CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Misunderstanding

Misunderstanding

Started by Nicholas King · · 👁 9 views · 54 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Nicholas Kingmistywolf17Tyler Grant76wiredangler5northernpilot2boldwalker12darksailor2dustyranger64Nicole JamesBrandon Castillo4Bradley Sanders4hollowtrucker77Tyler Bishop56Eric Newman75vividtiger922cosmicskipper39melloworca6mellowraven22Paul Green31A
boldwalker12 boldwalker12 Active Member
101 messages
joined Jul 2010
#21 ·
northernpilot2 said:I mean, honestly, I feel like this whole thing could’ve been wrapped up right here if Tyler Grant76 had just given a straight answer about who that user was, you know? Like, she was the one who jumped into the thread in the first place, so it's a pretty fair question to ask her.

Look, I was the new kid on the block once too. 😍

Anyway, I'm done talking about it.
darksailor2 darksailor2 Active Member
59 messages
joined Jul 2011
#22 ·
Good grief, I’m going to die! What kind of circus act is this 🤣🤣🤣

Is this some kind of guessing game? 😍 🙏

edit: I haven't just arrived here, I've been around for a long time, and I honestly have no clue who anyone is talking about! 🤣
boldwalker12 boldwalker12 Active Member
101 messages
joined Jul 2010
#23 ·
darksailor2 said:Good grief, I’m going to die! What kind of circus act is this 🤣🤣🤣

Is this some kind of guessing game? 😍 🙏

edit: I haven't just arrived here, I've been around for a long time, and I honestly have no clue who anyone is talking about! 🤣

Honestly, I don't know either. And frankly, I don't need to. 🤷 I already get how the whole system works.
dustyranger64 dustyranger64 Active Member
76 messages
joined Jan 2008
#24 ·
Off-topic and chat are officially closed. These folks are invited to jump in if they want to weigh in:
Byron.
Tyler Grant76 with a specific name regarding whose plot was missed in the organization.
The Admin team.
Nicholas King Nicholas King RegularOP
716 messages
joined Jan 2023
#25 ·
I honestly have nothing to say here, because I don't even understand what the question is. 🙂

I can only restate the facts:

- the new rule of the organization was established on September 22nd.

- these rules weren't just slapped together in a rush—it wasn't some "took more than a few minutes to draft" situation—but rather, we waited until they were fully thought through and finalized.

- nowhere in these rules does it state that they don't apply to existing partial bans, nor is there any mention of lifting current partial bans as an integral part of this new set of rules.

- my own partial ban was lifted four days after the rules were drafted and implemented.

- since lifting a partial ban isn't exactly a grueling, multi-day physical labor project, it simply doesn't make sense to claim it belongs to the same package of rule changes being discussed.

- preparing the announced public statement—which should really provide a broader context regarding the "how and why," rather than just being a blunt notice about lifting all partial bans without explanation—has been somewhat delayed... or maybe I'm just failing to find it.

Therefore, everything I have done—which I believe was polite and in keeping with both the old and new rules—was simply to request that my partial ban remain exactly as it was on the day it was originally issued (I can't recall the exact date offhand, though I assume it's documented somewhere). By lifting it, the organization has violated the rules that have been in effect for four days now—specifically the rule regarding the minimum six-month duration and the rule requiring a formal request from a forum member to lift a ban.

And that is all.
Nicole James Nicole James Regular
313 messages
joined Dec 2010
#26 ·
Byron, I’m going to lay out the facts one more time for you.

Fact 1: The decision was made to lift all partial bans across the board.
Fact 2: This call was finalized only after the new rules of the organization were officially published.
Fact 3: These partial bans are being removed from users sequentially—it isn't just happening to you.

You haven't received any special treatment here, and there is absolutely no reason for a partial ban to be applied to your account. If you're truly insisting on being banned, we might be able to accommodate that request—but let’s be clear: that wouldn't be "correcting" some perceived favoritism you claim to have had, it would simply be granting a ban upon request.
Nicholas King Nicholas King RegularOP
716 messages
joined Jan 2023
#27 ·
Nicole James said:Byron, I’m going to lay out the facts one more time for you.

