Thank You For The Warning CPalm

[dj8rocks]

Originally Posted by dj8rocks

I am in the exact same situation as OFD. I actually re-read GL #13 before I commented in the thread that had been bumped as I felt it was justified according to the GL. I was warned for bumping an old thread, I did not bump the thread, only commented very shortly afterwards.

I did try to handle this in private thru a pm to Cpalmson, which he has yet to respond to.

I would like to add another question to OFD's post for my clarification along with the explanation to the questions he already asked.

Question 4
How many other times has a Mod in Florida, or any other state pointed a member for bumping an old review? I see reviews bumped quite often across the boards. And also, how many other times have members been warned for commenting in a bumped review ?

What I am observing is misplaced and misguided applications of infractions to members based on personal opinion of a moderator in attempts to squelch the conversation that is going on at the time. I understand mistakes happen, we all make them, but this has seemed to the norm in the Panhandle forums for over a year now. Selective use of infractions to members in the past while looking over others has led to a hostile environment in the Panhandle forums. Making it to where members are afraid to step out into view and make comments that do not align with the particular mindset of a moderator. This to me is an unhealthy environment for hobbiest and providers as well..... But I guess that would depend on who you are and who you are banging at the time.

This is considered my official request for clarification on the warning I received for bumping a thread.

This was the post where I asked for clarification also on why I received a warning infraction for bumping an old thread. Just like OFD, I did not bump the thread, only commented after what I thought was relevant and pertinent information had been posted by softball. GL 13 does allow for that to be made after 30 days right?

Our concerns are the inconsistent application of infractions being given here. Point being, in the 3 bumped reviews of VI, a total of 8 people not including softball commented after it was bumped. Cpalmson admitted he pointed softball and warned the others. Did the other 6 get warnings as myself and OFD received. In the " New Additions" review of VI, post 11 handle Nedomansky76 had commented last year after the 30 day timeframe, rabbit posted about the GL's in post 12. Did Nedomansky76 get pointed for commenting in an old review?
We have tried to get clarification for days on this thread on the warnings. I pm'd Cpalmson the night I received my infraction and have had no response to my request for clarification on my warning for thread bumping when I did not bump it. If Cpalmson would man up and at least answer his pm's about this, there would have never been a need to bring it to the public boards. But we were left with no choice when HE refused us the opportunity to resolve this in private to reduce the board drama.

[dj8rocks]

OFD asked 3 very specific questions that could be answered by any mod, there was nothing vague with either of the 3 questions.

[dearhunter]

Modtardville does not publicly (is not supposed to) discuss infractions given to retards, unless the retard receiving the infraction discusses it publicly.

Thus, I am not at liberty to discuss what infractions others received in this little dog and pony show.

Your post was not a violation of the guidelines.

In general, the way that a bumped review is supposed to be handled is as follows:

The retard who bumped the review receives an infraction (if the bump is deemed a violation) and the review gets locked. No one else who posts subsequent of the bump receives an infraction. Because, they are not in violation of bumping a review. Responding to a bumped review is not listed as a violation of the guideline.

There are instances where a continuation post can be a violation. Examples of that could be a post about real life information......or......medic al speculation. If in that situation a post continues the advancement of the forbidden topic, it is a violation.

OFD asked questions in a manner that would require a different modtard to be inside Cpalm's head to know the answers.

I am not the modtard you want to play nuanced word games with.......I am not Cpalm.......ijs

[dj8rocks]

Thank you for taking the time to explain and clarify this mess. I have forwarded you the warning infraction pm that I received from Cpalmson. If my post was not a violation, I would like to have that infraction removed from my infractions page.

I understand about not being able to discuss the other fucktards infractions. Again, thank you for your time and assistance

[dearhunter]

aahhhhhh......and there is the nitty gritty of it.

Your post was not a violation, and I will not reverse it.

Now, you are scratching your head thincking "WTF???"

