what about a type of system, where forum users can rank the worthiness of a post?

If for instance a thread does not further the more noble goals such as the worlds longest run on sentence, or discuss Yakov Smirnoff the Russian Comedian then it can be ranked as a "Kaenash" or even higher threat.

This gets the "no life" warning.

I thought it would be considered a "Kaenash", why do you want to escalate it, O mighty Persecutor?

Waaaaaaaah! People don't like my threads!

Also, acccording to your system a kaenash thread is useful. This looks alot more like no life to me. I liked you better before when you just started a thread everytime you saw something shiny. Keep your eyes on the prize. If you just hang in there and keep up at what you do others will accept you soon enough.

well by 'useful', it means that there is no distinction between the content that anyone else posts, other than the fact that I started it.

The 'green', 'useful' posts, for people to post pictures of someones vacation, or talk about what they wore for halloween. you know..for 'people with lives'.

Its unlikely anything will change with you every five seconds yelling how I am the Osama Bin Laden when you see a post of mine and calling for bans/deletes.

why don't you take your own advice?

I don't understand what you're trying to achieve with these displays of childish petulance. You're not going to win anyone round acting like this.

Congratulations. All the problems you seem to have with the stripcreator forums are now solved.

assuming there's not something i don't know, like hacking or spamming or whatever, it's weak to ban somebody without a warning. tell him to move it to Fights go Here and if he doesn't, then ban him. just an outright banning is fucked

and i love crabby, but he was as much an instigator as Kaenash, but Kaenesh gets banned.

just seems like a warning would have been the appropriate step, consistent with what's been done in the past

quote:

---

assuming there's not something i don't know, like hacking or spamming or whatever, it's weak to ban somebody without a warning. tell him to move it to Fights go Here and if he doesn't, then ban him. just an outright banning is fucked

and i love crabby, but he was as much an instigator as Kaenash, but Kaenesh gets banned.

just seems like a warning would have been the appropriate step, consistent with what's been done in the past

---

Did I miss something? crabby's response here does not seem agnostic. In fact, the last sentence, to me, seems encouraging.

quote:

---

weak to ban somebody without a warning

---

quote:

---

Did I miss something? crabby's response here does not seem agnostic. In fact, the last sentence, to me, seems encouraging.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

weak to ban somebody without a warning

---

I agree. I'd actually say it's "unfair" or even "wrong" instead of just "weak."

People don't usually get banned for behavior in just one thread or just one instance. When people get out of hand, warnings are usually given to them by PM. I assure you, Kaenash had had plenty of them. The final say is given to Brad, however, who unfortunately is the one who will hve to get any e-mails if Kaenash wants to appeal his sentence.

---

Just a suggestion: Let this topic die and be forgotten.