Fact 1: The decision was made to lift all partial bans across the board.
Fact 2: This call was finalized only after the new rules of the organization were officially published.
Fact 3: These partial bans are being removed from users sequentially—it isn't just happening to you.

You haven't received any special treatment here, and there is absolutely no reason for a partial ban to be applied to your account. If you're truly insisting on being banned, we might be able to accommodate that request—but let’s be clear: that wouldn't be "correcting" some perceived favoritism you claim to have had, it would simply be granting a ban upon request.

Could you please quote exactly where I claimed to have received any kind of special treatment? If you can't, may I suggest that you're simply making things up—there’s nothing offensive about saying that, since I don't see a third option here.

I am not comparing my treatment to anyone else's, nor am I claiming mine was special. All I wrote was that I believe my partial ban violated all the forum rules, that I don't think I'm alone in that opinion, and because of that, I won't accept any quiet acts of mercy, regardless of any other circumstances. No, thank you.

We all know you people can literally do anything—I simply wrote what I felt would be the only consistent move on your part (to avoid any insinuations regarding this "you"—since you were actually the first to use the word "you" when suggesting you might accommodate me)—so it’s frankly ridiculous to claim that a "ban upon request" is the only possible option. I was completely powerless when the partial ban was handed down (I was even referred to the appeal process via the PM—the very same one who issued that partial ban 🙄) — and by the way, I was just as powerless to debunk the blatant falsehood that some deleted post of mine "came back to haunt me," a lie that none of "you" bothered to deny—and now, I am just as powerless regarding your decision on what to call this ban, how long it will last, what "arguments" will be used to justify it, and which PDFs it will refer to.

It is precisely this feeling of powerlessness that has been creating an immense sense of discomfort while writing here for some time now.

I am trying to wrap my head around a technical, logical, or any kind of reason why it is so incredibly impossible to leave my partial ban exactly as it was (with all due respect to whoever decided to implement it and why). I just can't find one. Could you help me out?

Edit: Now I'm confused—a "public statement" has been announced; does "we lifted the partial bans, so whatever" count as a public statement, or will there actually be a few sentences written explaining "who, how, and why?"
Nicholas King Nicholas King RegularOP
716 messages
joined Jan 2023
#28 ·
I seem to recall that under the new rule of the organization, there were promises regarding responses being provided in the shortest possible timeframe. Well, sixteen hundred views later, am I allowed to inquire about a final decision on this matter?

I suppose enough time has passed for whatever behind-the-scenes diplomacy was happening to do its thing and establish an official stance. So, the question remains: will my account be restored to its original state in accordance with the rules?

Edit: I almost forgot—will that announced "press release" ever actually surface? (And just so we're clear, I’m addressing that anonymous deleted user: this isn't some "request" on my part, but rather a simple fact that the supermoderator announced its "filing," which presumably implies its publication). It would probably be useful to have some clarification on what happened with those previous partial bans—kudos to them for even mentioning it, I guess.
Brandon Castillo4 Brandon Castillo4 Regular
277 messages
joined Nov 2003
#29 ·
Byron, what’s the actual point of this thread?

Your last post felt more like half-baked manifesto mixed with a vague commentary on current events. You kept things super hazy—no names, no specific incidents, just general criticisms tossed out into the void without much substance.

So, now that we’re cutting through the noise, let me ask you: in a nutshell, what are you actually looking for here?
By the way, I’m not trying to be provocative or mess with you, I’m genuinely curious. Let's wrap this up and get to the core: where do we go from here?
Nicholas King Nicholas King RegularOP
716 messages
joined Jan 2023
#30 ·
Brandon Castillo4 said:Byron, what’s the actual point of this thread?

Your last post felt more like half-baked manifesto mixed with a vague commentary on current events. You kept things super hazy—no names, no specific incidents, just general criticisms tossed out into the void without much substance.

