Reply to: Flounce by sasguru

[suityou01]

Good post.

But sadly this can all be used as a cop out for not punishing the infractions of your mates and having a plausible excuse.

I have reported 2 posts now which clearly break the T&C's, nothing has happened to those posts at all. I challenge anyone to show me how the posts I reprted didnt break the T&C's in fact I dont even want to quote them as I would likely get in trouble.

see post 24

HTH

[tay]

FaQQer, I think you should give it a rest for the sake of your sanity.

I can see that you are going to be one of those people that end up falling off a cliff because you wanted to know exactly how close to the edge you could safely get.

It is all about people and not machines. People do not fit into exact rules and behaviours.

For example, one poster received a temp ban for his repeated use of a certain word. It was not the word on its own that was the issue.

I am confident that I could regale you all with a tale of me visiting great aunt Annie in the Surrey village of iamaprat, without any fear of incurring an infraction. The poster that received the ban repeatedly used the same word in coloured letters, in a large font size, despite being told not to. It wasn't a particular colour or font size that makes the difference between acceptable and unacceptable, it was his behaviour.

I think he is over it now.

EDIT - Damn profanity filter, you get the point though.

Good post.

But sadly this can all be used as a cop out for not punishing the infractions of your mates and having a plausible excuse.

I have reported 2 posts now which clearly break the T&C's, nothing has happened to those posts at all. I challenge anyone to show me how the posts I reprted didnt break the T&C's in fact I dont even want to quote them as I would likely get in trouble.

[suityou01]

FaQQer, I think you should give it a rest for the sake of your sanity.

I can see that you are going to be one of those people that end up falling off a cliff because you wanted to know exactly how close to the edge you could safely get.

It is all about people and not machines. People do not fit into exact rules and behaviours.

For example, one poster received a temp ban for his repeated use of a certain word. It was not the word on its own that was the issue.

I am confident that I could regale you all with a tale of me visiting great aunt Annie in the Surrey village of iamaprat, without any fear of incurring an infraction. The poster that received the ban repeatedly used the same word in coloured letters, in a large font size, despite being told not to. It wasn't a particular colour or font size that makes the difference between acceptable and unacceptable, it was his behaviour.

I think he is over it now.

EDIT - Damn profanity filter, you get the point though.

IT people (the idiot savants ) don't have people skills
they see a truth table of rules to follow
I agree with everything you said, but geek pedants are the worst kind

[Gonzo]

All we have to go on are the current T&Cs. Either they apply, or they don't. Just because they are in need of an overhaul, should not render the current terms and conditions irrelevant - or does it?

I don't think it's silly to ask for clarification of whether the rules apply or not. FWIW, I don't believe that the rules need to be changed.

FaQQer, I think you should give it a rest for the sake of your sanity.

I can see that you are going to be one of those people that end up falling off a cliff because you wanted to know exactly how close to the edge you could safely get.

It is all about people and not machines. People do not fit into exact rules and behaviours.

For example, one poster received a temp ban for his repeated use of a certain word. It was not the word on its own that was the issue.

I am confident that I could regale you all with a tale of me visiting great aunt Annie in the Surrey village of iamaprat, without any fear of incurring an infraction. The poster that received the ban repeatedly used the same word in coloured letters, in a large font size, despite being told not to. It wasn't a particular colour or font size that makes the difference between acceptable and unacceptable, it was his behaviour.

I think he is over it now.

EDIT - Damn profanity filter, you get the point though.

[TheFaQQer]

I'd heard sas had formed a breakaway board and was PMing posters to join him. Hence no Dim,oracle,xen et al

As long as they have inline images - I'm in

[cojak]

I'd heard sas had formed a breakaway board and was PMing posters to join him. Hence no Dim,oracle,xen et al

Good luck to the mods...

[TheFaQQer]

Please stop being silly.

All we have to go on are the current T&Cs. Either they apply, or they don't. Just because they are in need of an overhaul, should not render the current terms and conditions irrelevant - or does it?

I don't think it's silly to ask for clarification of whether the rules apply or not. FWIW, I don't believe that the rules need to be changed.

[NotAllThere]

Does that mean that they no longer apply? GREAT!!

Please stop being silly.

Will the new rules be applied retrospectively, so that any user who has broken one of the new rules will get a ban, even though his/her post was in keeping with the rules at the time it was made?

I would have thought that even the hardest of thinking forum contributors here would understand that most of us consider BN66 and the like to be completely deplorable. So I think I'm safe in saying "NO".

[SizeZero]

I thought it had been established that the rules are due for an overhaul?

Will the new rules be applied retrospectively, so that any user who has broken one of the new rules will get a ban, even though his/her post was in keeping with the rules at the time it was made?

[TheFaQQer]

I thought it had been established that the rules are due for an overhaul?

Does that mean that they no longer apply? GREAT!!

For future reference, I'd just like to draw your attention to the following CUK rule:

It is against our policy to delete threads after they have replies

[NotAllThere]

I thought it had been established that the rules are due for an overhaul?

[TheFaQQer]

I'd just like to remind you of CUK rule number 4:

4. Do not stray from the discussion topic.

[Bunk]

I'm not surprised ... it was set to the "Evil swine, bwa-ha-ha-ha" setting.

It's now on the "Give 'em a chance!" setting.

Yay,

[RichardCranium]

I tried to register but I got the captcha wrong

I'm not surprised ... it was set to the "Evil swine, bwa-ha-ha-ha" setting.

It's now on the "Give 'em a chance!" setting.

[Mich the Tester]

The Chutney Spoon forum would benefit from a 2nd user...

4th!