pain is coming. *hides*

Juliette wrote:

Guild wrote:WTH ??

Haz wrote:Your sig violation was already changed by yourself, and the mod action should have included a verbal warning. This is notification of said verbal warning.

this is for something that i changed ages ago and received no warnign whatsoever !

so haz has decided to post date a verbal warning in the hopes of a quick ban , this is unacceptable !

There is no 'hope for a quick ban', I can guarantee you that, Guild.
However, when it comes to the protocol regarding signature size excesses, the PM you get (asking you to change it) comes accompanied with a verbal warning. That was not done (not only in your case, in a few others as well). This is merely setting the record straight.

I highly doubt you will get a board warning for your signature any time soon since you changed it to fit the rule, and this verbal only affects things related to your sig. You will be fine.

CCexyDCapedCrusader wrote:ok then

Pain is coming. *hides*

from the way in interpretted andys pms to me he specifically said , he was not talking as a mod , so there should have been no warning anyway, so suck it

im sick of haz's **Filtered** , he got a bit of power with the change up and is now goign crazy , besides bias as the alliance he is in is going to be randomly massed by me along with his account

Guild wrote:WTH ??

Haz wrote:Your sig violation was already changed by yourself, and the mod action should have included a verbal warning. This is notification of said verbal warning.

this is for something that i changed ages ago and received no warnign whatsoever !

so haz has decided to post date a verbal warning in the hopes of a quick ban , this is unacceptable !

A verbal warning. It is doubtful that a sig violation will happen again and as such, this verbal warning should have no effect on any other potential rule violations, where a mod may need to decide an action to take. I merely included the verbal warning as it was supposed to happen when you initially refused to remove the signature at the request of a mod.'

There is no intention of a quick ban, or of any ban in that matter.

Guild wrote:

Juliette wrote:

Guild wrote:WTH ??

Haz wrote:Your sig violation was already changed by yourself, and the mod action should have included a verbal warning. This is notification of said verbal warning.

this is for something that i changed ages ago and received no warnign whatsoever !

so haz has decided to post date a verbal warning in the hopes of a quick ban , this is unacceptable !

There is no 'hope for a quick ban', I can guarantee you that, Guild.
However, when it comes to the protocol regarding signature size excesses, the PM you get (asking you to change it) comes accompanied with a verbal warning. That was not done (not only in your case, in a few others as well). This is merely setting the record straight.

I highly doubt you will get a board warning for your signature any time soon since you changed it to fit the rule, and this verbal only affects things related to your sig. You will be fine.

CCexyDCapedCrusader wrote:ok then

Pain is coming. *hides*

from the way in interpretted andys pms to me he specifically said , he was not talking as a mod , so there should have been no warning anyway, so suck it

im sick of haz's **Filtered** , he got a bit of power with the change up and is now goign crazy , besides bias as the alliance he is in is going to be randomly massed by me along with his account

Despite what Andy said, anyone notifying a user about their sig size is speaking like a Moderator (at least when they are, in fact, a Moderator). Contacting you about it is, by nature, a verbal warning and one should have been added to your user notes.

Verbal warnings have no bearing on whether or not you are banned. Verbals are not Warnings and therefore do not count against your warning count. Had you not changed your sig size, then you would have received a warning.

I believe Haz was just trying to make it clear to you that you received a verbal warning in your user notes.

so what im taking from this is that , andy is even more incompetant than i first thought , why not try teaching your mids before installing them onto the forum

Guild wrote:so what im taking from this is that , andy is even more incompetant than i first thought , why not try teaching your mids before installing them onto the forum

Incompetent or not, Andy will be talked to, and will be kept an eye on by his Section Admins and myself, to ensure this does not happen again.

Guild wrote:from the way in interpretted andys pms to me he specifically said , he was not talking as a mod , so there should have been no warning anyway, so suck it

Andy was asking you to abide by the rules as part of the procedure related to signature violations. He can say he is not talking as a moderator, but a mod is a mod is a mod, and talking about rule things is a mod thing when you are blue (or white-ish yellow or whatever the hell my colour is). This could be cleared up more for future reference, admittedly.



As for incompetence, I disagree. A new moderator is bound to make a few mistakes, and we - Section Admins - are here to fix that and teach the moderators (where appropriate/necessary), in private (Mod forum). We are not here to publicly reprimand Andy for whatever reason. You understand that, and I hope you agree with us taking care of personnel issues internally. We take your feedback seriously.

Doesn't matter either way as you fixed the problem. If someone decides to give you a warning for something similar prior to another verbal warning, then there will be a problem.

Retroactively delivering verbal warnings to "set the record straight" is silly though and I can see how that can just be seen as mod targeting of a player.

To the section admins who will be taking over this position...good luck...