I think kow was just making the point that he, like myself, has been using it without even realizing the context. And in his case, as a contributor, had it being used in official threads.
I personally don't find anything wrong with it, as I'm sure kow agrees, but I do now understand that some people may be using it as an attack.

The only things that stack are moderations.  It is assumed that new users may not know a rule, so if they say something against the rules 10 times before they are warned and therefore informed about the rule then you leave it as a single moderation. 

If a person is saying something over and over again then sometimes the severity of the ban can be increased past the normal pattern, but usually it's best to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume that the first time they break a rule it was because they didn't know about it.

The forum rules at the bottom of the hot-topic section are not the same as the forum rules on the main forum page.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/board.php

http://vgchartz.com/forum/index.php#rules

Btw...Is it ok to call some thread a Joke trhead?
I made this thread http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93191&page=4
and some may have diffrent opinions but they should not call it joke thread..

I would have read this rant, but it was way too long :p

A nice update to the forum rules. Good work.

Hehe.

Excellent work, good sir.  You seem to have touched on every major point Moderators must cover. I'm sure these simple clarifications will go a long towards providing a consistent and unified front from which the Mods can attack.

I don't believe that is correct.  I've noticed both account bannings and account reinstatements having gone unoted in various users' moderation histories when carried out by Admins as opposed to regular Moderators.  You can check my own history for proof of that.  Notice the number of times my account has been reinstated despite no mention of a prior ban (and we all know who's the cause of that ^_^).

You will also find no mention of either a permaban (notably an IP ban carried out by an Admin) nor the reinstatement of the same account after said ban in the member's moderation history in some cases, notably the first referenced by Gnizmo in the OP, in regards to posting pornographic imagery.  Proof of this can also be seen simply by looking at the profile page of a certain permabanned alt.  Note that it says why the account was banned, but does not specify who carried out the ban.  If you click on the member's moderation history, you get nothing.

Usually it's not that big a deal, but it can be quite confusing on our end to see a user who was legimitely banned (even permabanned) suddenly running around scott free, with no evidence of anybody having actually reversed the ban.

Now this is just a bad idea all around.  Under a poster's profile, it links to the damning post that warranted the ban. If the post is edited, you'll just end up with fifty million wall posts and PMs the Moderator in question has to deal with asking "Why was ____ banned!?" or saying "That's BS!  That didn't warrant a ban!"  And you may also face posters coming back from a ban only to claim they did no wrong, with no proof either way since the original content of their post/thread has since been replaced.

And that also leads to the possibility of Moderator abuse, as one could simply edit a post and claim the initial content warranted a ban.  Though I suppose that could happen even now.

Though if either the original content of a post was recorded via Moderation History, or we started keeping logs of who edited posts (to the chagrin of crafty Mafia players everywhere), I suppose it wouldn't be much of a problem.

Does this mean the chartz will be more stirct? was it ever updated?

It was updated, and I don't see why it would be more strict. The only rule enforcement change was that one line responses will probably be more frowned upon, but that hardly seems like a bad thing. Everything else is updating the rules to reflect the current state of moderation. In other words, everything is the same but more clearly stated now.

I really like the new rules. Great job Naz.

I really don't understand some of these users. You don't argue with site admins. They control the servers, they control the content that appears on the site, well except for what users post, and pretty much everything that goes on here. Including that orange yellow picture that appear on the sides of the webpage.

You do not argue with the people that created or helped shape what the site is today. It's not a smart move. And you especially don't go trolling people in a thread filled with red names.

It was to no surprise to see the user, Phrancheyez, banned half-way down the first page. Why would one do that? Some of the users who are complaining about the lack of rule enforcement should really take a look at the site's Terms of Use and the Forum Rules.

They're not hard rules to follow: no porn, no warez, no trolling, no flaming, no thread duplication, no insulting the site, et cetera.

Why on earth would you insult the site when it specifically says in the rules not to?

I have provided you with links. Use them so you don't do anything stupid. And if you are, at least have the decency to use that "Edit" button because nobody is going to screen cap your trolling if you are quick enough.