So, now that we’re cutting through the noise, let me ask you: in a nutshell, what are you actually looking for here?
By the way, I’m not trying to be provocative or mess with you, I’m genuinely curious. Let's wrap this up and get to the core: where do we go from here?

I already laid this out in my very first post: I want my partial ban reverted back to its "original state," using the date it was initially applied, and then potentially having it lifted once at least six months have passed—provided I reach out with a formal request at that time. Honestly, I don't see how that could be more than a few clicks of a mouse.

If this whole "drawing a line" bit and the question of "where do we go from here?" is somehow meant to imply a conversation broader than just this specific thread or this particular partial ban, I can only remind you that one of the primary reasons I received this ban in the first place was because of my thread, "where to go forum?".🙂.
Bradley Sanders4 Bradley Sanders4 Active Member
108 messages
joined Jul 2018
#31 ·
Sorry for crashing Byron's thread, but since everyone is already debating lifting bans, I figured there wouldn't be a better place to ask this.

Is there actually a list of users who have partial bans, or was the whole unbanning process just handled somewhat randomly? I noticed this question popped up in the thread before, but it got deleted—instead of being answered or moved to a different section if it was considered off-topic—and I'm honestly dying to know the answer. Given the general amnesty, knowing who is still essentially "serving time" is a pretty, well, significant question.

Also, in a deleted post, someone made an excellent suggestion on how to handle this if a formal list doesn't exist, so here it is. If I'm not allowed to ask why such a constructive post was wiped out (since I don't want to get accused of playing lawyer), I assume I can at least ask what the administration is doing about notifying people when partial bans from the organization are being lifted. It’s the 28th today, the thread started on the 26th; surely a quick few-sentence announcement isn't asking for much. Either there's a lack of will to do it, or it was just overlooked. Since you guys explicitly stated you wanted to moderate this place better and clean up the organization by removing partial bans, I'll choose to believe it was just an oversight. So, I'm just throwing this out there as a friendly reminder that you really could make that happen.

Thanks for the reply.
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#32 ·
We’ve gone ahead and lifted those partial bans for everyone on our list—just so we're all clear, that applies specifically to the organization's matters
If anyone somehow slipped through the cracks and was missed, just shoot a DM to Tyndall or me

The slightly awkward part here is having to post a notice on a PDF that most of you forum regulars won't even be able to see anyway
🙂
Bradley Sanders4 Bradley Sanders4 Active Member
108 messages
joined Jul 2018
#33 ·
Just put out a site-wide announcement already. We’ve done it before for charity drives and when the rules for specific subforums changed, so there’s no reason we can't do it for this too. 🤷
Tyler Bishop56 Tyler Bishop56 Member
43 messages
joined Dec 2007
#34 ·
Tyler Grant76, Nicholas King, and the rest of you—look, I totally get why everyone's pissed off about how some of the site admins have been acting lately, it’s been pretty embarrassing. But honestly, there’s just no ground to stand on for a dedicated thread about it here.

The higher-ups at the organization actually listened and fixed one of those many mistakes people have been flagging over the last few weeks, which is actually a win if you ask me. Plus, I haven't really seen that typical "we know better than you" attitude or the usual condescension when they're talking to users, so that's a nice change of pace too.

Even if we all end up leaving this place, some new group of kids will probably just move on to complaining about the bizarrely weird moderation rules that seem to run this forum anyway. So, yeah, it’s a tiny step, but hey, at least it’s moving in the right direction.
Eric Newman75 Eric Newman75 Active Member
137 messages
joined Jul 2011
#35 ·
Tyler Bishop56 said:Tyler Grant76, Nicholas King, and the rest of you—look, I totally get why everyone's pissed off about how some of the site admins have been acting lately, it’s been pretty embarrassing. But honestly, there’s just no ground to stand on for a dedicated thread about it here.

The higher-ups at the organization actually listened and fixed one of those many mistakes people have been flagging over the last few weeks, which is actually a win if you ask me. Plus, I haven't really seen that typical "we know better than you" attitude or the usual condescension when they're talking to users, so that's a nice change of pace too.

