• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ban announcements

Status
Not open for further replies.
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
I edited after three seconds that's why no timestamp, I said it because I was tired, cranky, my kilt was annoying me and I hadn't had any haggis for three days
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
I think Sledger, Matteh, PF and co. knew they were going to get the chop when they made them. The risk is probably half the fun.

They're all guns, but they had it coming. If you tempt the axe, it will fall sooner or later. Also, the mods have other considerations. There are always lots of guests reading OT (and even Site Discussion), and they're all potential members. If all they see through OT and SD is a bunch of spam threads, they're going to think we're a piss-take site and move on to another forum.

It's not the fact that there are silly threads, it's the cynical clogging of the forum with them when the thread starters know they're going to get banned and do it anyway.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
GeraintIsMyHero said:
Honestly, I never realised how ****ed the priorities of the mod team were until I read this post. Creating idiot threads is clearly a capital offence. Much worse than 9 months of baiting two nationalities (that's what it took!!). He's just one such poster that it took months for you all to vote yes on. Honestly, what the **** is wrong with this place?
Click to expand...
Well I think that's a case of some things being a lot more subjective than others. Repeated baiting is obviously a lot worse than spamming but it's also a lot harder to conclusively identify. Furthermore, there's a big difference between knowing you'll get banned for doing something but not caring and doing something that ultimately gets you banned.

Look, I'll be honest here as I find my arguments a bit contrived if I don't in these matters - I wasn't personally involved in setting these ban lengths and I probably would've done been a fair bit more lenient if it'd been up to me. I know that goes against the "united front" of the moderation team a bit but if I'm going to be approachable and provide any insight into this I do have to be honest about it. That said, I don't think it's a terrible decision at all and apart from the inevitable bitterness, I can certainly see the argument to suggest that giving perhaps over-the-top bans to members who clearly knew they'd get banned for their actions could be good in the long run.

In the end, even if you don't agree with my arguments about Site Discussion being different or their knowledge of inevitable banning, everyone seems to have conceded to my points about the sheer number of threads and the fact that they continued on despite being warned. So it was clearly banworthy. I really don't think arguing over whether someone should've been banned for half a week or two weeks is worth it at all...
 
Last edited:
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
It's not just because of who it is but the blatant inconsistency that winds me up, though. We hear things are done in the interest of consistency, fact is, baiting constantly in CC is a stain on this forum but you all are afraid to ban for it unless you absolutely have to. To ban two people for two weeks for this is a deadset joke, given that that was the same as Alex got for being constantly provocative and offensive.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Burgey said:
WAC, honestly.

This from a bloke who reads something he doesn't like then flounces off for a few months. Seriously mate, you need to grow a pair and man up in life.

What a ****ing joke. That'll do me. I can't believe you've got the gall to sit there, no doubt typing with one hand, publicly calling for someone to be perma-banned because of what those blokes did.

You lack perspective, you **** off and sook when it suits you because you can't cop things, then you come back and you post things like you just have there. When someone calls you on it you'll then get all sanctimonious and do the standard "who me?" routine.

No wonder Fluffy looks worried.
Click to expand...
:notworthy
 
_Ed_

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
That would be a shame. Think it's important to have a thread like this.
 
Johnners

Johnners

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Pratters, kinda obvious you were either seeking a reaction, or at the very least you knew the reaction you were going to get posting in the manner that you did, cut it now. GIMH/Burgey, please keep it civil

Re: what prince has just posted, pretty much agree with everything he's saying.

edit: or as ss just said...
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Burgey said:
WAC, honestly.

This from a bloke who reads something he doesn't like then flounces off for a few months. Seriously mate, you need to grow a pair and man up in life.

What a ****ing joke. That'll do me. I can't believe you've got the gall to sit there, no doubt typing with one hand, publicly calling for someone to be perma-banned because of what those blokes did.

You lack perspective, you **** off and sook when it suits you because you can't cop things, then you come back and you post things like you just have there. When someone calls you on it you'll then get all sanctimonious and do the standard "who me?" routine.

No wonder Fluffy looks worried.
Click to expand...
Think we can safely add this to your greatest hits.

Prince EWS said:
Repeated batting is obviously a lot worse than spamming
Click to expand...
Batsmen: PEWS really hates them.

GeraintIsMyHero said:
It's not just because of who it is but the blatant inconsistency that winds me up, though. We hear things are done in the interest of consistency, fact is, baiting constantly in CC is a stain on this forum but you all are afraid to ban for it unless you absolutely have to. To ban two people for two weeks for this is a deadset joke, given that that was the same as Alex got for being constantly provocative and offensive.
Click to expand...
Hmmm yeah. Regardless of his identity, the crew have (unintentionally I'll assume) equated several months of questionable behaviour to a smartarse prank.

Though the flipside (as PEWS said) is defiance of the mods needs to be cracked down upon to provide a deterrent.

I would have preffered the threads deleted to closed though. Six consecutive closed spam threads are more annoying than six open ones. Just delete them and dish out the 7 dayers.
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Burgey said:
WAC, honestly.

This from a bloke who reads something he doesn't like then flounces off for a few months. Seriously mate, you need to grow a pair and man up in life.

What a ****ing joke. That'll do me. I can't believe you've got the gall to sit there, no doubt typing with one hand, publicly calling for someone to be perma-banned because of what those blokes did.

You lack perspective, you **** off and sook when it suits you because you can't cop things, then you come back and you post things like you just have there. When someone calls you on it you'll then get all sanctimonious and do the standard "who me?" routine.

No wonder Fluffy looks worried.
Click to expand...
You have baited me four to five times before but I ignored it as I have always held you in high regard. I have lost all respect for you with that post.

And yes I honestly feel Sledger was lucky not to be perma banned.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Pratters said:
You have baited me four to five times before but I ignored it as I have always held you in high regard. I have lost all respect for you with that post.

And yes I honestly feel Sledger was lucky not to be perma banned.
Click to expand...
If you read it again, perhaps you'll work out that he won't be all that bothered
 
Pratters

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Burgey said:
WAC, honestly.

This from a bloke who reads something he doesn't like then flounces off for a few months. Seriously mate, you need to grow a pair and man up in life.

What a ****ing joke. That'll do me. I can't believe you've got the gall to sit there, no doubt typing with one hand, publicly calling for someone to be perma-banned because of what those blokes did.

You lack perspective, you **** off and sook when it suits you because you can't cop things, then you come back and you post things like you just have there. When someone calls you on it you'll then get all sanctimonious and do the standard "who me?" routine.

No wonder Fluffy looks worried.
Click to expand...
You have baited me four to five times before but I ignored it as I have always held you in high regard. I have lost all respect for you with that post.

And yes I honestly feel Sledger was lucky not to be perma banned. You can differ from my opinion but going off like this is completely unbecoing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top