i) I'm with Hugh Mann on the "blaming something else" point.
With that said, I certainly see how the post could be read as suggesting that any criticism of GP or request of GP could be grounds for a warning.
If the poster was intending that reading, of course he was wholly incorrect.
But being wholly incorrect is not necssarily a bannable offence, and I don't think the post falls into the "purposefully misleading" category to make it so.
Also for my own part:
MiscChaos Wrote:The obvious first rule broken was the "don't post just asking for updates" rule.
ii) While this is a private forum, not a criminal court, and so the moderation team has ABSOLUTELY no requirement to abide by rules like "double jeopardy", it's still a wholly reasonable concept in fairness that a past infraction, once punished, should not attract another separate punishment.
So the past asking for updates, having already been punished by a (public) warning, shouldn't attract a further punishment by itself.
If he were to do it again in a post submitted after the warning, that would obviously be a separate infraction rightfully attracting a separate sanction.
(Of course It's also absolutely the case that if there was a future infraction, the facts that a previous one had been committed, and that it was brought to his attention, and punished, would be relevant, and would rightfully tend to count against the user.
You can't just be a constant offender and expect the same relative leniency as a first-timer.)
MiscChaos Wrote: I could also argue it goes against the "use common sense" rule since passive aggressively sniping at the moderation team doesn't seem the wisest course of action.
iii) Now that is an interesting argument.
Maybe correct, too, but in my respectful opinion it threatens descent on a slippery slope, and on that slope are places I do not want to go.
It's a little too close for comfort to "Don't piss off the mods or you can get ban't for it as that was against common sense lol", and I wouldn't want to see that happen.
Hugh mann Wrote:Y'all should probably update the rule list tbh.
The link to the specific Creative Corner rules with the update-only bit is posted in the general rules thread, which is neat.
That link works, too,
unlike the link TO the Global Forum Rules in the Creative Corner Rules thread itself.
The link to the Global Forum Rules in the CC Rules thread seems to link to a forum that general users aren't authorised to access or something?The link from CC rules to Global Rules has been fixed (or my browser was behaving very strangely when I posted, if nothing changed : o)
Anyway, I can't deny it'd be even neater for those CC rules to also be copy-pasted in ZeusKabob's general rules thread post so they're all in one place, but ... eh.
Hugh mann Wrote:(The first and third "rules" are also extremely redundant)
I like the first "rule" as an explanatory guideline and the third rule as a way to keep the Creative Corner free-stuff-only, I honestly think they're good as is.I miscounted; yeah the first and third are kinda saying the same thing.
That could stand to be merged into one probably XD
Bladelight999 Wrote:So just be a friend to me. not my digital lawyer.
I'm far too flaky and lazy to be a mod myself, so the only good I can do the team is to gently poke them if I think they might possibly be drifting off-direction.
It is what it is, don't worry about it.
And besides, Misc's Profile Pic
is from the Ace Attorney series : o
With that having been said, I'm sure it's a bad idea to antagonise the Moderation Team, just on general principle; they're human like ourselves after all.
Got off to a bit of a bad start there, sport, but I hope you'll enjoy your time here regardless.