Even if we all end up leaving this place, some new group of kids will probably just move on to complaining about the bizarrely weird moderation rules that seem to run this forum anyway. So, yeah, it’s a tiny step, but hey, at least it’s moving in the right direction.

Signed. No need to beat a dead horse.
dustyranger64 dustyranger64 Active Member
76 messages
joined Jan 2008
#36 ·
Partials have been removed from the organization regardless of when they were earned. We won't be issuing refunds upon request.

The following users had their partials stripped:
walther-P38 Carlos Il Bestione lord Byron Lastan Mcaucliffe snowleopard Manchild

Carlos

Il Bestione

Nicholas King

Lastan

Mcaucliffe
snowleopard Manchild
All of them have been notified via PM. (Well, Byron and Manchild obviously already know, and Lastan is still under a general ban—he’ll get his notice once that clears up.)
We didn't touch the partials for anyone who is permanently banned. It makes sense both technically and logically. (Let's face it, any partials earned after a permanent ban were basically "earned" by causing total chaos during those messy mass-download sessions involving saints, mothers, and other relatives—basically just being totally inappropriate.)

That specific part of the decision
is
not open for debate or review. So, saying "Hey guys, we don't have the technical tools to do this perfectly, so we're asking the community if we missed anyone on this list—if we did, please let us know"—is actually a pretty solid move. It keeps things transparent and cuts down on all the random questions hitting our inbox.

justcurious
says:
Conclusion:

If you know someone who should have had their partials removed from the organization but isn't on this list, please shoot the admins a PM. Your help is much appreciated!

Since the list is still pretty short and this thread has already hit over 2,000 views, I don't think we need to make a massive forum-wide announcement just yet.
However, we might end up doing that if things change significantly—like if more names pop up thanks to your tips.
I’ll take this chance to ask one more time: please actually read the new rule of the organization at the top of the PDF. I noticed it has about a third of the views this thread has!
Thanks for listening and for understanding.
Bradley Sanders4 Bradley Sanders4 Active Member
108 messages
joined Jul 2018
#37 ·
dustyranger64 said:Partials have been removed from the organization regardless of when they were earned. We won't be issuing refunds upon request.

The following users had their partials stripped:
walther-P38 Carlos Il Bestione lord Byron Lastan Mcaucliffe snowleopard Manchild

Carlos

Il Bestione

Nicholas King

Lastan

Mcaucliffe
snowleopard Manchild
All of them have been notified via PM. (Well, Byron and Manchild obviously already know, and Lastan is still under a general ban—he’ll get his notice once that clears up.)
We didn't touch the partials for anyone who is permanently banned. It makes sense both technically and logically. (Let's face it, any partials earned after a permanent ban were basically "earned" by causing total chaos during those messy mass-download sessions involving saints, mothers, and other relatives—basically just being totally inappropriate.)

That specific part of the decision
is
not open for debate or review. So, saying "Hey guys, we don't have the technical tools to do this perfectly, so we're asking the community if we missed anyone on this list—if we did, please let us know"—is actually a pretty solid move. It keeps things transparent and cuts down on all the random questions hitting our inbox.

justcurious
says:
Conclusion:

If you know someone who should have had their partials removed from the organization but isn't on this list, please shoot the admins a PM. Your help is much appreciated!

Since the list is still pretty short and this thread has already hit over 2,000 views, I don't think we need to make a massive forum-wide announcement just yet.
However, we might end up doing that if things change significantly—like if more names pop up thanks to your tips.
I’ll take this chance to ask one more time: please actually read the new rule of the organization at the top of the PDF. I noticed it has about a third of the views this thread has!
Thanks for listening and for understanding.

