Who's been banned and why? Your right to reply.

[WTFH]

Humour is hard work.

Hard work? Your flow seems to be:

1. Find joke by WTFH from a few months ago.
2. Ctrl + A
3. Ctrl + C
4. Ctrl + V

[vetran]

Hard work? Your flow seems to be:

1. Find joke by WTFH from a few months ago.
2. Ctrl + A
3. Ctrl + C
4. Ctrl + V

The hard work is finding one you posted that was funny

[Zigenare]

Some of us have never been in a position to know how it actually works...

Have you always been such an underachiever?

[Zigenare]

Some of us have been banned incorrectly.

Sometimes I overstepped the mark. Humour is hard work.

Stop whinging, suck it up, move on.

[LondonManc]

The hard work is finding one you posted that was funny

We're still waiting. HTHBIDI

[eek]

It seems that NAT has screwed up

Looking at the list of bans - BR14 was banned for 1 month from July 9th which means he should have been able to return on August 9th Jainnode joined on August 17th - which is 8 days after the ban should have been lifted - so given the recorded ban length the creation of a sockie account seems fine to me (and probably most other people).

And I say that even though I don't even like the poster.

[NickFitz]

One could argue that if a one month ban was actually a one month ban and not - due to either incompetence or malice - a six month ban, then the user in question might not feel the need to create a temporary sockpuppet account after the one month ban was supposed to have expired

[eek]

One could argue that if a one month ban was actually a one month ban and not - due to either incompetence or malice - a six month ban, then the user in question might not feel the need to create a temporary sockpuppet account after the one month ban was supposed to have expired

Given NAT managed to ban himself once I would go for incompetency but it's possible that his incompetency is fake and it was just malice.

[ladymuck]

I can understand said person not being everyone's best friend but I do think the banning of their original account needs to be checked to make sure it really was for a month and not accidentally set for a much longer period.

[eek]

I can understand said person not being everyone's best friend but I do think the banning of their original account needs to be checked to make sure it really was for a month and not accidentally set for a much longer period.

The entire purpose of the "Who has been banned" thread is to ensure Mods write down what their intentions were because Mods have been known to do things incompetently.....