Conegamer said:
Yes indeed, that was the case. The actual content isn't too bad from Faxandu; it's more he got offended, asked him to stop and told him why we was offended and then continued on regardless. The initial post if you check isn't actually moderated, but it is the one afterwards which is. For example if I were to call you a fuddy-duddy and then you tell me to stop doing it, then I immediately call you it again; regardless of that; then that's a bigger offence IMO. Yeah it's an overreaction, but even so it seems like he's just baiting him into a more aggressive reply. Also I've already explained my stance on Basil's post (apologies for not putting in the mod note, that was careless as I was distracted by Basil's PM) and I stand by that. Is it harsh? Yes, maybe it is. I said that above as well. As you know, most of the time I do indeed post a warning in a thread; either before or during an argument. But the whole thing was completely unneeded and unusual from both sides (continuing when asked to stop by one party, overreacting and posting the needless "reported" comment by the other) and as both were due just a warning I decided to stop it right there and punish both parties right off the bat. |
Ok, but was a mod warning neccessary at all? The conversation was essentially over amd I think a general warning would have been more than enough. Since neither side really broke any forum rules. Specifically basil, I dont see why his post would need an official warning, thats just going overboard.
as for the other guy, I think his second post was an explanation of what he meant in an attempt to calm basil down. He certainly didnt mean anything bad by it. I still think both warnings should be overturned!