1010102 Deleted

[Hryvatia]

Now I'm not trying to counter any MODLY POWAH here, just wondering what happened as it's all quite muddled in that thread and no explanation was given, which I had believed to have been a de facto (if not de jure) practice by mods.

Deat here.

I'm presuming it has something to do with this post since the previous banter was also participated in (and therefore I presume condoned by) Kat.

Cheers,
Hryv[atia]

[Reploid Productions]

The short version is that 1010102 has a history of mod warnings against him since last year, and his particularly obnoxious, trolling, flaming, pagebreak-attempts and such on the new forum finally nudged him over the edge for a DEAT.

[Hryvatia]

The short version is that 1010102 has a history of mod warnings against him since last year, and his particularly obnoxious, trolling, flaming, pagebreak-attempts and such on the new forum finally nudged him over the edge for a DEAT.

That's quite fair enough, if indeed this 'tougher' policy is to continue to be exercised.

Could I request that providing explanation for actions of moderation such as 'deleting' (i.e. judgements of greater consequence) be made common practice by all mods? As such actions are normally announced, for example in the aforementioned incident involving 1010102 and Scolo, it would make sense to do so, especially if the 'illegal' content has already been removed by modedit.

[EDIT:Might I also add that my original question was not fully answered, my apologies if it was vague. Beyond a previous history of rule infractions what was the exact reason he was deleted this time (i.e. his final violation)?

I ask because if being 'obnoxious' is actionable our ranks will become considerably thin! Otherwise as I have previously mentioned Kat (amongst others of unequal stature) was playing along too. Cheers again.]

[Naivetry]

Before that thread, though, there was this one: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=109

[Erastide]

The short version is that 1010102 has a history of mod warnings against him since last year, and his particularly obnoxious, trolling, flaming, pagebreak-attempts and such on the new forum finally nudged him over the edge for a DEAT.

[EDIT:Might I also add that my original question was not fully answered, my apologies if it was vague. Beyond a previous history of rule infractions what was the exact reason he was deleted this time (i.e. his final violation)?

She told you right there what it was for. I believe most of it was edited out, but Nai linked you to a thread that hasn't had the pictures taken out.

[Ardchoille]

Hryvatia, if what you're getting at is, "Will I , Hryvatia, get DEATed if I post a pagebreaker/act obnoxious?", the answer is probably "No". Not the first time, anyway.

Players who generally stick within the rules (y'know, act like reasonable beings towards other players) don't get kicked out for just being dumb/making mistakes/flaring up a bit.

Even if it is their fault -- like when somebody with a previously spotless record suddenly starts rulebreaking all over the forums -- mods may decide to ban them to give them time to cool off, rather than DEAT them.

But when you've got someone whose post records show repeated rule infractions -- when someone makes it clear that they know the rules, but they're deliberately breaking them -- it gets to a point where the next infraction they incur, whatever it is, is going to be the one to trigger their exit. So it will sometimes look as if a player copped it for something others have got away with, when in fact it was their "rules don't apply to me" approach, not the individual offence, that lowered the boom.

1010102's final goof wasn't "page-breaking" or "obnoxiousness". It was his making clear that his rulebreaking was conscious, deliberate and likely to continue. The usual dummy-spit.

[Hryvatia]

1010102's final goof wasn't "page-breaking" or "obnoxiousness". It was his making clear that his rulebreaking was conscious, deliberate and likely to continue. The usual dummy-spit.

I do not contest this whatsoever, I should make clear. The purpose of this thread was more to [respectfully] request that immediate explanations for actions such as 'deletion' be made common practice by all mods. I believe considering that such actions are normally announced as was done so in this case, it would make sense to do so in the future?

I realise as has been previously stated that the forums are no DEMOCRACEH, however I simply believe this would be beneficial to all.

Cheers,
~Hryv

[Scolopendra]

I believe considering that such actions are normally announced as was done so in this case, it would make sense to do so in the future?

That's fair enough, and it probably should be SOP. That being said, the reasons given may not be in extreme detail and may be limited to one or two lines.

[Hryvatia]

That's fair enough, and it probably should be SOP. That being said, the reasons given may not be in extreme detail and may be limited to one or two lines.

Excellent, and thanks for your time.