I see banned n00bs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yamaneko

Let's adopt the winning Fool's Gold formula!

---

The "winning Fool's Gold formula" is not having a front site, more than anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychotic

Ugh, I hate this so called "defence".

You may be in the right, and have totally defeated our logic, but we own the damned thing so you suck HAHAHA!

Ugh ugh ugh. No.

---

Agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychotic

Ugh, I hate this so called "defence".

You may be in the right, and have totally defeated our logic, but we own the damned thing so you suck HAHAHA!

Ugh ugh ugh. No.

---

First of all, we can start spelling "defence" correctly, secondly, I am always right.

Hawkeye hit the nail on the head. Manny, if you're smart, you'll know fully well that EoFF is working exactly the way that we want it to work, and therefore there is no problem. This isn't a place for just anyone. Nobody will ever see it as perfect, but we will make it what is good for us, the Staffers.

As for spam harming people by losing their posting privileges, I'll say it again, they were warned and they knew they would get banned. There's nothing wrong with banning someone when they know they're going to get banned. There's no real way to argue with that at all. Maybe you're just joking around, and if that's the case then I'd rather you stop posting in this thread so people can carry on their more serious conversations.

This forum is working just the way it's meant to be. Changing the way this forum is run would be like Maddox deciding to not be offensive because it harms some people. It would be like Fool's Gold ceasing to exist because some people out there think the whole place is a cesspool. Not saying I do, but I know people do. You know fully well that we are capable of dealing with things in the way that suits us in the way we find most suitable. Not banning people for constant spamming would not be suitable for us. That's final.

eest is right that we are pleasing the greater number of people that we want to keep here. Having said that, a great number of people wanted Bush to get elected but you don't see that forcing the rest of the country to just roll over and say "okay sir". Sometimes the majority of people aren't the kind of people you want. For this reason, you should always just make the place you run into the place you want it to be, not the place the majority of the world wants it to be.

As for anyone who thinks the majority of people don't like this place, we got a lot of anonymous feedback using those form thingies - in excess of 160 forms, in fact - and I'd estimate that around 90-95% said this place was run bloody well. Some people had minor specific problems, and about 10% said that this place could be more strict and about 10% said that the place should be less strict. Not a single active staff member got an average rating below seven, and most lower ratings were purely based on the fact that a person didn't know the Knight/Admin mentioned. This place is considered to be well run, so say the members.

You're saying the reason you aren't doing the job I'm paying you to do is because you don't have a job to do? what are you trying to convince me of exactly? that you're ass useless as an asshole right here? *touches elbow* Well guess what. You just smurfing convinced me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

First of all, we can start spelling "defence" correctly, secondly, I am always right.

---

Ah yes, the grammar card. Refuge of those who lack proper debating skills.

What's this thread about exactly?

nobody wins in an internet argument!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

First of all, we can start spelling "defence" correctly, secondly, I am always right.

---

He's British, he spelt it the British way, I hardly see a problem here :monster:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony BoB

Hawkeye hit the nail on the head. Manny, if you're smart, you'll know fully well that EoFF is working exactly the way that we want it to work, and therefore there is no problem. This isn't a place for just anyone. Nobody will ever see it as perfect, but we will make it what is good for us, the Staffers.

As for spam harming people by losing their posting privileges, I'll say it again, they were warned and they knew they would get banned. There's nothing wrong with banning someone when they know they're going to get banned. There's no real way to argue with that at all. Maybe you're just joking around, and if that's the case then I'd rather you stop posting in this thread so people can carry on their more serious conversations.

This forum is working just the way it's meant to be. Changing the way this forum is run would be like Maddox deciding to not be offensive because it harms some people. It would be like Fool's Gold ceasing to exist because some people out there think the whole place is a cesspool. Not saying I do, but I know people do. You know fully well that we are capable of dealing with things in the way that suits us in the way we find most suitable. Not banning people for constant spamming would not be suitable for us. That's final.

eest is right that we are pleasing the greater number of people that we want to keep here. Having said that, a great number of people wanted Bush to get elected but you don't see that forcing the rest of the country to just roll over and say "okay sir". Sometimes the majority of people aren't the kind of people you want. For this reason, you should always just make the place you run into the place you want it to be, not the place the majority of the world wants it to be.