There are multiple issues in play here.

The first among them being "you post it/you own it".

[dj8rocks]

Lmao! Yep I am surely scratching my head. If it was not a violation... why did I receive a warning in the first place? Sure I posted a comment that you just said was not a violation.... 🤔

[dearhunter]

If I had erroneously given you an infraction, I would need to reverse it.

I did not issue you an infraction incorrectly or otherwise.

The modtard who issued you the infraction needs to reverse the infraction. He posted it/he owns it.

Imagine the chaos that would ensue if modtards went around reversing infractions issued by other modtards. Thinck of all the whores who would be modtard shopping after each infraction.

As egregious as you may feel the infraction is, the alternative you suggest is unthinckable. I am here doing what I am willing to do. I am providing you cover to discuss the situation in the open.

[dj8rocks]

Very clear and understood. Your assistance is greatly appreciated

[hotrix1]

It's refreshing to see an admin address our concerns.

It's so frustrating to have the modtard responsible for the overreaction ignore the legitimate questions of members that incur his ruling not understanding the violation, or even if there was a violation.

Originally Posted by dearhunter

OFD asked questions in a manner that would require a different modtard to be inside Cpalm's head to know the answers. Now that's a scary thought.

I am not the modtard you want to play nuanced word games with.......I am not Cpalm.......ijs. Of course not dh, you're logical and reasonable.

.

[Laney Lixx]

DeerHunter, please let me add my appreciation to the others. The kindness you just showed by answering a few simple questions, in the very short time that it took you to do it, could have settled every single one of these issues many days ago. You have earned my respect in so many ways.

[dearhunter]

This is where some retard who doesn't see the big picture comes in and says "it was just a warning for Tebow's sake....move on already".

Laney, do not mistake what I do for kindness......I am without a doubt the second biggest asshole (whores love them some Wakeup) on this board....ijs

[dj8rocks]

Originally Posted by dearhunter

This is where some retard who doesn't see the big picture comes in and says "it was just a warning for Tebow's sake....move on already".

Laney, do not mistake what I do for kindness......I am without a doubt the second biggest asshole (whores love them some Wakeup) on this board....ijs

Your first sentence is a strangely familiar remark that was made after some warning complaints. Sad but true.

Your second sentence is very palatable, no issue with an asshole that does their job consistently, by the rules, and equitably distributes ass kickings.

I only have 2 more questions, that may or may not can be answered due to their nature. The last 3 threads in co-ed have a lot of eyes on them, obviously so due to the topics being discussed.

Is the inconsistent application of infractions being given here that caused much of the problems here going to be addressed?

Will we ever know for sure if the allegations made by softball that his old account of mdlee was hijacked and had fake reviews written on that account, be found to be substantiated or found to be false allegations?

[Laney Lixx]

Originally Posted by dearhunter

This is where some retard who doesn't see the big picture comes in and says "it was just a warning for Tebow's sake....move on already".

Laney, do not mistake what I do for kindness......I am without a doubt the second biggest asshole (whores love them some Wakeup) on this board....ijs

Actually,
Wakeup won my heart over a year ago. He's my Superman!
Enforcing the rules fairly to everyone is sexy as Hell in my book, sweetie! No doubt.

[hotrix1]

Originally Posted by dearhunter

This is where some retard who doesn't see the big picture comes in and says "it was just a warning for Tebow's sake....move on already".

Laney, do not mistake what I do for kindness......I am without a doubt the second biggest asshole (whores love them some Wakeup) on this board....ijs

dh is so modest.....And honest. I remember reading either a post or PM rather recently saying something to the effect "just take the points....it's not that big a deal....move on already". Sheep. What can you do, eh dh?

Didn't you used to have a quote about sheep on your sig line dh? Really liked that quote.

[dearhunter]

LL,

The business of modtardville is addressed in modtardville, and not for general consumption.

The issue of mdlee has been addressed in accordance with the guidelines.