warning deleted becuase of good behavior. .

[Demonic]

I was the one who removed Blue Ninja's warnings. He had five previously, which should have been enough to get him perma-banned months ago. He had some constructive and nice posts over the mapping section, so I cut them down.

It's not about how much you post, it's about WHAT you post. We're not machines either: none of us is going to keep in mind how long have your warnings been hanging there. If your posts contribute, we will remove the warnings, as the sign that we're noticing a change in behaviour since you got them. Period.

[Will]

well, I agree with a 4 year old here... don't you just hate when someone posts like 100 posts a day. And he isn't even an administrator or anything.

So we regulate number of posts per member? That would be greeted with open arms... >.>

I'm not saying that we should make a limit or something, just that sometimes, half of those posts are bullcrap. Of course we who frequent these forums know who is who, new members could see someone with a huge amount of posts posting shit and they could follow the example.

[Laser Guy]

I was the one who removed Blue Ninja's warnings. He had five previously, which should have been enough to get him perma-banned months ago. He had some constructive and nice posts over the mapping section, so I cut them down.

It's not about how much you post, it's about WHAT you post. We're not machines either: none of us is going to keep in mind how long have your warnings been hanging there. If your posts contribute, we will remove the warnings, as the sign that we're noticing a change in behaviour since you got them. Period.

Thanks for telling me after I had my 1st warning for more than half a year -_-

[Twistkill]

Thanks for telling me after I had my 1st warning for more than half a year -_-

Honestly, it should be self-evident to you that you need to change when you get the warning in the first place. That's the primary reason for it anyway... its message is "Hey you. You did something bad. Change your attitude."

[a-4-year-old]

If people are making really high number of posts per day, a red flag should go up for the moderators just saying "hey, it looks like this guy might be spamming"

[LeetFidle]

well i would like to know why warned me.

[a-4-year-old]

Quoting me in your signature is a death sentence.

[Psycho]

Dont you get a PM when you are warned?

[Graham]

Dont you get a PM when you are warned?

You should get told either in topic or in PM. However sometimes people forget.

[BondJamesBond]

Should create a warning system based on warnings per time ratio or warnings per posts ratio.

[Graham]

Should create a warning system based on warnings per time ratio or warnings per posts ratio.

So when people are about to be banned they just don't post for a while? That kind of system is way to flawed.

[a-4-year-old]

Should create a warning system based on warnings per time ratio or warnings per posts ratio.

So when people are about to be banned they just don't post for a while? That kind of system is way to flawed.

Well if someone goes say 300 posts without getting a warning it should auto reduce one warning.

[Graham]

Should create a warning system based on warnings per time ratio or warnings per posts ratio.

So when people are about to be banned they just don't post for a while? That kind of system is way to flawed.

Well if someone goes say 300 posts without getting a warning it should auto reduce one warning.

If they really have improved it wouldn't take 300 posts to tell...

[a-4-year-old]

Well the system we have now (3-6 months) is lots more than 300 posts

Besides, change can be short lived.

[Graham]

Well the system we have now (3-6 months) is lots more than 300 posts

Besides, change can be short lived.

We don't have a system... most people just learn from the first two warnings. Some people like you don't. Those people get banned. Seems like thats creating a friendlier atmosphere to me.

[a-4-year-old]

I took a look:

Warning I: August 2 2006
Warning II: August 19 2006
Warning III: October 26 2007

It speaks for itself.

[mxyzptlk]

I took a look:

Warning I: August 2 2006
Warning II: August 19 2006
Warning III: October 26 2007

It speaks for itself.

Why would you hate someone if their fat? I think anyone is cool just as long as their not a total asshole.

that policy sucks, you suck. Go die.

Speaks for itself.

[a-4-year-old]

thats exactly why we have the fisting forum.

[Graham]

thats exactly why we have the fisting forum.

You post like that outside the fisting forum though. It's stupidly obvious you will never get a warning removed... I have no idea how you cannot see that...

[a-4-year-old]

thats exactly why we have the fisting forum.

You post like that outside the fisting forum though. It's stupidly obvious you will never get a warning removed... I have no idea how you cannot see that...

Example?
I keep my flaming for the flaming area. in fact; I seem to be one of the few people that use it for what it is for.