How many temporary bans...

[Richard]

Went on a pathetic anti-James rant because sledger got banned, I believe. He even asked to be banned as I recall. All very sad.

Think he was less asking to be banned as making it clear that he didn't really care whether he got one or not. Not like what he said about James there is something he hasn't said before. Without commenting for a second on whether it's right or wrong, it's a common opinion among certain types.

I'm never exactly happy when sledger gets banned, he's a good friend of mine, FTR. But I've given-up commenting on it on-forum, it helps no-one, be it myself, him or those doing the banning.

 

[Jamee999]

Matteh has been banned for 3 weeks.

 

[fredfertang]

Hadn't really taken on board the banning sanction until now - seems a great shame that four essentially popular guys get taken off the forum and given that I detect a hint of recidivism (particularly from the ever entertaining sledger) it appears not to achieve what it seeks to achieve

I appreciate the rules are there for a reason and need to be policed but as the thing most people seem to take a pride in here is their post count wouldn't it be better to issue a private warning, delete all offending posts and then deduct an appropriate number from their count?

Naturally if someone gets a certain number of private warnings then a ban must follow but by that stage they have surely demonstrated total worthlessness and therefore all bans should be permanent and their avatars placed on a gibbet on the front page as a warning from history

 

[Craig]

Matteh has been banned for 3 weeks.

Maybe he can go and keep on listening to his no-name music.

 

[Perm]

Nice cheap shot Craigos.

Mitchell might be a bit of an arrogant **** when it comes to music, but it's better than being a complete ****ing moron like you.

 

[Somerset]

Nice cheap shot Craigos.

Mitchell might be a bit of an arrogant **** when it comes to music, but it's better than being a complete ****ing moron like you.

Gee thats a bit harsh Perm - from what I've seen of Craig hes a good bloke and, for me anyway, provides some of the better posts to read.

 

[Matt79]

Chuck Norris says to Perm:

Kids, no matter what temptations are placed in front of you:

DON'T
POST
PRE
MENSTRUAL

 

[Craig]

Nice cheap shot Craigos.

Mitchell might be a bit of an arrogant **** when it comes to music, but it's better than being a complete ****ing moron like you.

Well that is your opinion and your entitled to it.

 

[grecian]

Ahh, isn't it lovely the festive spirit being shown around the forum ATM

 

[Uppercut]

Hadn't really taken on board the banning sanction until now - seems a great shame that four essentially popular guys get taken off the forum and given that I detect a hint of recidivism (particularly from the ever entertaining sledger) it appears not to achieve what it seeks to achieve

Hmm, was thinking that too. In one way i can understand that the rules need to be upheld and noone wants to be seen as picking and choosing when to enforce them depending on who they like. But on the other hand, i thought the main purpose of having rules on a forum was to make it a generally better place, and banning those people emphatically does the opposite IMO.

 

[Richard]

Nice cheap shot Craigos.

Mitchell might be a bit of an arrogant **** when it comes to music, but it's better than being a complete ****ing moron like you.

Another for the bannedwagon I wonder? Certainly not wise to be making posts like that in the current climate.

 

[Richard]

Hadn't really taken on board the banning sanction until now - seems a great shame that four essentially popular guys get taken off the forum and given that I detect a hint of recidivism (particularly from the ever entertaining sledger) it appears not to achieve what it seeks to achieve

I appreciate the rules are there for a reason and need to be policed but as the thing most people seem to take a pride in here is their post count wouldn't it be better to issue a private warning, delete all offending posts and then deduct an appropriate number from their count?

Naturally if someone gets a certain number of private warnings then a ban must follow but by that stage they have surely demonstrated total worthlessness and therefore all bans should be permanent and their avatars placed on a gibbet on the front page as a warning from history

Really not sure about the postcount thing TBH. They're a bit of fun, no more, and precious few members treat them as anything more.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

I appreciate the rules are there for a reason and need to be policed but as the thing most people seem to take a pride in here is their post count wouldn't it be better to issue a private warning, delete all offending posts and then deduct an appropriate number from their count?

What in the hell gave you the impression people care about their post count?

 

[fredfertang]

What in the hell gave you the impression people care about their post count?

The existence of a huge thread about milestones sowed the seed in my mind but happen I'm on the wrong scent and it's there for a different reason I am too stupid to understand

 

[Richard]

No-one's posts in the milestones thread are of great importance to them. The thread is there so we use it, and ITBT it should've been created many years ago as it'd have saved loads of really fairly pointless threads. As I say, post milestones are generally worth acknowledging if you're that way inclined (I've become less enthusiastic over time really) but if postcounts were completely lost tomorrow I doubt anyone'd be all that upset. It'd be a bit of a shame, but no more than that.

Can't remember the last time I posted a post milestone of my own in the thread TBH, reckon at was at least 10,000, very possibly 15,000, ago. Someone'll probably dig it out now of course and my estimate will probably have been wrong.

 

[fredfertang]

Not if it's a matter of trifling importance they won't

 

[biased indian]

andd all this for silliy thing if they had asked me i would have confirmed percambian was not sledgers duplicate account

I am sure he is some one from kerala,india

 

[Richard]

Not if it's a matter of trifling importance they won't

You underestimate the desire of certain individuals on CW.n to prove me wrong on something... anything.

 

[Richard]

andd all this for silliy thing if they had asked me i would have confirmed percambian was not sledgers duplicate account

I am sure he is some one from kerala,india

No-one actually thought Precamb was a sledger duplicate (we're all far too well-versed in spotting those). The problem was that an accusation made in jest was taken in seriousness by Precamb (who's not quite so familiar with the of-times-strange ways and in-joke style of certain CW posters) and he got het-up about it.

Or, at least, he appeared to. Maybe he got the joke 100% and just pretended to get angry.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Ahh, isn't it lovely the festive spirit being shown around the forum ATM

Correct. In fact I believe there's an amnesty planned for the New Year whereby all previously banned posters (not including multiple accounts) will have their bans lifted.