this is ridiculus
Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:29 pm
i didnt do anything yet eary has banned me..... im not shure ho its not perm..... but wth i didnt do anything
These are the forums for the GateWa.rs family of text-based space-centred PBBGs
https://talk.gatewa.rs/
animal father wrote:i didnt do anything yet eary has banned me..... im not shure ho its not perm..... but wth i didnt do anything
I don't believe this was an appeal. It sounded more like a request to know why he was banned. I do not believe people are told why they are banned, unless it is via PM and they cannot read that until their ban is over.General Riviera wrote:You deserve to be banned for this awful attempt at an appeal.
General Riviera wrote:If that's the case, he/she/whatever it is making my eyes bleed surely should have contacted the admin in question instead of posting here.
Psyko wrote:Not if he feels persecuted by the Admin in question. This is the reason for the Ombudsman position.
If your eyes are bleeding over his problem with the staff, you should probably refrain from reading this thread. It is, after all, an issue unrelated to you.
Psyko wrote:animal father wrote:i didnt do anything yet eary has banned me..... im not shure ho its not perm..... but wth i didnt do anything
Let me clear this up for you.
Your second warning is still up for discussion with the Admins. Therefore, you still had two warnings when you posted about drug use and were issued a warning. That makes 3 warnings currently placed on your account. The punishment for that is a 2 week ban.
Sorry, but you should have been more careful with the content of your posts. That's the whole intention behind the 3 strike warning policy. If you get 1 warning you should wise up, if you get a second you should be more careful not to violate rules, and if you get a third you're out of luck.
If the Admins determine your second warning could have been a verbal your warning count will return to 2 and you should be unbanned. They are still deliberating, so you will be banned until a decision is made or your 2 weeks are up.
~kinky king~ wrote:Psyko wrote:animal father wrote:i didnt do anything yet eary has banned me..... im not shure ho its not perm..... but wth i didnt do anything
Let me clear this up for you.
Your second warning is still up for discussion with the Admins. Therefore, you still had two warnings when you posted about drug use and were issued a warning. That makes 3 warnings currently placed on your account. The punishment for that is a 2 week ban.
Sorry, but you should have been more careful with the content of your posts. That's the whole intention behind the 3 strike warning policy. If you get 1 warning you should wise up, if you get a second you should be more careful not to violate rules, and if you get a third you're out of luck.
If the Admins determine your second warning could have been a verbal your warning count will return to 2 and you should be unbanned. They are still deliberating, so you will be banned until a decision is made or your 2 weeks are up.
it was a thread about drug use..... i certainly hope i wasnt the only one warned
ANIMAL MOTHER wrote:im actualy trying to be a some what usefull contributor to this forum
I've not seen any evidence of this, and your latest post about the drug cocaine is evidence of your intent to stir feathers on this forum. Anyway as I told you your next ban wasn't a perma. I do sure hope people get bored of your complaining soon and you'll fade away.ANIMAL MOTHER wrote:and im shure youve noticed ive been trying to be a good boy
Psyko wrote:I don't believe this was an appeal. It sounded more like a request to know why he was banned. I do not believe people are told why they are banned, unless it is via PM and they cannot read that until their ban is over.General Riviera wrote:You deserve to be banned for this awful attempt at an appeal.
Eärendil wrote:Talking and promoting are different.
Haz wrote:Eärendil wrote:Talking and promoting are different.
I would agree with this, but I have also noted the sigs with marijuana in them, which I personally see as promoting, albeit subtly.
But the debate seems OK as long as it stays on the "talking" side.