Wow, so much fun stuff to reply to, where shall I start?
Everyone has understood and respected that you have your feelings against the rules - now can you respect that everyone doesn't like being terrorized and insulted (like PN) or want to read about MD's fantasies?
So now I've "terrorized and insulted" PN? Ha, good one! So now pointing out when User A harasses and insults User B counts as harassment of User A?
Examples of me "terrorizing" PN, por favor?
a) Her PM to Hollywood, I wouldn't call terrorizing (unless Hollywood was really scared, which I doubt)- and she didn't edit his post about it!
Oh, stop trying to weasel out of everything, will you? Telling someone to edit a post
which did not violate any rules, along with an implied legal threat, is harassment. It's a bullying attempt. The fact that it was funny and didn't work doesn't make it any less of an attempt.
That was her theory. A well written one I might say. If she writes about something, she does it well, not like a certain someone, who just mentions his theories here or there without any base.
She's welcome to her theories-- which were baseless by the way; "because I say so" is not proof-- but I would hope she is not welcome to insult and harass everyone who disagrees with her. That very thread with her "well written" theory being a case in point. Anyone who dared say they so much as disagreed got an ad hominem smackdown. That's appropriate behavior? What about "before flaming new users (aka newbies) think of yourself when you started"?
And yeah, I consider quoting the exact text that darkcat was banned for to be a clear provocation and a flaunting of one's "above the law" admin status. Let's put it this way: can you imagine how all hell would have broken loose if I (or, god forbid, MiscastDice) had posted the same thing?
Umm if you have followed this topic carefully, MD has already made at least one troll-comment... Did I say something about it? (Well, I did... But I didn't do anything)
And now MD is banned, and ferret is allowed to go on making snide personal attacks at him. I'm not saying MD's ban was not earned, breaking the rules is breaking the rules. But the double-standard is painfully obvious. I thought the rules apply to staff as well?
Yup, because you were getting restless with lack of action from our side. And I had heard opinions on the rules during the previous 8 days, so...
Given that everyone-- staff included-- has publicly mocked the photo disclaimer rule from the moment it was implemented, I HIGHLY doubt that many opinions were heard (or acknowledged) about that rule, for one. It all adds up to looking like you and PN rammed the final version of the rules through with little to no interest in staff feedback. I hope you can prove me wrong.
And hey, great! Now there's yet a fifth conflicting story for why the new rules were created at all!
1. They're there because of PN's behavior.
2. They have nothing to do with PN, they're there because Hypno always meant to make new rules anyway and the timing is just an incredible coincidence.
3. They're there because PN told Hypno he could get sued if he doesn't make new rules.
4. They're there to keep normal users from turning into trolls, nevermind that this had never happened before and the "trolling" users are only "trolling" out of anger at the new rules.
5. (NEW!) They're there because, months ago, darkcat called PN a puta, nevermind that there were already rules in place to handle that and the majority of the new rules have nothing to do with putas whatsoever.Fantastic.
