Originally posted by STANGIf you could refer me to a good pornographic site, I'd appreciate it.
You're exaggerating what I was doing recently and should not have been banned for. Moreover, a "moderator" intentionally changed a copy of a statement that he had made to include an implication that I was referring people to a pornographic site.
Originally posted by XanthosNZThe closest I came to 'spamming' threads was around X-Mas / New Year when I was digusted by celebrations whilst children in Iraq are dieing drinking their own waste or going through the agony of burns and limbs blown off or trauma of seeing violence to others.
Which bit did I exaggerate?
I got banned at that time and ceased to 'spam' but gone banned again for including a reference to a web-site showing a picture of a dead child.
If it is OK for children to see or experience that first hand, then why is it not OK to show a picture to nations who caused it ?!?!?.
Originally posted by XanthosNZIt was no more an accusation than these comments from a "moderator". Why would the "moderator" rephrase the comment other than to be defammatory ???
What amazes me is that STANG's blatent accusation against me hasn't been moderated yet.
*** "MODERATOR'S" COMMENT ***
you were not suspended from the forums because of your views, you were suspended because the way you expressed them was selfish and detrimental to the forums, and you refused to stop despite being asked repeatedly. Why detrimental?
1) flooding - you were opening multiple threads on the same topic, often with the same content. Flooding unnaturally skews the forums to what one user thinks is important at the exclusion of others, making the forums less appealing to most.
2)spamming - you were repeatedly posting your message in totally unrelated threads, which has the effect of disrupting these threads and often grinding them to a halt with people asking you to stop. Again, this reduces everyone elses enjoyment of the forums.
3) posting a deceptive link - your repeated advertising of a link that claimed to show RHP ratings but was really a political statement was not welcome. Just as if the owner of "RHP faces" changed the link to show aborted foetus' to support his anti abortion feelings this is not welcome. If you had been up front about the sites content (including changing the deceptive URL) and had not spammed by posted it repeatedly there would have been no issue.
These are the reasons you were banned from the forums before. They still stand and if you persist you will be banned again.
Regards
Jon
*** "MODERATOR'S REPHRASED COMMENT ***
3) posting deceptive link(s) - posting URLs that lionk to material other than stated, or that link to sites that could be damaging to users (eg. to porn sites that people could then view at work & get in trouble)
STANG is a serial offender in all 3 of these. He's currently banned again not for his views but for the way he expresses them,
Originally posted by STANGHe gave an example of a type of damaging link. He didn't say you did post a link to a porn site he gave an example.
It was no more an accusation than these comments from a "moderator". Why would the "moderator" rephrase the comment other than to be defammatory ???
*** "MODERATOR'S" COMMENT ***
you were not suspended from the forums because of your views, you were suspended because the way you expressed them was selfish and detrimental to the forums, and you ref ...[text shortened]... 3 of these. He's currently banned again not for his views but for the way he expresses them,
He may have decided to rephrase because his first attempt was rather long and confusing to those who seem to lack reading comprehension (such as yourself).
Who knows.
All I know is that I don't appreciate being called a cheater because of some percieved slight a moderator gave you.
Originally posted by XanthosNZSorry but you should have researched my very first posts on this site before making your own public conclusions.
He gave an example of a type of damaging link. He didn't say you did post a link to a porn site he gave an example.
He may have decided to rephrase because his first attempt was rather long and confusing to those who seem to lack reading comprehension (such as yourself).
Who knows.
All I know is that I don't appreciate being called a cheater because of some percieved slight a moderator gave you.