Just what does it take to get banned around here?

[ZephyrGlaze]

Seeing as how I'm a hair's width from being banned from this board, I'd like to know what kind of standards are being applied as to what kind of post constitutes a warning point. The FAQ doesn't spell out very well what (besides flaming) will nab me a point or four.
I'm not asking for any of my points to be removed; I'm just asking what requirements, if any, a post has to have to constitute a point, as there doesn't seem to be a consensus among the mods, or even across different boards as to what will get you in trouble.
The mods finally came to a consensus on the opinion that "posting for emphasis" counts as post-whorring (it would've been nice for them to announce this before they started handing out points for such a post.
It doesn't feel like there's a large enough emphasis placed on the difference between posting a thread, and making a post in a thread. A rather notorious user in the chit-chat forums posts a dozen threads a week. On a good week one or two of them won't be a blatant attempt to up his post count or seek acceptance (lack of respect for other posters aside). He joined about the same time as me, and in that time has managed to garner a whole point from creating the majority of the threads you have to scroll by to get to any content (albiet he also started almost half of the good threads).
It makes no sense to me that creating a completely inane, out-of-forum, and incomprehensible topic might just get it's starter a point, where screwing around withing part of a topic will net eight points. (Which is pretty funny, because it was in an otherwise worthless thread already).

Again, I'm not asking for any of my points to be removed. Each one of them had at least an arguable basis for them to be given to me. I'd just like an little more explanation than "post-whorring" when I get the point, and I'd like to know what rules the mods use to judge a post (if there are any).
A little consistency would be nice.

[not dryad]

What does it take to get banned around here? Nanashi seems to be the master of getting banned with style. You could ask him.
_________________

[Mr. Deus]

ARGH. You made me click a chit-chat link.

Look, simple answer: If you want retards by the truckload, keep posting in chit-chat.
If you want asshats and a retard or three, stick to random chat.

[Thomas Hobbes]

To get banned, you need a point total of nine.
_________________

"I am about to take my last voyage, a great leap in the dark."

| Pics | Play-Asia |

[Spike]

If you have a question about a specific warn, ask the mod who gave it to you. If you don't know which mod gave it to you, ask any mod and they can tell you who did.

Personally, I don't want super strict rules on what constitutes something (let's take postwhoring as an example). I think that a good guideline is better. For example, saying "Needlessly making a post that contributes little or nothing to the thread." A one smiley post would fit that as well as something totally off topic. But if we get too specific about it by saying something like "Having a post that is 3 words or less, or a one emoticon post" and have that be it then problems arise. Not only can you have a post that contributes that is only 2 words long, but that definition doesn't catch everything. People will figure out new ways to be idiots, so it's better to have general guidelines IMO.

But again, if you have questions on a specific warn, ask the mod that warned you.
_________________

[ZephyrGlaze]

Thanks, King. I was just asking for the rules you mods use in general when judging a post. The posts I linked were only as examples.

Another thought that comes to mind: I think appropriateness or uselfulness to the thread shouldn't be the only factor. Stoopid Baka's answer, for example, while not at all helpful, was funny. I, as a reader of this MB don't feel that m time was wasted in reading his post, but a mod on a bad day could very easily give him a point for it.

[Tomo_kun]

To spike (I dont understand your new screen name...). You said that if we have a problem with our warnings, we should contact the person who gave it to us, right? I tried PM'ing SHERL0Q, but, he never responded, and I had a good explanation. What should I do in this case?


EDIT: I should mention that I ended up finding out why I got the points (As in, what the hell tubgirl is) three weeks after I received them (saying I posted this). I didn't realize I had posted this picture, but it was someones picture for too much bandwidth use.
_________________

Cutriss wrote:

FLCL, God of Gods wrote: Uh... so when do we get the porn forum? If you can't find porn on the Internet, you're not trying.

[Cutriss]

[Tobias Preener]

john bono, i REALLY hope youre not talking about me
_________________

Ned Diggers wrote:

Everytime someone frick quotes one of my frick godly posts and places it in there signature I have to change my name. I don't want any of you NERDS ruining my E-Rep by being 'friends' with me.

Brawl FC (PM me): 0989-1391-5541

[ZephyrGlaze]

[Supa Dupa Fly {FSF}]

Is there any way you can get "unbanned?" Like after a couple of months you have another chance?

[Cutriss]

[legend of zig~Rq$T_LCK]

[Tomo_kun]

[sherl0k]

Tomo_Kun, I've removed the points. Sorry about that.
_________________

[quote:ed1f6848c5=\\\"jaeness\\\"]get your change from obama, he apparently has tons of it.[/quote]

[Tomo_kun]

[ZephyrGlaze]

One thing I don't really think I got an answer on, is why it's almost impossible to get points for creating a worthless thread, but saying something only a fraction as worthless in said thread is a fifth of a banning. I would like to hear the general reasoning behind not tossing out points to users like Shiki, Max'erAA, and boss matsumoto (there are many others, and these three only represent a small fraction of the bad threads posted on this board, but they are undeniably the worst offenders) never seem to trip a single point?
I guess it wouldn't bother me if you guys (the mods) weren't so strict with anything remotely post-whoring or being off topic, while completely ignoring most of the list of point-gaining infractions.
It feels like the worst kinds of posts for this board go on ignored (those that clog most of the reasonably large forums) while minor offenders are dealt with in an extreme manner.
_________________

I remember forum signatures. Do you guys remember forum signatures?

[not dryad]

I, too, agree that excessively making pointless threads should be a warnable offense. It just wastes bandwidth.
_________________

[Cutriss]

The problem lies in tracking. People run amok all over the boards, and we generally only notice a problem when it gets big enough for one of us in particular to notice. We aren't a collective intelligence, and so if Poster #23423 makes an excessive number of crap posts in, say, Imaging, and then posts a crap thread in Arcade, I would never know he's got a bad rep already because I simply haven't seen him engaging in misbehavior.

Ultimately, there's also the fact that it's a "discussion board", and thus people are inclined to discuss things. Even if they've been discussed to death repeatedly. Why punish people for not being here for a previous discussion? The search really only works on informational topics. For stuff that's just mindless banter (eg - 90% of RC), you really can't search on it.

I'll generally only get on someone's case if it's within the two most recent pages of a forum, or if it's something that's just blatantly obviously covered somewhere else.
_________________

Sentient Mode is capable...

[Spike]