Warnings and Infractions - The Truth

[Suroth]

In the Dispute Forum we are not aloud to "Dispute" Warnings.

Therefor there should be a new subforum for Disputes specifically for Warnings

Expired warnings should also be removable by the mod...(Mods often look at it and automatically give an infraction even if they have expired)
Reason for this:

• Warnings that shouldn't be warnings can lead to Infractions

I am dealing with this problem right not thanks to stupid warnings accusing me of breaking a rule, which I havn't. If a mod gets a chance please read my Dispute thread:

 

[Billyy]

Warnings aren't worth any points, therefore you don't have a need to dispute them.

Simple as that.

Also, even if a warning has expired, say for "spamming" that lets the moderator know that you know what spamming is, and the next time it is seen coming from your account, an infraction is necessary.

 

[Suroth]

Yes but then why is expiration dates on warnings needed??

And warnings lead to infractions, therefor they should be disputable.

Thats like saying "bad boy, no eating in the living room" but what if we didnt eat in the livingroom? and we only receive a warning, then the next time around we do eat in the living room and I receive an infraction?

 

There's no need for this... at all... As Billyy said, there aren't any points involved with Warnings to why dispute them.