Usernote Spam.

[Psychotic]

Water is comparable to acid in how liquid-like it can be, too, but you don't see me drinking it.

But some people might find drinking acid fun. Does that mean you should stop them drinking it because YOU don't do it?

Actually, a usernote is just a form of post, so this rule is quite quotable in that regard...

But someone might not realise that despite reading the rules thoroughly. Perhaps it should be made clear, if that's the staff's view on it. People are not at fault for breaking rules that haven't been stated.

However, as you may have noticed, we HAVEN'T banned you, yet. We can also make and get rid of whatever rules we agree to make or get rid of. Just because something isn't written doesn't mean we can't do anything.

Sure, you can ban people for a rule you just invented, there's no dispute over that. My point was: Is it fair? And just how far would you extend these theoretical usernote rules? Many people have posted SOMETHING in user notes, but can you be sure every single member hasn't posted something off-topic, spammy, etc etc?

There's actually a REASON we haven't, yet, and that's because we'd like to give them a chance. Keep in mind there are quite a lot of reasons we can get rid of them, and the only reason to keep them is because there are people who like using them. You shouldn't be accusing us of discrimination. You should be thanking us for allowing them in the first place. At EoFF, usernotes are used as a luxury feature for the members.

I'm not really trying to argue with the staff about this, and watch me thank you folk for them, in fact: Thank you for usernotes! I'm more concerned with other people who posted previously saying "Let's get rid of them altogether", which I presume is because either they don't like them or because one individual posted spam in Proto's.