need answer

[R0B3RT]

Who blocked me why does not think to close topic (vendetta)
you are good to delete should not remove
if you are doing your job " moderators" should not only when you enjoy

[Clarkey]

Who blocked me why does not think to close topic (vendetta)
you are good to delete should not remove
if you are doing your job " moderators" should not only when you enjoy

Sorry not sure what you are requesting, but are you asking for your vendetta thread with jander to be closed?

[Rudy Peña]

Who blocked me why does not think to close topic (vendetta)
you are good to delete should not remove
if you are doing your job " moderators" should not only when you enjoy

Sorry not sure what you are requesting, but are you asking for your vendetta thread with jander to be closed?

But he only wants it closed cause hes banned and cant post.Thats what i understand of his post.

[R0B3RT]

Who blocked me why does not think to close topic (vendetta)
you are good to delete should not remove
if you are doing your job " moderators" should not only when you enjoy

Sorry not sure what you are requesting, but are you asking for your vendetta thread with jander to be closed?

use your mods ability mister

[R0B3RT]

Who blocked me why does not think to close topic (vendetta)
you are good to delete should not remove
if you are doing your job " moderators" should not only when you enjoy

Sorry not sure what you are requesting, but are you asking for your vendetta thread with jander to be closed?

But he only wants it closed cause hes banned and cant post.Thats what i understand of his post.

thanks rudy

[Clarkey]

The vendetta thread shall remain open.

[R0B3RT]

The vendetta thread shall remain open.

i don.t wait positive answer from you
don.t ask to not post to other player leave them talk
you wait to warn them because is off topic

[Clarkey]

The vendetta thread shall remain open.

i don.t wait positive answer from you
don.t ask to not post to other player leave them talk

I am handling the thread as I see fit.

I suggest you keep your posts in this section to appeal posts only as per the banned usergroup guidelines or the admins may completely remove your access for the remainder of your ban.

[R0B3RT]

is a threat???
if who make post ask to close it temporaly make something wrong ?????
show me rules !!!!!!

[Clarkey]

is a threat???
if who make post ask to close it temporaly make something wrong ?????
show me rules !!!!!!

A threat lol.

Read this:
[spoiler]

Over the last 4 months or so, the middle and upper management of the forum has been discussing and tossing around an Idea to hopefully improve the banning system of the forum.

As it stands now, the basic banning function that is integrated into the forum is simply a ban. No access to anything on the forum, including the ombudsman. As the Ombudsman's purpose is to help resolve issues, such as bannings, it is inconsistent for the forum to not allow a direct means of contacting the ombudsman.

It has been suggested a few times, by several members of the community, that perhaps a Ban Group instead of the Ban Function would be more fair and beneficial overall. During the last four months, this notion has been discussed at length. It was finally decided to be given a trial period, to see how this different method of banning would work and if it would work well for this forum.

Here is a quick briefing of how this new system will work:

The "Banned" Usergroup has had all of its forum privileges and access restricted. Anyone in this group is incapable of accessing the user control panel, receiving/sending PMs, browsing the forum, etc. The only thing that a user in this group can do is post in the Ombudsman Section of the forum.

Upon receiving a 3rd warning, a user will be placed into the group by a Global Moderator or an Administrator. The user will remain in this group for the duration of their ban, should they see reason to contest the ban, as noted they will have access to the ombudsman directly and may do so accordingly.

If any attempt to evade a ban, via this group, is seen to be made. The offending user will be banned via the traditionally function. Any Multi used to evade a ban, will be banned via the traditional function as according to the forum rules.

As this is a usergroup, users must be added and removed manually. It will take an admin or GM being present at the end of the ban to remove someone from the group, as such a slight overlapping may occur time wise, if this happens be patient and you will be unbanned as soon as a staff member is able to do so.

The purpose of this new way of banning is to provide a direct means through the forum to contact the forum role of Ombudsman. This is a new system, and a major change. Since it is a large difference from how things are now, this is only a trial run for it. If it works out well, it could be adopted into permanent use. If it works poorly, it is possible that the banning system will revert to the function provided by the forum.

If you have any questions regarding this or have any comments about it please feel free to let the staff know.

~Thought up by SuperSaiyan.
Approved by the Admin team.

Ps. Any current ban will not be included.(3/8/12)

[/spoiler]

The banned usergroup you are in gives you access to Oms section only to appeal your warnings/bans only.

Any abuse of the usergroup privilege can result in the privilege being taken away.

Your privilege in requesting the temporary closure of another thread is void because you lost that privilege when you became banned. As it stands you currently have no right to request anything besides the Ombudsman to look at your case.

[Game Over]

Robert needs his answer . The thread should be closed since he was banned frkm the forums. Seems like mods abusing their power.

[R0B3RT]

is a threat???
if who make post ask to close it temporaly make something wrong ?????
show me rules !!!!!!

A threat lol.

Read this:
[spoiler]

Over the last 4 months or so, the middle and upper management of the forum has been discussing and tossing around an Idea to hopefully improve the banning system of the forum.

As it stands now, the basic banning function that is integrated into the forum is simply a ban. No access to anything on the forum, including the ombudsman. As the Ombudsman's purpose is to help resolve issues, such as bannings, it is inconsistent for the forum to not allow a direct means of contacting the ombudsman.

It has been suggested a few times, by several members of the community, that perhaps a Ban Group instead of the Ban Function would be more fair and beneficial overall. During the last four months, this notion has been discussed at length. It was finally decided to be given a trial period, to see how this different method of banning would work and if it would work well for this forum.

Here is a quick briefing of how this new system will work:

The "Banned" Usergroup has had all of its forum privileges and access restricted. Anyone in this group is incapable of accessing the user control panel, receiving/sending PMs, browsing the forum, etc. The only thing that a user in this group can do is post in the Ombudsman Section of the forum.

Upon receiving a 3rd warning, a user will be placed into the group by a Global Moderator or an Administrator. The user will remain in this group for the duration of their ban, should they see reason to contest the ban, as noted they will have access to the ombudsman directly and may do so accordingly.

If any attempt to evade a ban, via this group, is seen to be made. The offending user will be banned via the traditionally function. Any Multi used to evade a ban, will be banned via the traditional function as according to the forum rules.

As this is a usergroup, users must be added and removed manually. It will take an admin or GM being present at the end of the ban to remove someone from the group, as such a slight overlapping may occur time wise, if this happens be patient and you will be unbanned as soon as a staff member is able to do so.

The purpose of this new way of banning is to provide a direct means through the forum to contact the forum role of Ombudsman. This is a new system, and a major change. Since it is a large difference from how things are now, this is only a trial run for it. If it works out well, it could be adopted into permanent use. If it works poorly, it is possible that the banning system will revert to the function provided by the forum.

If you have any questions regarding this or have any comments about it please feel free to let the staff know.

~Thought up by SuperSaiyan.
Approved by the Admin team.

Ps. Any current ban will not be included.(3/8/12)

[/spoiler]

The banned usergroup you are in gives you access to Oms section only to appeal your warnings/bans only.

Any abuse of the usergroup privilege can result in the privilege being taken away.

Your privilege in requesting the temporary closure of another thread is void because you lost that privilege when you became banned. As it stands you currently have no right to request anything besides the Ombudsman to look at your case.

why mods not close ability to post?? because want ban for ever player ???
come on

block me because i asked close my post where i can.t reply
i have print screen
lets see jason if like it

[Clarkey]

Robert needs his answer . The thread should be closed since he was banned frkm the forums. Seems like mods abusing their power.

As a Mod of the General section I have given Rob3rt his answer. The thread will remain open.

Just because Rob3rt got himself banned does not mean the thread should be closed until he is unbanned. He lost his own access to post in that thread, doesn't mean everyone else loses their access to post in it.

[Clarkey]

is a threat???
if who make post ask to close it temporaly make something wrong ?????
show me rules !!!!!!

A threat lol.

Read this:
[spoiler]

Over the last 4 months or so, the middle and upper management of the forum has been discussing and tossing around an Idea to hopefully improve the banning system of the forum.

As it stands now, the basic banning function that is integrated into the forum is simply a ban. No access to anything on the forum, including the ombudsman. As the Ombudsman's purpose is to help resolve issues, such as bannings, it is inconsistent for the forum to not allow a direct means of contacting the ombudsman.

It has been suggested a few times, by several members of the community, that perhaps a Ban Group instead of the Ban Function would be more fair and beneficial overall. During the last four months, this notion has been discussed at length. It was finally decided to be given a trial period, to see how this different method of banning would work and if it would work well for this forum.

Here is a quick briefing of how this new system will work:

The "Banned" Usergroup has had all of its forum privileges and access restricted. Anyone in this group is incapable of accessing the user control panel, receiving/sending PMs, browsing the forum, etc. The only thing that a user in this group can do is post in the Ombudsman Section of the forum.

Upon receiving a 3rd warning, a user will be placed into the group by a Global Moderator or an Administrator. The user will remain in this group for the duration of their ban, should they see reason to contest the ban, as noted they will have access to the ombudsman directly and may do so accordingly.

If any attempt to evade a ban, via this group, is seen to be made. The offending user will be banned via the traditionally function. Any Multi used to evade a ban, will be banned via the traditional function as according to the forum rules.

As this is a usergroup, users must be added and removed manually. It will take an admin or GM being present at the end of the ban to remove someone from the group, as such a slight overlapping may occur time wise, if this happens be patient and you will be unbanned as soon as a staff member is able to do so.

The purpose of this new way of banning is to provide a direct means through the forum to contact the forum role of Ombudsman. This is a new system, and a major change. Since it is a large difference from how things are now, this is only a trial run for it. If it works out well, it could be adopted into permanent use. If it works poorly, it is possible that the banning system will revert to the function provided by the forum.

If you have any questions regarding this or have any comments about it please feel free to let the staff know.

~Thought up by SuperSaiyan.
Approved by the Admin team.

Ps. Any current ban will not be included.(3/8/12)

[/spoiler]

The banned usergroup you are in gives you access to Oms section only to appeal your warnings/bans only.

Any abuse of the usergroup privilege can result in the privilege being taken away.

Your privilege in requesting the temporary closure of another thread is void because you lost that privilege when you became banned. As it stands you currently have no right to request anything besides the Ombudsman to look at your case.

why mods not close ability to post?? because want ban for ever player ???
come on

block me because i asked close my post where i can.t reply
i have print screen
lets see jason if like it

You're sending a print screen to Jason, oh noes....

[R0B3RT]

Robert needs his answer . The thread should be closed since he was banned frkm the forums. Seems like mods abusing their power.

As a Mod of the General section I have given Rob3rt his answer. The thread will remain open.

Just because Rob3rt got himself banned does not mean the thread should be closed until he is unbanned. He lost his own access to post in that thread, doesn't mean everyone else loses their access to post in it.

damn is a vendetta 1vs 1 jander talk alone use your head not mod power