StarGateWars Forums

I recently got a warning for it, what a load of horse **Filtered**

**Filtered** sort it out, you bunch of muppets

Did you get the warning after the rule was changed, or before?

Juliette wrote:Did you get the warning after the rule was changed, or before?

i dont care, even if it wasnt its still a **Filtered** rule lmao,

You gunna warn me for replying back to you?

It was a verbal warning not a board warning.

~Wolverine~ wrote:I recently got a warning for it, what a load of horse **Filtered**

**Filtered** sort it out, you bunch of muppets

You replied to a mod post (mod instructions, usually posted in their mod colour). It is against the rules, and was dealt with.

Haz wrote:

~Wolverine~ wrote:I recently got a warning for it, what a load of horse **Filtered**

**Filtered** sort it out, you bunch of muppets

You replied to a mod post (mod instructions, usually posted in their mod colour). It is against the rules, and was dealt with.

So? they choose to reply into a topic and why cant people reply to it? And in context the one i replied was done as a 'joke'.

~Wolverine~ wrote:

Haz wrote:

~Wolverine~ wrote:I recently got a warning for it, what a load of horse **Filtered**

**Filtered** sort it out, you bunch of muppets

You replied to a mod post (mod instructions, usually posted in their mod colour). It is against the rules, and was dealt with.

So? they choose to reply into a topic and why cant people reply to it? And in context the one i replied was done as a 'joke'.

They mod a topic. They don't reply to it. And regardless, the rules specify a response to a mod post is seen as spam. Regardless of context.

Boy, I wish these forums had some sort of elected officials to settle disputes between Mods and Users... if only..

Empy wrote:Boy, I wish these forums had some sort of elected officials to settle disputes between Mods and Users... if only..

I wonder whom that could be lol, by all means wolve if you feel the action was not just after you follow the correct chain of command (which is speaking with the green mod for general) and you are not happy contact the gents in light blue.

Empy wrote:Boy, I wish these forums had some sort of elected officials to settle disputes between Mods and Users... if only..

If he wishes to, he may approach you guys to appeal his verbal warning.

~Odin~ wrote:

Empy wrote:Boy, I wish these forums had some sort of elected officials to settle disputes between Mods and Users... if only..

I wonder whom that could be lol, by all means wolve if you feel the action was not just after you follow the correct chain of command (which is speaking with the green mod for general) and you are not happy contact the gents in light blue.

Yes, he may speak to me if he wishes to. If he compels me to change my current stance on this verbal warning, I'd be more than happy to have his verbal warning removed. If not, it's over to the ombudsman

Haz wrote:

Empy wrote:Boy, I wish these forums had some sort of elected officials to settle disputes between Mods and Users... if only..

If he wishes to, he may approach you guys to appeal his verbal warning.

Sick italics bro.

but it doesn't just have to be about that, if he has other concerns such as the rules being unfair.

Haz wrote:

Empy wrote:Boy, I wish these forums had some sort of elected officials to settle disputes between Mods and Users... if only..

If he wishes to, he may approach you guys to appeal his verbal warning.

I trust he discussed everything with Odin and Odin's GM? Oh, right, kind of what has been happening all over this thread.

~Wolverine~ wrote:You gunna warn me for replying back to you?

**Filtered** no. Why would I?

Haz wrote:

Empy wrote:Boy, I wish these forums had some sort of elected officials to settle disputes between Mods and Users... if only..

If he wishes to, he may approach you guys to appeal his verbal warning.

haha well aren't you a muppet.

there should be no need for it in the first place, the fact you came up with some **Filtered** rule because you dont like people replying to you.

b. Replies
Replies will be considered spam if they do not contribute to the discussion of the topic, or derail the topic from the intended purpose as defined in the opening post. This may include multiple replies 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. The act of replying to a moderator post falls under this category, provided said post was not in forum issues or one of its subsections. Private messages (PMs) are not subject to this rule.

I get your crappy rule when it applys to a topic which isnt spam and needs some attention, but still why cant people reply? The fact that sometimes it might be constructive and right?

The fact that the topic it was posted in was spam and a bunch of **Filtered** anyway, it wasnt dealt with properly with the 3 various topics ,of the top of my head, and should of been sorted properly in the first place.

So whats the logic behind not being allowed to post in reply to a mods modding?

~Wolverine~ wrote:So whats the logic behind not being allowed to post in reply to a mods modding?

Because the majority of the time it's off-topic and there is a dedicated sub-section for discussing moderator's actions, and why they're muppets.