|
Post by DaveyJones on Sept 1, 2013 11:56:20 GMT -5
re: Just glad I am not Davey.
Doesnt bother me a bit I kinda enjoy it,but somnetimes when one goes a way overboard on this forum then its time for the administrator to take action.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2013 13:09:28 GMT -5
re: Just glad I am not Davey. Doesnt bother me a bit I kinda enjoy it,but somnetimes when one goes a way overboard on this forum then its time for the administrator to take action. Exactly what action did you take? She simply came back with a new name and started right back into the same crap.
|
|
|
Post by myche on Sept 1, 2013 16:07:37 GMT -5
re: Just glad I am not Davey. Doesnt bother me a bit I kinda enjoy it,but somnetimes when one goes a way overboard on this forum then its time for the administrator to take action. Exactly what action did you take? She simply came back with a new name and started right back into the same crap. Apparently she was banned. It took her two or three posts to take ANOTHER dig at Davey with her new nic. I hope her meds kick in. Paranoia is a nasty thing to have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2013 16:33:57 GMT -5
Exactly what action did you take? She simply came back with a new name and started right back into the same crap. Apparently she was banned. It took her two or three posts to take ANOTHER dig at Davey with her new nic. I hope her meds kick in. Paranoia is a nasty thing to have. There is no such thing as getting banned. There are only temporary outages.
|
|
|
Post by jamie on Sept 1, 2013 17:02:17 GMT -5
Davey and VM sitting in a tree. You know what they be doin? Huh? Do Ya? They each be on their laptops having a posting battle. Is anybody keeping score?
|
|
|
Post by rule62 on Sept 1, 2013 17:21:20 GMT -5
Apparently she was banned. It took her two or three posts to take ANOTHER dig at Davey with her new nic. I hope her meds kick in. Paranoia is a nasty thing to have. There is no such thing as getting banned. There are only temporary outages. There is; but apparently this forum's admin either doesn't know how to do it, or doesn't want to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2013 6:34:26 GMT -5
As with any "new" poster with a different name,even if we know who that poster is,we usually allow that poster to stay here for a about a week or less. Just to give them a chance to (ahem) change. "We", as in you, admin and moderator? That's a ridiculous statement and only confirms what rule said about you - you either don't know how or you just won't. Period. What's the point in punting them if you're just going to let them right back in? Why not just let them stay with their existing names and keep warning them not to do the bad stuff they're doing? Based on your answer, does that mean she's now "banned" again. Because she started right back in with her usual behavior.
|
|
|
Post by rule62 on Sept 2, 2013 7:20:49 GMT -5
As with any "new" poster with a different name,even if we know who that poster is,we usually allow that poster to stay here for a about a week or less. Just to give them a chance to (ahem) change. "We", as in you, admin and moderator? That's a ridiculous statement and only confirms what rule said about you - you either don't know how or you just won't. Period. What's the point in punting them if you're just going to let them right back in? Why not just let them stay with their existing names and keep warning them not to do the bad stuff they're doing? Based on your answer, does that mean she's now "banned" again. Because she started right back in with her usual behavior. Davey finds some sort of odd enjoyment in it.
|
|
|
Post by myche on Sept 2, 2013 7:51:19 GMT -5
"We", as in you, admin and moderator? That's a ridiculous statement and only confirms what rule said about you - you either don't know how or you just won't. Period. What's the point in punting them if you're just going to let them right back in? Why not just let them stay with their existing names and keep warning them not to do the bad stuff they're doing? Based on your answer, does that mean she's now "banned" again. Because she started right back in with her usual behavior. Davey finds some sort of odd enjoyment in it. I think finding some sort of enjoyment is better than worrying about the pathetic stalker. Imagine how angry she gets knowing she is not getting Davey mad. She is losing at her own game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2013 8:28:43 GMT -5
"We", as in you, admin and moderator? That's a ridiculous statement and only confirms what rule said about you - you either don't know how or you just won't. Period. What's the point in punting them if you're just going to let them right back in? Why not just let them stay with their existing names and keep warning them not to do the bad stuff they're doing? Based on your answer, does that mean she's now "banned" again. Because she started right back in with her usual behavior. Davey finds some sort of odd enjoyment in it. Among other things
|
|
|
Post by DaveyJones on Sept 2, 2013 11:19:25 GMT -5
Talk about a rediculous statement.. "Why not just let them stay with their existing names and keep warning them not to do the bad stuff they're doing? "
So how many warning should the administrator give, got a number?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2013 11:28:08 GMT -5
Talk about a rediculous statement.."Why not just let them stay with their existing names and keep warning them not to do the bad stuff they're doing? " So how many warning should the administrator give, got a number? Geez Davey, this really isn't that hard. If you're going to wear all the hats at least know and do the job. Whether or not you want to acknowledge it there are most certainly people who visit the forum and make determinations on how it's run. The answer to your question is very simple: 3. You know, as in "3 strikes and you're out"? If they're warned 3 times then they get banned. And not just fake banning but real banning. If you don't know how to do it then learn. But if you're going to ban just make sure you're doing it for the right reasons.
|
|
|
Post by rule62 on Sept 2, 2013 11:35:11 GMT -5
Talk about a rediculous statement.."Why not just let them stay with their existing names and keep warning them not to do the bad stuff they're doing? " So how many warning should the administrator give, got a number? Geez Davey, this really isn't that hard. If you're going to wear all the hats at least know and do the job. Whether or not you want to acknowledge it there are most certainly people who visit the forum and make determinations on how it's run. The answer to your question is very simple: 3. You know, as in "3 strikes and you're out"? If they're warned 3 times then they get banned. And not just fake banning but real banning. If you don't know how to do it then learn. But if you're going to ban just make sure you're doing it for the right reasons. Also, whatever rules you set up should be applied equally.
|
|
|
Post by yugomary on Sept 2, 2013 13:05:43 GMT -5
Three pages about some lunatic getting banned??? SERIOUSLY!!!
|
|
|
Post by DaveyJones on Sept 3, 2013 14:21:20 GMT -5
There are pros and cons to any topic on this forum,some are better then others. I mean SERIOUSLY how else can we live day to day without laughter.
|
|