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

Thanks, but...

Started by Matthew Castillo5 · · 👁 3 views · 3 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Matthew Castillo5Christian Howard2Maria Barnes
Matthew Castillo5 Matthew Castillo5 RegularOP
264 messages
joined Apr 2013
#1 ·
Shout out to whoever decided to ban me, but let’s be clear: this conversation isn't over.

I mean, seriously, what was the actual reason for the ban? Who exactly pulled the trigger on that? And more importantly, is there going to be any accountability for someone abusing moderator powers like that? What steps are being taken to make sure this kind of nonsense doesn't happen again?

Look, don't take this the wrong way, but I’m not letting this go without some answers.
Christian Howard2 Christian Howard2 Member
19 messages
joined Nov 2011
#2 ·
Alice isn't around right now, and besides, the moderator banned Scott Long71.
Since none of us actually have any inside info to give you an answer, we're going to go ahead and close this thread. I really don't want this to turn into a massive Reddit flame war where everyone starts speculating about who did what to whom.

Don't worry, you'll still get your answer eventually. We can always unlock the thread later if we need to.
Maria Barnes Maria Barnes Active Member
105 messages
joined Dec 2005
#3 ·
You got banned because you have a history of targeting IBM users on Reddit, despite being warned to stop. In this post, you singled out a comment from IBM and claimed you "despise that attitude," which we view as further harassment. If we didn't know your history, that post might have looked like a standard debate—which is why we had to second-guess our decision. On paper, it’s debatable, but given the context? Not really. When we face a dilemma like that, we choose the path that causes the least harm to the community. Besides, this "contextual" rule isn't explicitly defined in our bylaws. That's why your ban was upheld.

To prevent these headaches moving forward and to avoid having to judge the intent behind every single post, we are introducing a new rule: a restriction on commenting about specific individuals. Think of it like a restraining order. Commenting on someone when there is a documented history of conflict is just another form of harassment.

This means if someone under this restriction ignores the rule and targets that person anyway, they will receive a 30-day ban if reported.

The restriction on commenting remains in place indefinitely, though it can be lifted by the person who requested it.

Because of your history of targeting IBM's posts, you are now prohibited from commenting on them. Watch yourself.
Maria Barnes Maria Barnes Active Member
105 messages
joined Dec 2005
#4 ·
Linda Young38 said:Why was I even banned? Who did this? Is there going to be any accountability for abusing moderator powers? What steps are being taken to make sure this never happens again?

Look, don't get mad, but I'm demanding answers.

Don't get mad, but you aren't getting answers to some of those questions.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads