IKE, Don't spoil it!

[Peerzy]

I don't think he took too kindly to the new admin posting his IP address.

New admin as in IKE or Krohn?

Anyway Paul (Rat Faced) said that mods/admins cannot moderate yet or suspend (VB Rawks don't it)

But IKE said:

So now you know why I banned him instead of moderation.

Which means he did not know you could not moderate/suspend. Or at least it came out that way. So IKE why ban when you could have (as far as you knew) moderated or suspended?

[Yogi]

thats correct

if you read my reply you should understand why i banned him ínstead of a moderation period.

Please, IKE.

You suspended him/his account.

A temp ban is like skating on water............

[{I}{K}{E}]

I'm fine with why he is listed as banned and not moderated, that is clear - there is no alternative.

He made an error in judgement, maybe he wasn't articulate enough in his email to convey that.

The offensive pics were way below the run-of-the-mill rotton.com headless cadavers, about 3 page heights if you're using 1024X768 - it is quite concievable he did not see them since he only meant to link to the top face surgery pic. Which is the case. He probably come across the site using google thus wouldn't have known what the site was about - neither do I actually, and I spent a good 10 mins scrolling. Looking at the frequency of his posts at that time, I'll bet he was there for around 30 seconds only to copy paste he url.

Again, he only linked the whole site so as he wouldn't offend those who didn't want to click. If he'd hotlinked the picture without caring then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Thanks for addressing my original points

If it was a mistake I would like 2 hear that from himself and then I will forgive him.
But what he posted was against the board rules mistake or not.

[manker]

Bujub has had plenty of warnings in the past.

Are you saying that we should only ever warn, and then not actually do anything?

Bujub has already had periods of Moderation...

I'm not saying that, I was trying to get some clarification as things were somewhat obscure. I didn't know Bujub had a high warn level, now I do.

I'm glad that things are out in the open now, as said before members don't have to know everything, to be honest, we don't care about most of the technical stuff, but when one of our friends gets the word "banned' under his name then the mod team should be fully open and frank in their explanations.

It is only my opinion, but I think the majority share it.

[manker]

If it was a mistake I would like 2 hear that from himself and then I will forgive him.
But what he posted was against the board rules mistake or not.

That's fair enough, IKE. I agree

[{I}{K}{E}]

Which means he did not know you could not moderate/suspend. Or at least it came out that way. So IKE why ban when you could have (as far as you knew) moderated or suspended?

As far as I know I can't put members on moderation or suspend them.

---
If he did not had a warning level above 10% on the other board I would not have done this.

[Yogi]

But you can CALL it suspension.

I am getting repetitive.

[{I}{K}{E}]

But you can CALL it suspension.

I am getting repetitive.

I understand you disagree with my action. But you must understand that this was the only option there was at this moment for this user.

[Spicker]

banning for a period of time=suspension...

so just get over it and bujub is not gone forever he will be back so lets just get over it and not fight/discuss this any further?

[Emdee]

Here's an idea. How about a new section that only banned members and mods/admins can see and post in.

That way they can justify themselves in the same sort of roundtable atmosphere as the rest of the board instead of stodgy emails to one particular moderator.