---

obviously my continuing to post in this thread isn't going to change anyone's opinion, so I'll just say fair enough and give up :monster:

I just have a hard time believing that more people complained about PIP's spamming than approved of it (same goes for HOORJ). Most people generally seemed to like him :monster:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eestlinc

nobody wins in an internet argument!

---

Arguing on the Internets is like running in the Special Olympics?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Man

He's British, he spelt it the British way, I hardly see a problem here :monster:

---

That was the point!

EDIT BY BoB: Hawkeye, please do not flame people.

ah, touché

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yams

What's this thread about exactly?

---

Yeah, I'm lost too. Maybe that's why our staff sucks so hard hahahahahahahahaha

Yeah, we've probably gone a bit far off topic. The original topic of this thread was explained so if anyone wants to start a new thread with a new topic, then go for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Man

I don't really mind if people who constantly break the rules get banned... but shouldn't final warnings expire as "final warnings" after like a year? 'Cause if you only screw up once a year, that's not really that much of a problem :monster:

of course, maybe they do, but I just want to be sure :cool:

---

It turns out that final warnings do expire. There isn't an exact statute of limitations yet, but I am pretty sure we haven't had a case where someone got banned in reference to a final warning issued anywhere near a year prior.

Quoted because this should be the last post of the thread, since it is really the way things are, and not just a line we are feeding the members, yet people continue to complain or get in trouble because they can't understand it:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony BoB

Okay, now that people are starting to turn things personal and resorting to flaming, I'm going to speak out a few rules.

1) Saying "you're being ignorant assholes" is against the rules and will get you a warning. Dreddz, this is a warning. Don't do that.

2) If you have a problem with the banning of a specific person, PM an admin/mod and talk to them about it. If you don't like the way things went, you are welcome to start up your own forums and make your own rules. We will listen to what you have to say, though, and all the staff get made aware of such things when they become issues, and we do reflect on what we do and have made adjustments to rules in the past.

3) Some people tell us we are too strict, while some people refuse to post here because they think we aren't strict enough. There is no way we're going to "give in" to either argument and we tend to neglect general comments of "you guys are too strict" or vice versa because there will always be someone on the other side saying otherwise. We found our balance, and we tell each other when we feel that we've gone too far one way or the other and discuss it and sometimes shift to more or less extreme measures.

4) Likewise, as many people complain about the banning of a person, we get people thanking us and saying it's one of the greatest things we've ever done. Do we care about either? Not really. We care about EoFF in general - and most importantly of all, when making rules for a place you care about, you want people to...

5) Follow the rules. If you don't follow the rules, be it spam, be it flaming, be it anything, expect to get banned. It'll happen. If you get warned not to do something, don't do it. It's not bleeding rocket science to respect the rules. We need to make sure that people respect this place, and the rules are what have made EoFF the place it is today. If you enjoy posting at EoFF, you're enjoying the place that is a product of the rules we made. If you break them, you will get warned and/or banned so that other people can continue to enjoy the forums and the rules that make the forums what they are.

I personally don't have a problem with porn. I don't have a problem with vulgar jokes and I don't have a problem with spam. But I do have a problem with them at EoFF, because at EoFF they aren't allowed. Do those things elsewhere. It's easy. You can go to a place that such things are allowed or even encouraged and do them there, I know I do. But if you do them here, you'll get banned.

I didn't have a problem with PiP spamming, but I did have a problem with him spamming here, more because it was against the rules than anything else. I don't understand why anyone who knows that they are breaking rules would complain about getting warned/banned after they do just that. Regardless of how harmless it might be, if you broke a rule, you broke a rule. That's your problem.

And as much fun as it might be to make fun of people or insult them or whatever, I'm pretty sure it's more fun to ban people, so your fun will only encourage us to have our fun. :D

---