Honestly, you could just pin that as a notification for the whole sub-forum for a week and call it a day. I don't get why you guys keep ignoring that option just to obsess over view counts, list lengths, and whatever else. We've used that method to announce way less important stuff on here before, so it's only logical to use it for this. You're coming off as unprofessional, and frankly, it makes people question if you're actually being sincere. Is the real issue just that you didn't think of it first?
vividtiger922 vividtiger922 Member
39 messages
joined Apr 2009
#38 ·
dustyranger64 said:Partials have been removed from the organization regardless of when they were earned. We won't be issuing refunds upon request.

The following users had their partials stripped:
walther-P38 Carlos Il Bestione lord Byron Lastan Mcaucliffe snowleopard Manchild

Carlos

Il Bestione

Nicholas King

Lastan

Mcaucliffe
snowleopard Manchild
All of them have been notified via PM. (Well, Byron and Manchild obviously already know, and Lastan is still under a general ban—he’ll get his notice once that clears up.)
We didn't touch the partials for anyone who is permanently banned. It makes sense both technically and logically. (Let's face it, any partials earned after a permanent ban were basically "earned" by causing total chaos during those messy mass-download sessions involving saints, mothers, and other relatives—basically just being totally inappropriate.)

That specific part of the decision
is
not open for debate or review. So, saying "Hey guys, we don't have the technical tools to do this perfectly, so we're asking the community if we missed anyone on this list—if we did, please let us know"—is actually a pretty solid move. It keeps things transparent and cuts down on all the random questions hitting our inbox.

justcurious
says:
Conclusion:

If you know someone who should have had their partials removed from the organization but isn't on this list, please shoot the admins a PM. Your help is much appreciated!

Since the list is still pretty short and this thread has already hit over 2,000 views, I don't think we need to make a massive forum-wide announcement just yet.
However, we might end up doing that if things change significantly—like if more names pop up thanks to your tips.
I’ll take this chance to ask one more time: please actually read the new rule of the organization at the top of the PDF. I noticed it has about a third of the views this thread has!
Thanks for listening and for understanding.

The rules are getting fewer views than most threads on here... one might wonder why that is, though I suppose it goes without saying that people generally prefer sensationalism over substance.

Still, I suspect some would gladly open those rules just to find something to nitpick. As they are now, they remain far too subtle. They've been sitting there for a week already.

And for that small handful of curious souls who actually decide to read them and reflect—or perhaps offer some criticism—it seems like quite a chore that keeps you from simply doing your job in peace.

Just give us a reason to believe all of this is being done for our sake... otherwise, it feels a bit like a royal decree issued solely to maintain order in the house.
cosmicskipper39 cosmicskipper39 Active Member
71 messages
joined Jan 2012
#39 ·
Was I hallucinating today, or did someone actually post about the new rule of the organization and lifting those partial bans for a few users across the entire forum?

Since I'm already here, I just have to say: those partial bans on this subforum are easily the worst thing to ever happen to this place. It’s like painting a giant target right over people's avatars—it's pretty easy to guess how that ends and who gets screwed in the process.

Those users were just venting their frustrations because they couldn't post here, so they took it to other subforums. Now we've ended up with this whole group of disgruntled forum members, and honestly, it's hard not to feel for them.

I am glad the forum leadership finally stepped up to help out at least a handful of people.
northernpilot2 northernpilot2 Active Member
201 messages
joined Oct 2013
#40 ·
cosmicskipper39 said:Was I hallucinating today, or did someone actually post about the new rule of the organization and lifting those partial bans for a few users across the entire forum?

Since I'm already here, I just have to say: those partial bans on this subforum are easily the worst thing to ever happen to this place. It’s like painting a giant target right over people's avatars—it's pretty easy to guess how that ends and who gets screwed in the process.

Those users were just venting their frustrations because they couldn't post here, so they took it to other subforums. Now we've ended up with this whole group of disgruntled forum members, and honestly, it's hard not to feel for them.

I am glad the forum leadership finally stepped up to help out at least a handful of people.

Nah, you didn't imagine it, I saw that too, but seriously, why the hell was that notice pulled down so fast? It honestly makes this whole thing look pretty unprofessional.🤷

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads