Conquer Club

Night Strike wrote:Just to clarify for everybody: DM received 1 month because of his PREVIOUS HISTORY, not because of posting the phone number. Without that history, it would have been something far less (like a warning or 24 hour). By the way, lack decided this, not myself, clapper, or KA.

Doesn't sound like nothing

My mistake Gabon. I should have paid more attention and I didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

Anyway, I post (you call it complaining) because it's all I can do. I don't think he should have banned, and while I can understand the decision, I still don't agree with it. And when I express my opinion and people (including the administration) basically say "f*ck off if you don't like it" and it feels like that any reasonable case for revoking the decision will be ignored, I try to think of what I can do. I realize there's not a damn thing and it's quite frustrating. I'd chance that it's the same for most others as well.

The administration should have posted something like this:

"Ok, we understand you guys are upset because of the complications with the rules, but at CC we want to promote absolute protection of privacy. Even if DM was asked to post the message, it still could have caused harm to someone on the forum besides himself. We are clarifying the rules as we speak to correct this problem in the future, but given DM's past offenses and the possible severity the posting of personal information, we gave him a temporary 1 month ban. Since the rule was not clearly defined before, we avoiding giving him a harsher sentence which would follow if he had blatantly broke rules for the sake of causing trouble. If you would like to discuss this decision, please contact XXX and they will answer your questions and consider your suggestions.

Thank you,
Random CC Mod/Admin"

Professionalism and courtesy go a long way in businesses. People still would have complain after a post like this, but I'd wager there would be far less people and people would have gotten over it far sooner. But go ahead and keep telling us to leave and/or shut up. I suppose that might work too.

GabonX wrote:

F1fth wrote:Do people honestly have a problem with us saying we don't think he should have been banned? Because it certainly seems like it. Excepting a few cases, most of what I've seen hasn't been justification for the ban but more of a "STFU and deal with it."

He broke a long established rule. How about that for justification?

If you want to spam up the forums complaining don't be surprised that not everyone agrees wit you.

A long established rule? You mean yesterday?

clapper011 wrote:no thanks, this just shows that no one has proof that DM was even telling the truth, and he edited his post to try to make it look like he did not know he would get into trouble.... I mean i may not agree with a 1 month ban, but it is not myself that gave it out. And I think a 1 month is still him being luckier then getting a website ban, when he has had allot of warnings and bans for numerous things. The admin has actually gotten more lenient then before. He would be long gone if things were still like they were last year!

Last year nobody had been perma-banned from the site yet.

TheProwler wrote:

timmytuttut88 wrote:

clapper011 wrote:if you are posting a picture of yourself it is not. It is only if you are posting someone elses.... and it should be posted in here :
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10159

what if someone tells you to post there picture? Apparently that warrants a 1 month ban.

Only if you actually did post the picture.

Why would anyone be so stupid as to post someone else's picture.

It is common sense.

If someone says "Can you post this for me?", you say "No".

If they want it (whatever it is) posted, they should do it themselves. If they can't, then there is a reason for that and you shouldn't be undermining the authority that placed this restriction on them.

I am thankful the mods are doing their jobs.

If someone was leaving the website for good, I would see no harm in it. Semigall was talking about how he hated the internet, hence why he wouldn't post it himself.

timmytuttut88 wrote:

GabonX wrote:

F1fth wrote:Do people honestly have a problem with us saying we don't think he should have been banned? Because it certainly seems like it. Excepting a few cases, most of what I've seen hasn't been justification for the ban but more of a "STFU and deal with it."

He broke a long established rule. How about that for justification?

If you want to spam up the forums complaining don't be surprised that not everyone agrees wit you.

A long established rule? You mean yesterday?

No, I mean at least a year.

GabonX wrote:

timmytuttut88 wrote:

GabonX wrote:

F1fth wrote:Do people honestly have a problem with us saying we don't think he should have been banned? Because it certainly seems like it. Excepting a few cases, most of what I've seen hasn't been justification for the ban but more of a "STFU and deal with it."

He broke a long established rule. How about that for justification?

If you want to spam up the forums complaining don't be surprised that not everyone agrees wit you.

A long established rule? You mean yesterday?

No, I mean at least a year.

If you check the date in NightStrikes announcement. I believe it says "december 3rd". It had never before said that "you are not allowed to post personal information if the poster gives you permission".

GabonX wrote:

timmytuttut88 wrote:

GabonX wrote:

F1fth wrote:Do people honestly have a problem with us saying we don't think he should have been banned? Because it certainly seems like it. Excepting a few cases, most of what I've seen hasn't been justification for the ban but more of a "STFU and deal with it."

He broke a long established rule. How about that for justification?

If you want to spam up the forums complaining don't be surprised that not everyone agrees wit you.

A long established rule? You mean yesterday?

No, I mean at least a year.

At least a year when you realized that mere common sense dictates you shouldn't?
That's not an established rule, plus there's some magical place they put established rules in, like a rulebook or something.

lack cares not for any of us. CC is just a cover for his real business.

http://lackattack.com

Once you get addicted to CC and go into debt because you are not working and constantly playing CC, he is on the other side to take your money again and help you out!

Why did the thread entitled "why" get deleted?
I posted a question for Clapper in there, but it never got answered.... The thread was deleted, so the question I originally wrote is gone, I'll re-write it here because it is relevant to the "personal information" topic.

