Un-Ban Poster 'MyTurn2Raise' - Page 2

delta k · #11 02-07-2007, 03:09 PM

cmon, MT2R is the onlyperson posting in the full ring NL forum so if you ban him that forum goes under! think of the work nation did petitioning for it!

Nick B. · #12 02-07-2007, 03:09 PM

I think Ryan does a great job.

A S U · #13 02-07-2007, 03:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Mat,

Nick B. de-greened because of this situation? Confirm/deny?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh my!

Mat Sklansky · #14 02-07-2007, 03:10 PM

If the post had been the announcement of a new rule, I might agree. His post was a rant where he chose to abuse his "power" in a casual manner.

stabn · #15 02-07-2007, 03:10 PM

Mat,

Given that he immediately [censored] around in the thread with a gimmick account i believe you made a bad decision here. You could cut it down to 2-3 days but an immediate unbanning is probably wrong in this case (mostly because of his gimmick account usage in that thread, post ban).

Mat Sklansky · #16 02-07-2007, 03:15 PM

My issue is with Daryn's post. It should not have been made.

It was his post which led to the banning. And the original ban should never have occured.

A S U · #17 02-07-2007, 03:18 PM

I think it was dumb what MT2R did. He was basically saying ban me. But I appreciate what Mat has done here. Some of these mods just go crazy and arbitrarily ban people for personal reasons. Thanks for keeping them in check.

eviljeff · #18 02-07-2007, 03:19 PM

fruit of the poisonous tree!

stabn · #19 02-07-2007, 03:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My issue is with Daryn's post. It should not have been made.

It was his post which led to the banning. And the original ban should never have occured.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, that's fine. I get where you are coming from. I'm not sure that simply making "no QFT's" a new rule would have worked though. If he had a rant thread about it and then the next day made it a new rule in the sticky would you have been ok with that?

Grunch · #20 02-07-2007, 03:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My issue is with Daryn's post. It should not have been made.

It was his post which led to the banning. And the original ban should never have occured.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, that's fine. I get where you are coming from. I'm not sure that simply making "no QFT's" a new rule would have worked though. If he had a rant thread about it and then the next day made it a new rule in the sticky would you have been ok with that?

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't ask me, but regardless.

My contention in this situation is that OOT should not have the power to make an OOT-only rule which is enforcable with a site-wide ban. Go ahead and outlaw QFTs all you want. But it should be enforced with the '*' system. Not a site-wide ban.