http://imgur.com/a/2zO85
shred wanted you to see it tabby

Shredtail, that never works. The first rule of the internet is: Don't feed the trolls.

Edited 9/19/2016 02:40:45

Serbia, you have to include the image filename extension in those links. Add .png to the URL and it should work. [Edit: Oh, you got it, nvm.]

Edited 9/19/2016 02:43:14

Just let him rot in purgatory for a year, and then let him back. He's played for 3 years, so 1 year away isn't that much in the full spectrum. Besides, didn't he say he was getting bored of warlight? This is a great way to break his addiction! It's like throwing a coke addict into a jail cell for a week.

Fizzer's got a new rule: Talk shit get shot.

Doesnt matter who it is, or how long they spam.

awww, remorse for being caught, so noble!

Here's an idea: What if he agrees to do some sort of 'community service' in exchange for making the ban non-perma? I'm thinking something along the lines of having him help with the spam/troll problem, e.g. be on spam-patrol or something like that where he has to go out of his way to report and downvote spam.

This is just a basic idea right now, not fully formed. Just trying to come up with an alternative middle-ground between 'permaban vs. no consequences', without it being a case of "Well, why'd you let Shredtail off the hook? Why don't you let So-and-so off the hook, too?"

If we can come up with a way for people to 'contribute something to the community', then it might be worth a shot.

No. If these kids keep getting let back in it shows that theres no real consequences. I think shred needs to be an example.

@WCT
That could be abused. No ofc you could require them to buy a Membership (or something else for money) but that is also a shady business idea. (aka NO NO)

Ofc you could recode the system so that you could be partially banned (no chat in games, forums or mail) but can still play. But, well that takes coding time.

Edited 9/19/2016 02:59:51

read this thread.

@Tbest no chat in games punishes other players as well (teammates, communication in ffa)

First, your post has a good signal-to-noise ratio, which is a separate matter from whether someone agrees or disagrees with it. Therefore, if someone dv's your comment, they would be doing so wrongly, IMO, according to the purpose Fizzer stated for the voting system.

Second, the voting threshold for comments is way too high right now anyway, so even if a bunch of people dv'd your comment, it still wouldn't get hidden. :-D

Third, just in case, I upvoted your comment as a precaution. I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree; but that's irrelevant. People can't have a proper discussion if they vote based on whether they agree or disagree: that would just lead to voting wars. It has to be based on whether the comment is constructive as opposed to trolling. People can disagree and still have a constructive conversation. That's how it should work, anyway, IMHO. (And I've seen forums that work this way, and it does work.)

TLDR: Don't underestimate me, I know about upvotes! I'm an upvote strategist!

"my friend should not be banned!

The people that make fun of me should be banned!"

youre right little alt, lets try to make the fourms better again. i have 9 cars ready to go. you and your cats line up and ill let 'em rip.

Edited 9/19/2016 03:18:27

Benjamin "one thread per week" 628, with about his 4th thread this week.

@WCT
That could be abused.

And if he abuses it, the ban goes back to perma. Prosecutors and parole boards make agreements like this all the time. "We'll give you a chance to make amends. But screw that up, and you go back to the full penalty." The point is that it's not just "Well, we'll lower the penalty with no strings attached," and neither is it, "Nope. Sorry. One strike and you're out. No chance to make amends."

Citation Wally Balls?

Maybe you should make a new thread for that.

Damn you guys sure have a lot of patience for this kind of discussion.

Fizzer's game, fizzer's rules. He's the one who decides. Posting stuff here (or in uservoice, before anyone else for whatever reason thinks it's a smart idea) shouldn't get you anywhere at all.

Shred did something stupid out of sheer curiosity. He knew he was doing something wrong, just underestimated the final result and is now punished for it.

The only person who can do anything is Fizzer; knowing him, he might as well cede under some weird condition, but hey. Just hope he's in a nice mood.

Now discussing potential punishment/being generally trollish/attempting YAFT is not gonna get you anywhere. Let the thread die, and just wait for Fizzer's response.

Fizzer doesn't need to respond. The deed is done.