Lmfao

I'm not going to lie, I most likely wouldn't have infracted that. However the infraction is still warranted because if we allow this it would just give people a loophole to spam (ie. goes to a market thread where OP says only paypal and offers western union knowing the OP doesn't accept it just to raise post count).

 

Staff reserve the right to ban or infract for any unconscionable act. The above rules and associated punishments only apply when the staff can reasonably judge that a user does not deserve some other, perhaps more severe form of punishment for any unconscionable act they might make on the forums.

 

I can't see the original post, so I can't really say what I would have done. Still, it is technically infractable - TJ said he wouldn't make an exception, and therefore asking to be an exception is a pointless request.

As noted somewhere in this thread, the rule exists to prevent users having to sort through a slush of, "I'll do $300 paypal" when they state they will not accept paypal, and from users who go around quick-replying comments for post count without reading the original post.

The official rule that was broken was spamming.

 

His original post was:

Also, no where did TJ say "no exceptions." IWCMORE made a genuine offer to donate to sythe.org and he's punished for it. What the hell? He did not go around posting to get post count.

Which one of these spamming rules did he break? I just can't figure it out.

That's also pretty shitty how the other guy HERE got infracted when he was TOLD by TJ to post. Seriously? Come on.


----

Again, how was his post "unconscionable?" By the wording of the second sentence it sounds like harsher punishments can be given to rule breakers if needed, but it does not say "we'll make up our own freaking rules and infract harshly for the hell of it."

 

loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

I think that's all I have to say... for right now. >:

 

He makes it rather clear that he is not interested in handling donations for those who don't meet his criteria. The "must have" and "I will report you" imply, at least to me, inflexibility.

Spam is any post that offers no meaningful contribution to a thread.

 

TJ does not make the rules of this forum.

How was his post not meaningful? Ffs -_- And what about the guy that TJ told to post on his thread? Why did he receive an infraction?


Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the point of moderators and admins on a website to watch over and make sure nothing bad happens? Right now it just seems like a dictatorship. Why put so much emphasis on punishing members? Don't be like "oh it's to stop post count, people spam to get trusted" because that's crap and doesn't have to do with this situation or most of the punishments given out in general. This staff team could be much better than it is.. Look at cheapassgamer; they don't have many people on staff but they govern their forum fairly and do not punish people for the hell of it.

edit: typo

 

FG4, read my first post again. TJ does not make the rules of this forum, but when the OP of a thread says he won't accept this or that, there's no point in users offering "this or that."

See the above. It's the same reason we infract users for offering a penny for accounts: if it's obvious the OP isn't interested or won't accept something, then the offer has no purpose.

He can dispute it if he disagrees. That's not the topic of this discussion, and I don't know who you're talking about.

It absolutely has to do with the situation. We have specific intentions in mind when we create rules, but we cannot say that the rules apply to some users and not to others. Although mods frequently forgo infractions based on situational considerations, I said - and maintain - that what wcmore did was technically against the rules, and if a mod chose to infract him, they did nothing wrong.

Moreover, the "point" of moderators and admins is not singular. We do watch over the site and make sure nothing 'bad' happens (deleting keyloggers, phishers, banning scammers, etc), but we are also responsible for keeping discussions on-topic, trying to ensure that members are at least somewhat civil to each other, etc. This site is a blackmarket, and many people come here to trade: with that in mind, it is also our job to make that process as simple and effective as we can. If a user doesn't want paypal, and says so, then they shouldn't have to read 5 pages of paypal offers.

Sythe.org has never claimed to be a democracy, though I always laugh when people call it a 'dictatorship'. Either way, if you don't like it, you can leave.

 

Seems like people are looking for excuses to dole out punishments. Maybe that's just my view.

 

He broke a 'TJ' rule not a sythe rule, i don't see how he can be punished through sythe, if TJ refuses to donate for him, because he didn't read his thread, i think that's warranted, but infracting him, seriously?

 

Screw it. There's no getting through to you people.

Too much time wasted already >.<

Exactly.

My point aswell. Although Iwcmore did read his thread and made a genuine offer.

I just think this whole thing is ridiculous, but I'm sure as heck not spending any more time on this...


Best of luck to you, IWCMORE and buyaday.