Moderator: Community Team
Minister Masket wrote:Sooooo, what's your point? If indeed you actually have one.
wicked wrote:LMAO. I suggest you get the facts first. Here you are, since you asked so nicely...
Iliad's past punishments: SEVERAL warnings, 24 hr ban, 5 day ban, 2 week ban
Since his last infraction was in November, I was lenient and went with a 3 day ban.
wicked wrote:LMAO. I suggest you get the facts first. Here you are, since you asked so nicely...
Iliad's past punishments: SEVERAL warnings, 24 hr ban, 5 day ban, 2 week ban
Since his last infraction was in November, I was lenient and went with a 3 day ban.
seems fair to me. persoanlly I would have given him a perm ban.wicked wrote:LMAO. I suggest you get the facts first. Here you are, since you asked so nicely...
Iliad's past punishments: SEVERAL warnings, 24 hr ban, 5 day ban, 2 week ban
Since his last infraction was in November, I was lenient and went with a 3 day ban.
JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:seems fair to me. persoanlly I would have given him a perm ban.wicked wrote:LMAO. I suggest you get the facts first. Here you are, since you asked so nicely...
Iliad's past punishments: SEVERAL warnings, 24 hr ban, 5 day ban, 2 week ban
Since his last infraction was in November, I was lenient and went with a 3 day ban.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
is it standard procedure that mods have a look at how long it has been since the last infraction and maybe take into account the many months of good behaviour ?wicked wrote:LMAO. I suggest you get the facts first. Here you are, since you asked so nicely...
Iliad's past punishments: SEVERAL warnings, 24 hr ban, 5 day ban, 2 week ban
Since his last infraction was in November, I was lenient and went with a 3 day ban.
Looks like Iliad got off really easy with this one.
Twill wrote:You have seriously crossed a line on the reminisco trolling front.
Curmudgeonx wrote:Wrestler1ump opined:Looks like Iliad got off really easy with this one.
Thank you Mr. Obvious.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
wicked wrote:I'll respond once and that's it. It doesn't matter if you throw a wink after a flame, it's still a flame. If all anyone had to do to get away with flaming is throw a smiley/wink after it, don't you see how that would be abused? I don't care what you call me, or anyone else, as long as it's done in flame wars. Welcome back, enjoy your mafia.
wicked wrote:I'll respond once and that's it. It doesn't matter if you throw a wink after a flame, it's still a flame. If all anyone had to do to get away with flaming is throw a smiley/wink after it, don't you see how that would be abused?
Ironic, given that you use the flame+wink method at least once a week yourself.wicked wrote:It doesn't matter if you throw a wink after a flame, it's still a flame.
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users