Duderanch wrote:I warned you for this post viewtopic.php?f=62&p=2115054#p2115054 .
Earlier in the thread, a verbal warning was given to everyone by solus to stop spam, you was even mentioned by name.
You then quoted Solus' post to stop spamming, with spam.
Forum rules definition of spam wrote:b. Replies
Replies will be considered spam if they do not contribute to the discussion of the topic. This may include off topic posting or an excessive number of posts that contain nothing more than emoticons or small words such as ‘lol’. While it is appropriate to indicate something is amusing, drowning out a whole thread with such posts makes it hard to follow for all users.
As you disregarded a verbal warning to stop spamming, i issued you with a board warning.
Good course of action. I see no fault in Duderanch's handling this issue.
When the posters in a thread are warned not to spam, spamming that thread results in a warning. This is how it has always been, and how it shall always be until the Administration changes standard procedure.
Bebita is obviously confusing our beloved Galactic Colosseum with some other forum, somewhere.
A forum where the warnings moderators give are mere mentions to brush aside without consequence.
Bebita, your record speaks for itself. You
know to take the remarks a
moderator makes seriously. Are you not the same who complained about people 'spamming his threads'? How would that be possible, if as you say, the Galactic Colosseum is a place to spam without regard for earlier moderator directions..
Surely you agree that a semblance of order is required, in order to protect
you (and in fact all of the Galactic Colosseum) from the spammers. That order is created by the moderators, for want of self control on the part of some of the residents. Now, would you
really like to argue that the Galactic Colosseum is not supposed to be moderated? Would you
really like to argue that things, which have been this way for years, should suddenly change because you received a warning you feel is unfair?
And to request the firing of one of my section moderators, without talking to me or that particular moderator? I think not.
Even if that warning is removed, which I wouldn't make an issue of, Duderanch did his job. And he did it as we have always done, regardless of how you feel about being on the receiving end of that.
bebita wrote:following your post i have 2 options
to report your post because from what i know u have no right to post here and this will be exactly what u did to my post where a moderator talked with me on forums and i respond it in the same manner(YES HE TALKED WITH ME AND HE DIDN'T PM ME AND I AM NOT OBLIGATED TO EAT WHAT HE DROPS FROM WHAT I KNOW)
AND I ANSWER TO VERBAL WARNING LIKE I SHOULD RESPOND
IN THE SAME MANNER MODERATOR TALKED WITH ME
from my knowedge moderator should be example for other and i follow his example
That is just a desperate attempt at justifying your defiance of a moderator's direction. "He talked to me so I talk to him."
That reminds me of my little sister.. we used to quarrel from time to time, and I would tell her to shut up. Her reply, always, was "Okay". She'd always be out to have the final word in, when anyone told her to shut up or be quiet, or something. It's ridiculous, and it is only acceptable between equals. If it were a regular user telling you not to spam, your reply would have been just as spammy as the comment made. However, a
moderator gives you directions, in this case, to stop spamming.. then that is not spam. Your reply to him, however, is.