K, well then you could have made that argument to ioi.

It's too late now, as Crucial went berserk, so I say again, the point is moot.

We'll be more careful about this in the future, but there's nothing we can do now...I'll give you a pat on the back. *pat on back*

Ah, but see now you admit he started with an insult which was inappropriate and unwarranted action. Now you are just into debating the severity of the punishment. The fact that he still isn't perma-banned even after his post-ban actions I think shows quite a bit of leniency in that regard. So even if the original punishment was too severe, ioi was lenient in not increasing that punishment even after he continued to act inappropriately. You could say there may have been a mistake in the initial severity, but either way there is a balance now. I'm sure in the future we'll all be more careful about it, but you asked for a reasoning for a ban and you got one.

naznatips said: If they weren't banned that was a mistake on the mod's part. FF asked what reasoning there was for the initial ban. I gave him that reasoning. Insulting the site is not criticizing the site. His post after the insult may have been criticism, but he started with an insult, which directly contradicts the forum rules, and common decency in general.

 Which forum rule is that in direct contradiction with? I think the whole point here is how things are interpreted. It would be helpful to know what the words are exactly and how you're interpreting them.

BenKenobi88 said: K, well then you could have made that argument to ioi. It's too late now, as Crucial went berserk, so I say again, the point is moot. We'll be more careful about this in the future, but there's nothing we can do now...I'll give you a pat on the back. *pat on back*

 The point with Crucial may be moot. The question of how the forum rules are applied is certainly an ongoing question. Using Crucial as an example of how the rules are applied is topical.

The end result is a moot point on this one, as Ben has pointed out. The issue is with the initial over reaction. I can understand why mods would want to ban users for saying the site sucks, but it happens so often on these boards it is ridiculous. To punish one person with a 3 month ban (or heck even a one day ban all things considered) and let a dozen or so other people off the hook with no punishment at all is ridiculous. Maybe ioi was just having a bad day and over reacting, or maybe he has never seen the same comment I have read. I can't say for sure. I can say that the post seems perfectly normal for this forums, for whatever that is worth.



It is the principle of the situation. The point is some feel the first ban was unjust and the sotuation where he could circumvent the ban should never have come up. His behavior after that point cannot justify actions taken earlier.

fkusumot said: naznatips said: If they weren't banned that was a mistake on the mod's part. FF asked what reasoning there was for the initial ban. I gave him that reasoning. Insulting the site is not criticizing the site. His post after the insult may have been criticism, but he started with an insult, which directly contradicts the forum rules, and common decency in general. Which forum rule is that in direct contradiction with? I think the whole point here is how things are interpreted. It would be helpful to know what the words are exactly and how you're interpreting them.

Hrmm.  Good point, you have me there.  There isn't a rule directly against insulting on the forums.  However, there is in rule 3 "No posts specifically to to say that a poster or the thread sucks, either with words or pictures."  Again, it's common sense not to post insults and it's reasonable for any site to enforce punishment on people for those insults.  Even without a direct rule, insults shouldn't be tolerated.  If you'd like you can always go to the site improvement suggestions thread and request that be added to make things more clear.

i have no confidence in the judgement of mod's on this site. I was banned about 2 weeks ago for saying Wii Play should be counted as controller sales. A mod unbanned me but nothing was ever done about the first mod abusing his power and ruining the dialogue in that was ongoing in the thread.

Again, you are down to debates on the severity of the punishment, but that's up to the individual. Whether it's too severe or not, he posted an insult. The original topic was why he was banned. Now, if you have a problem with the severity of the ban, make a direct suggestion that the conditions of a ban and the length of time of a ban be clearly defined. Either way this original topic has been resolved. He was banned for an insult. There isn't any point in discussing this further.

Except for the fact that other users have insulted the site and not been banned, you are correct. Or would that be a different issue?

If you have an issue with someone insulting, report the post. If the person was not banned, then message a mod and ask for clarification as to why. Individual mods may resolve things in different ways. Personally, I'm inclined to warn the person and talk to them rather than ban them. If you are banned in a way you consider unjustly, message Ben, Stof, or ioi and explain your situation.

Like I said, if you want a clearly defined level of punishment, we don't have one right now. That might be something to suggest as a site improvement. The fact that we don't right now though will just lead a discussion about the severity of the punishment onward endlessly.