Please explain

[BackFromUSA]

can we lock this now and move it to the admin forum? I think most people will have seen the banning notice and had their say? Fair enough? Seems like it has been announced on BF too.

[saynta]

can we lock this now and move it to the admin forum? I think most people will have seen the banning notice and had their say? Fair enough? Seems like it has been announced on BF too.

Alright by me.

[saintspremiers]

can we lock this now and move it to the admin forum? I think most people will have seen the banning notice and had their say? Fair enough? Seems like it has been announced on BF too.

Disagree.

Leave it here. Traffic is much lower without plugs and for some it may mean posting more now he's gone.

If you bury it in the admin forum irregular users may not see it

[The Fireman]

I agree...leave it up..it helps to out some of the other problem posters the forum has.

[Bunk_Moreland]

I agree...leave it up..it helps to out some of the other problem posters the forum has.

like you

[Dis Believer]

I agree...leave it up..it helps to out some of the other problem posters the forum has.

like you

And me.......

[kosifantutti]

How is that boasting?

Thanks for the clarification.

[The Fireman]

I agree...leave it up..it helps to out some of the other problem posters the forum has.

like you

haha

[BackFromUSA]

Ok will leave it up for a bit longer ... But it isn't a place to take pot shots at anyone

[The Fireman]

Ok will leave it up for a bit longer ... But it isn't a place to take pot shots at anyone

that stands for the whole forum

[BackFromUSA]

Ok will leave it up for a bit longer ... But it isn't a place to take pot shots at anyone

that stands for the whole forum

True

But you can do it in the Animal Enclosure

[Freebird]

he did feel unfairly targeted.
... coz he was ... by the ss slippery set.

(if u read my post correctly , u would understand that there was no accusation or comment regarding
admin or mods targeting him unfairly
only regarding their inability to provide a level and fair playing field for him to participate in)

ie ... you got your man by not protecting him ... whilst allowing the slipsliders near free reign to recreate
the anti plugger vibe ... check out the dogs posting history on the matter for an example of proof
of that to which i point.

imo , oc and fwtw which i understand is little.

Amazing Leadership.
s*** hot stuff.
... its the frog on a slow boil trick.

Vale SS.

Blind assessment - definite blood connections here

[supersaints]

Wonder if this thread will outrun pluggers favourite forum .... Essendope 

[supersaints]

Wonder if this thread will outrun pluggers favourite forum .... Essendope 

[supersaints]

Oops post doubled... Sorry no intention, I wish Pluggs all the best wherever he roams.

[Freebird]

He knows the rules. Got banned, then came back. His habit of arguing for the sake of arguing is childish and stupid. He brought no value to the forum, as all he did was stir.
Good riddance.

Exactly

[Freebird]

Stop the whinging ffs. He's gone. He abused a mod over and above what is acceptable.

If we didn't have BFUSA and st b we wouldn't have a forum.

Is this having a go at any poster putting a counter argument mods? Any warning?

<edited by mods>

[skeptic]

I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that plugger was a victim here... he gave as good as he got but more than that, he clearly enjoyed the stoushes as he sought them out so regularly.

The reality is that it's really not that hard to stay within the rules here... Over the journey I've gotten into my fair share of verbal scraps with a number of posters including Barks, Bunk, Plugger, Markp, Stinger etc. And yes at times they've divulged into some playing of the man so to speak... I've never felt the need to report any of them and have never received a warning myself with the exception of when I had a quote from Stinger in my sig... got told it was deliberately provocative which in fairness was exactly what I was going for at the time.
The point is, I was told to remove it so I did. True story.

[dragit]

Stop the whinging ffs. He's gone. He abused a mod over and above what is acceptable.

If we didn't have BFUSA and st b we wouldn't have a forum.

Is this having a go at any poster putting a counter argument mods? Any warning?

In yet another attempt to educate ...

This broad statement is not directed at any particular individual.

Anyone offended by it is deeming THEMSELVES to be part of the accused "whingers"

If he had written "Jacks Back - stop being a whinger" - YES that is a breach and a POSSIBLE warning!

But he didn't.

The difference has been defined and explained MANY times before.

If you want it changed - then the end result we would be issuing warnings more often.

We have decided on a tolerance level to REDUCE the number of warnings.

We also have given ourselves 3 levels within assessments after we discuss a REPORT.

(a) ignore it because it is so minor and just dismiss the report

(b) send a PM to the offender rather than issue a formal warning (a PM may have also been sent to the reporting poster to explain our action)

(c) issue a formal warning and post the warning in the offending post (a PM may have also been sent to the reported AND reporting poster to explain our action)

Even if that poster had written "Jacks Back - stop being a whinger" ... and the post was REPORTED for assessment (noting that we can not possibly assess each and every post each day so only assess REPORTED POSTS ) .... the mods would have discussed the breach and decided the best course of action.

Simon you are contradicting yourself with some of these rules…

Surely whether you've quoted or used someones name directly is completely irrelevant when a post such as… "stop whinging for f*** sake" can only possibly be assessed as hostile, mocking & purely designed to cause anger and friction in our community - see troll rule.

You have actually told me directly in a PM that a post of mine was worthy of a warning even though it contained emoticons only and did not quote anyone?… surely this is at odds to what you have posted above?

This 'tactic' you are referring to here of taking pot-shots at people but without using names in order to avoid warnings should be considered a direct breach of the troll rule. It's a sneaky and cowardly approach and a blight on this forum.

The forest analogy is good one… the broadness of an inflammatory trolling post is irrelevant.

[BackFromUSA]

There is a distinction in my eyes, however I don't remember your specific case to be honest!

If the statement or emoticons DIRECTLY references or relates to one post / poster then a warning MAY be considered.

But when several people are involved ... And a comment is made about the collective ... Then each individual has a choice to decide whether the comment applies to them or not.

In this case - some posters sticking up for Plugger may feel that they were not whinging but instead making valid points. Thus the post would not apply to them.

And I don't see a broad statement to "stop whinging" to say half a dozen posters as inflaming the community! It is a throw away line that is used in common usage around Australia everyday without even a blink of an eye ...

If we go the other way (as you suggest) and warn for ANY commentary on a poster OR a collection of posters (broader) then we will be issuing many more warnings!

That is not what we want to do.

Ideally we don't want to issue any warnings.

But if we do hopefully posters realise that they have no impact unless you get 3 in 7 days.

[dragit]

You missed a bit... Stop whinging for f*** sake.

So it's okay to make abusive comments so long as they are broad and appear to be addressing more than one poster?

There are some real friggin' morons posting in this thread, must be developing dementia FFS -

Is that okay?

[satchmo]

Absolute bollocks.

[dragit]

I will remember to make any future personal attacks broad in nature and appear to be aimed at a collective, just like some other ridiculous lying cowards on here.

Cheers.

[The Fireman]

Absolute bollocks.

this is the sort of language we don't need here.

[satchmo]

Absolute bollocks.

this is the sort of language we don't need here.

Can anyone think of any more examples?