Page 1 of 1
Colton's Appeal for a warning issued by Jack
Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 6:41 pm
by Colton
Original appeal post: [spoiler]
Colton wrote:[spoiler]Seems Jack went on a rampage of sorts.. Received two "rapid fire" warnings in one night, while I was asleep on May 6-7.
Here's the first:
[spoiler]
Jack wrote:The following is a warning which has been issued to you by an administrator or moderator of this site.
[/spoiler]
What happens when I hit the link?
Forum wrote:You are not authorised to read this forum.
Oh, well that's just swell isn't it?
It seems to me that it would be COMPLETELY without reason to give someone a
warning without telling them what they have been warned
for.. So as for this one, I have absolutely NO idea whatsoever as to the reasoning behind this.. joke, of a modding attempt.
Number 2 however, I wasn't even given an explanation.
I was merely thrown the address to the thread, which didn't even have the post in question, which to my recollection, was actually me asking the "Big Guys" of SGW to take it easy on the newcomer, and show him the ropes instead of picking on him. I would like to first see the evidence behind the alleged claims of "Spam" I've been hearing, so that I may even begin to make a valid defence for myself..[/Spoiler]
Since it seems to be high treason to post an opinion around here lately.. I ask any passer-by who wishes to share his or her thoughts on this matter, to please PM me with what you wish to say, and I will post it up here. I wouldn't want someone else to fall victim to the onslaught of The Ban Hammer..
Please keep all
genuine spam to yourself, or the temple, or my PM box, thanks
I now await Jack's "ripping apart" of my thread
Have at 'er Jack
[/Spoiler]
Edited due to misunderstanding, on my part I believe.
Spoiler function doesn't seem to be working properly..
I would like to appeal for the warning issued by Jack..
Re: Colton's Appeal for not one, but TWO warnings issued by Jack
Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 6:49 pm
by Jack
Colton wrote:Seems Jack went on a rampage of sorts.. Received two "rapid fire" warnings in one night, while I was asleep on May 6-7.
You have one warning, princess.
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]
Colton wrote:Here's the first:
[spoiler]
Jack wrote:The following is a warning which has been issued to you by an administrator or moderator of this site.
[/spoiler]
What happens when I hit the link?
Forum wrote:You are not authorised to read this forum.
Oh, well that's just swell isn't it?
It seems to me that it would be COMPLETELY without reason to give someone a
warning without telling them what they have been warned
for.. So as for this one, I have absolutely NO idea whatsoever as to the reasoning behind this.. joke, of a modding attempt.
The post is in the dump, a hidden section of the forum. The link is automatically added by the warning when issuing a warning. It is left for our records.
Colton wrote:Number 2 however, I wasn't even given an explanation.
I was merely thrown the address to the thread
That's not a warning, you said you didn't have any verbal warnings about spamming, I said you had two and linked you to the relevant verbal warnings.
Colton wrote:which to my recollection, was actually me asking the "Big Guys" of SGW to take it easy on the newcomer, and show him the ropes instead of picking on him. I would like to first see the evidence behind the alleged claims of "Spam" I've been hearing, so that I may even begin to make a valid defence for myself..
It's the market, the only thing that should be posted is questions about the goods offered/sought. Everything else is spam.
Colton wrote:Since it seems to be high treason to post an opinion around here lately.. I ask any passer-by who wishes to share his or her thoughts on this matter, to please PM me with what you wish to say, and I will post it up here.
Though you did not come out and say, you have alluded to it. And I agree, the rule preventing third parties from giving their opinion on matters is retarded, and seems to be counter-intuitive to the whole point of the Ombudsman. But somewhere along the way people have seem to have forgotten the purpose of the Ombudsman and turned it into something it's not. Kangaroo Court comes to mind.
Re: Colton's Appeal for a warning issued by Jack
Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 7:43 pm
by Colton
Thanks for clearing that up for me.. Would you please post what was seen as "spam" now?
I may be heading over to my buddies place for a day now, so I'll get back to this thread when possible. Thanks for keeping it on a professional level, apart from calling me a princess
Re: Colton's Appeal for a warning issued by Jack
Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 9:09 pm
by Empy
Colton wrote:Poor little guy lol
Someone should give him a helping hand in how to play SGW
Hope I am not castrated for posting this... that was the post you were warned for.
Re: Colton's Appeal for a warning issued by Jack
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 12:38 am
by zeekomkommer
Empedocles wrote:Colton wrote:Poor little guy lol
Someone should give him a helping hand in how to play SGW
Hope I am not castrated for posting this... that was the post you were warned for.
this post can stay here becausse it's needed insight in the situation.
only colton, jack, the ombudsman and understudy can post here.
Re: Colton's Appeal for a warning issued by Jack
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 8:13 pm
by Manetheren
Sorry that it took me so long to post here but my wife kept coming up with stuff for me to do every time I tried getting on here today. I take a look at this now and get back to you asap.
Re: Colton's Appeal for a warning issued by Jack
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 8:39 pm
by Manetheren
The case is pretty cut and dry. Jack is right about what is allowed to be posted in market threads and what isnt. Your post in this case was spam.
If you have any further questions regarding the issue, feel free to pm me.
Issue is closed.