#1 ·
Is Saba's statement actually accurate?
If it is, I would appreciate a link that indisputably points to said statement, as it strikes me as entirely arbitrary...
http://www.americanforum.com/showpost.php?p=75328941&postcount=6
I found no evidence of such a claim, and I believe Saba is being intentionally misleading. She made a similar error right here.
http://www.americanforum.com/showpost.php?p=75327309&postcount=3
It is quite clear that I can request immediate relief if I can argue that the initial ruling was completely arbitrary—which I certainly can prove, provided the moderators permit me to do so, as my goal isn't personal gain but rather the preservation of factual integrity.
I trust my meaning is clear when I use the word "imply," because it is implied that communicating with Saba is an exercise in futility, given her tendency toward exclusivity and her insistence on defending the indefensible.
Regrettably, I must point out that the moderator Dub is still failing to provide truthful information in her communications.
This spans from her comments regarding "cabbage" all the way to posts she has deleted—not just from the forum, but seemingly from her own memory.
I find myself obligated to offer Dub a partial apology if it turns out that the sequence was accidentally "serviced" by Tiki since he also oversees that area.
I propose that the thread which was forcibly locked be reopened.
http://www.americanforum.com/showthread.php?t=1152833
Thank you.
Summary:
Your feedback, ideas, grievances, and comments. How can we make this Forum better and more civilized?
If it is, I would appreciate a link that indisputably points to said statement, as it strikes me as entirely arbitrary...
http://www.americanforum.com/showpost.php?p=75328941&postcount=6
I didn't say I was making an assumption; it simply is the case.
A partial ban from a specific sub-forum implies that you do not participate there, which is why I am locking this thread. I am asking you nicely not to start new threads regarding the sub-forums where you have a partial ban.
I found no evidence of such a claim, and I believe Saba is being intentionally misleading. She made a similar error right here.
http://www.americanforum.com/showpost.php?p=75327309&postcount=3
A partial ban from a specific sub-forum means you have no right to participate in that sub-forum in any capacity, including commenting on it here.
The only recourse you have is to request the removal of the ban after a certain period of time.
It is quite clear that I can request immediate relief if I can argue that the initial ruling was completely arbitrary—which I certainly can prove, provided the moderators permit me to do so, as my goal isn't personal gain but rather the preservation of factual integrity.
I trust my meaning is clear when I use the word "imply," because it is implied that communicating with Saba is an exercise in futility, given her tendency toward exclusivity and her insistence on defending the indefensible.
Regrettably, I must point out that the moderator Dub is still failing to provide truthful information in her communications.
This spans from her comments regarding "cabbage" all the way to posts she has deleted—not just from the forum, but seemingly from her own memory.
I find myself obligated to offer Dub a partial apology if it turns out that the sequence was accidentally "serviced" by Tiki since he also oversees that area.
I propose that the thread which was forcibly locked be reopened.
http://www.americanforum.com/showthread.php?t=1152833
Thank you.
Summary:
Your feedback, ideas, grievances, and comments. How can we make this Forum better and more civilized?