And if you honestly think imitating gimmick accounts to make complaint threads and insulting rating threads is 'constructive criticism', then you're being ridiculous.
As a moderator or administrator, certain privileges are necessary in order to maintain the smooth running of the website. Such privileges include having the knowledge of which accounts belong to a specific user. This is necessary in order to track past history of those specific users. Whilst understanding that a user has made a new account, and has decided to unlink it prevent being tracked, they are inclined to disclose this information upon request. This is especially true when such users are provoking a volatile atmosphere on the forums with their copious threads which undermine the volunteers who are responsible for moderating the website.
I saw it as more seeing to them being held responsible for their actions but I guess from your position any lack of complete respect or submission is undermining lol!
As a moderator or administrator, certain privileges are necessary in order to maintain the smooth running of the website. Such privileges include having the knowledge of which accounts belong to a specific user. This is necessary in order to track past history of those specific users. Whilst understanding that a user has made a new account, and has decided to unlink it prevent being tracked, they are inclined to disclose this information upon request. This is especially true when such users are provoking a volatile atmosphere on the forums with their copious threads which undermine the volunteers who are responsible for moderating the website.
I saw it as more seeing to them being held responsible for their actions but I guess from your position any lack of complete respect or submission is undermining lol!
deletedover 8 years
Well actually I'm pretty certain lucid is strongly against users alternate accounts being outted.
It is my opinion that mods have the best interest of the community in mind. That being said, I actually tend to agree with the user base here, walrus, whale and narwhal have done nothing wrong.
I think Roadman will act without bias or pride and overturn this decision.
Alternatively, people could have just been more cooperative in informing the administrator who they were, rather than making a thread saying I was making threats, simply because I was asking for the main account.
This is all well and good to say they should have "co-operated". Unfortunately though, when you make ultimatums such as, "you have 10 minutes or you are banned" that qualifies as a threat.
Surely this could have been handled better. Also there was a conflicting message as other mods such as Gerry spoke in support of not banning the accounts, this may have caused people to believe the threat was empty.
Those threats came after the thread was made, and the PMs were ignored.
ya cody's pretty wrong about that, anti-admin/mod content isn't censored and shouldn't be. it's always been common for unknown/unlinked accounts to be asked for main accounts if they appear to be banned users
Is it also common that they are banned when they provide this information, and then are unbanned when that information is brought to the public?
deletedover 8 years
Well lying about your main isn't banable at all, unless you're a banned user but walrus doesn't seem like a banned user at all!!
As a moderator or administrator, certain privileges are necessary in order to maintain the smooth running of the website. Such privileges include having the knowledge of which accounts belong to a specific user. This is necessary in order to track past history of those specific users. Whilst understanding that a user has made a new account, and has decided to unlink it prevent being tracked, they are inclined to disclose this information upon request. This is especially true when such users are provoking a volatile atmosphere on the forums with their copious threads which undermine the volunteers who are responsible for moderating the website.
ya cody's pretty wrong about that, anti-admin/mod content isn't censored and shouldn't be. it's always been common for unknown/unlinked accounts to be asked for main accounts if they are suspected of being banned users
deletedover 8 years
It is my opinion that mods have the best interest of the community in mind. That being said, I actually tend to agree with the user base here, walrus, whale and narwhal have done nothing wrong.
I think Roadman will act without bias or pride and overturn this decision.
Alternatively, people could have just been more cooperative in informing the administrator who they were, rather than making a thread saying I was making threats, simply because I was asking for the main account.
This is all well and good to say they should have "co-operated". Unfortunately though, when you make ultimatums such as, "you have 10 minutes or you are banned" that qualifies as a threat.
Surely this could have been handled better. Also there was a conflicting message as other mods such as Gerry spoke in support of not banning the accounts, this may have caused people to believe the threat was empty.
pretty sure you getting banned had more to do with you lying about who you are than with you being annoying. though i'm sure they found that to be quite annoying.
- I was not a well known user in the past - My main, which had like 10 friends, I deleted - BEET is now my main
Kind of funny because now Roadman is saying
I don't know why you couldn't have been more genuine and co-operative when I first asked you for your main. I will unban WildNarwhal, but you never needed to disclose this publicly.
Alternatively, people could have just been more cooperative in informing the administrator who they were, rather than making a thread saying I was making threats, simply because I was asking for the main account.
deletedover 8 years
i dont know what walrus did but here's my opinion anyways
pretty sure you getting banned had more to do with you lying about who you are than with you being annoying. though i'm sure they found that to be quite annoying.