Since posting another user's"personal information" isn't allowed, what are the rules about pictures posted on the forums, in places such as the "post a picture of yourself" thread? If I posted a picture of myself and said the person standing next to me was named _______ on CC, would that count as "personal information" , since I technically posted a picture of another user?
And, if it is decided that posting a picture like what I just described is against the rules, what happens to people that had already posted them before the "personal information" rules were made? Since DM got busted in part because of that (before the rule was official and posted where the rest of CC could see it), would you also warn/bust people that have recently posted images like I described (posted before the rules were made public) ?

EDIT: timmi had another one to add to this. Would quoting images from that thread now be against the rules if it isn't your photo?

wcaclimbing wrote:Why did the thread entitled "why" get deleted?
I posted a question for Clapper in there, but it never got answered.... The thread was deleted, so the question I originally wrote is gone, I'll re-write it here because it is relevant to the "personal information" topic.

Since posting another user's"personal information" isn't allowed, what are the rules about pictures posted on the forums, in places such as the "post a picture of yourself" thread? If I posted a picture of myself and said the person standing next to me was named _______ on CC, would that count as "personal information" , since I technically posted a picture of another user?
And, if it is decided that posting a picture like what I just described is against the rules, what happens to people that had already posted them before the "personal information" rules were made? Since DM got busted in part because of that (before the rule was official and posted where the rest of CC could see it), would you also warn/bust people that have recently posted images like I described?

And would quoting images from that thread now be against the rules if it isn't your photo?

wcaclimbing wrote:Why did the thread entitled "why" get deleted?

The threads got merged into this one. (I didn't do it though.)

Night Strike wrote:

wcaclimbing wrote:Why did the thread entitled "why" get deleted?

The threads got merged into this one. (I didn't do it though.)

Congratulations on avoiding the real question

Lol I almost got a vacation for my signature. What was in my signature you might ask:

Lack's phone number: 453947539

The harm that could have been done form that! Keep in mind that these are totally random numbers typed in and that there aren't enough of them to have fully typed out the area code. The mods once against keeping crime to a minimum in the town of CC!

timmytuttut88 wrote:Lol I almost got a vacation for my signature. What was in my signature you might ask:

Lack's phone number: 453947539

The harm that could have been done form that! Keep in mind that these are totally random numbers typed in and that there aren't enough of them to have fully typed out the area code. The mods once against keeping crime to a minimum in the town of CC!

Liar, Lack's real phone number:

Frigidus wrote:

timmytuttut88 wrote:Lol I almost got a vacation for my signature. What was in my signature you might ask:

Lack's phone number: 453947539

The harm that could have been done form that! Keep in mind that these are totally random numbers typed in and that there aren't enough of them to have fully typed out the area code. The mods once against keeping crime to a minimum in the town of CC!

Liar, Lack's real phone number:

No! It's XXXXXXXXX
EDIT:Actually I think typing a fake number might be enough to give someone a perma-ban, so i'm gonna edit it out.

EDIT:Actually I think typing a fake number might be enough to give someone a perma-ban, so i'm gonna edit it out.

I doubt that.

His number is

Well given that you are ALL trolling to the extreme...

GabonX wrote:Well given that you are ALL trolling to the extreme...

We're gonna get banned no matter what, might as well have some fun!

hecter wrote:

GabonX wrote:Well given that you are ALL trolling to the extreme...

We're gonna get banned no matter what, might as well have some fun!

Well if that's your attitude what can I say? Honestly I don't want everyone to get banned, even the people who disagree with me on things so long as they can have a moderately respectuful debate.

GabonX wrote:

hecter wrote:

GabonX wrote:Well given that you are ALL trolling to the extreme...

We're gonna get banned no matter what, might as well have some fun!

Well if that's your attitude what can I say? Honestly I don't want everyone to get banned, even the people who disagree with me on things so long as they can have a moderately respectuful debate.

If you don't like everybody getting banned, you can just leave.

hecter wrote:

GabonX wrote:

hecter wrote:

GabonX wrote:Well given that you are ALL trolling to the extreme...

We're gonna get banned no matter what, might as well have some fun!

Well if that's your attitude what can I say? Honestly I don't want everyone to get banned, even the people who disagree with me on things so long as they can have a moderately respectuful debate.

If you don't like everybody getting banned, you can just leave.

Hahahaha. I think this moderation is getting a bit extreme. We can't even type fake numbers now? I thought things were bad when they banned rick-rolling...

timmytuttut88 wrote:

wcaclimbing wrote:Why did the thread entitled "why" get deleted?
I posted a question for Clapper in there, but it never got answered.... The thread was deleted, so the question I originally wrote is gone, I'll re-write it here because it is relevant to the "personal information" topic.

Since posting another user's"personal information" isn't allowed, what are the rules about pictures posted on the forums, in places such as the "post a picture of yourself" thread? If I posted a picture of myself and said the person standing next to me was named _______ on CC, would that count as "personal information" , since I technically posted a picture of another user?
And, if it is decided that posting a picture like what I just described is against the rules, what happens to people that had already posted them before the "personal information" rules were made? Since DM got busted in part because of that (before the rule was official and posted where the rest of CC could see it), would you also warn/bust people that have recently posted images like I described?

And would quoting images from that thread now be against the rules if it isn't your photo?

no thread was deleted, they were merged.

GabonX wrote:

hecter wrote:

GabonX wrote:Well given that you are ALL trolling to the extreme...

We're gonna get banned no matter what, might as well have some fun!

Well if that's your attitude what can I say? Honestly I don't want everyone to get banned, even the people who disagree with me on things so long as they can have a moderately respectuful debate.

Stop giving me a headache.