dragonshardz

As soon as you start talking about the "SJW rabbit hole", you become exactly the kind of person who should leave anyway. Bye! I'm dumb and didn't realize how old this post was.

There was never a peace agreement.

I enjoy how you insist on saying "we" like there is anyone else in your micro. Also lmao at you thinking you did any appreciable damage the last time we locked you down and double lmao at expecting a fair fight.

Generous would be if moderators could give you timeouts as applicable to the context of the offense, instead of a blind policy of seven strikes. Having a rigid policy is counterproductive, as it allows canny repeat offenders to just barely skirt the line and continue to get away with being a negative influence on the community.

Regardless of Noctis' derail, I would still like an answer to my questions earlier, please? @Alex? I feel that one of the challenges currently faced by the moderation team is that the process is a black box to most users. They report a post, and then there's no visible record of what, if any, action was taken. One thing that I know helps cultivate a positive environment and opinion of moderation teams is a public record of the offenses and actions taken, sort of a rap sheet. This would cleanly avert any instances of people mistakenly thinking they were warned multiple times for the same post, as the moderation team would be able to point confused users to the public rap sheet for anyone as the canonical record of why, when, and how strongly they were thwacked with a rolled-up newspaper.

Again, if you have nothing relevant to post, consider not posting.

Goons leadership doesn't have as tight of a rein on us as you think. And we're not going anywhere.

If you don't have anything relevant to say, consider saying nothing.

Previous reports on this subject ruled that one removal followed by one new embargo in a 24 hour period does not constitute spam. Reference:

I read through the opening paragraph and my eyes glazed over. Planes are fine. GC is fine. Long wars of attrition are fine.

Why should he be the special case who gets two accounts? One at least ought to be disabled, since literally nobody else gets to have two accounts. Sort of related to the subject of warning points, why are the punishments for warning points so clearly outlined and why do they escalate so quickly? It seems to me that it removes a lot of flexibility from the moderation staff, as it means that someone can either get a warning for a fairly minor offense and get muted for just over two weeks, or a person who is sufficiently canny can just skirt the edge of the rules. Is there any reason moderators cannot mute someone for six hours or remove their ability to post in a specific subforum?

AKA: We didn't win pixel medals so we'll make our own clubhouse and ban the big kids from it and make our own pixel medals!

From Wikipedia: If the Yearly Awards are P&W's equivalent of the Academy Awards, then this proposed one should be the P&W equivalent of the Razzies.

Planes are fine as they are, since they are expensive to replace. This puts greater emphasis on alliance-level economic planning and building up warchests.

No.