Selective warnings?

[butters]

Why would the admin pay any attention to reporting done by the alt of a banned member?



[/thread]

there's that

I would ban all members that violated TOS.

a violation does not necessarily warrant a ban. multiple violations or very severe cases of violation may incur a ban, otherwise they generate warnings UNLESS Laurel decides otherwise. again, you don't like it, you know where the door is. be sure to ask for a refund on your subscription on the way out. oh, wait...

Any member that violates TOS should be banned.

see above. also, not your site. no matter how much you stomp your little feets, still not your site and you don't get a say. none of us do. like it or walk away.

Yeah, I really wish they'd knock it off with the phone calls and the direct mail.

To ensure admin bans the violators.

Regardless of any opinions regarding TOS, the general consensus is you are a whiner.

this, obsessed like a mattnazibot

Just for the record, this is the post OP felt the need to report me over.

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=91147681&postcount=25

well now, i cannot for the LIFE of me imagine why that's not brought everything to a screeching halt to be addressed right here, right NOW!

Are you the morbidly obese Euro trash that suckered a thoroughly confused American gentleman into marrying you?

Are your hygiene habits as deplorable as Sean's? Do you also have greasy hair, pale skin & bad teeth?

you have 2 words in there that apply to me&mine: "American gentleman". the rest is your normal twatwaffle. i'm embarrassed for you. really.

 

[Aquagal]

All I had to do was start a thread about TOS violations & the usual suspects rush to the defense of the GB's "protected class."

Time will tell if the TOS violators are banned.

I was wondering if it was something like this, because it didn’t make sense. I thought of a different direction you were going though.

 

[Talk_Radio]

Let's deal with this as if it's serious and not a troll's work product.

I would say issuing genuine threats is banworthy. Spamming is worthy of a post deletion and a ban if one is a repeat offender (and what VeraBad posted is not really what most people would call spam).

As for the personal information thing, simply repeating something that's been openly discussed on the board is not, by definition, "disclosing" personal information. For example, I've alluded numerous times to the general part of the country where I live. I don't think referencing that would be "disclosing personal information" about me. Posting my actual address obviously would be.

The same goes for Ish and the Franzia thing. Drinking cheap-ass wine wouldn't be the disclosing of personal information about him unless he were its only customer (although judging from his average Saturday night output here, he alone might be enough to keep them in business). It's just a joke and is understood as such, and considering Ish's long track record of threatening to weaponize personal information himself, it's hypocritical for some alt to be coming to a defense that isn't needed.

Thanks! We'll see if Laurel bans Zumi & Luk.

 

[KeithD]

Laurel has full justification for just ignoring any request from a previously banned poster because they have no standing here anymore. They should be gone.

 

[butters]

I was wondering if it was something like this, because it didn’t make sense. I thought of a different direction you were going though.

from all the bannings i've seen take place here, i see no 'protected class'. fata, luk, + lots of other names that aren't shy about posting their thoughts and hailing from all political spectrums/genders... they've all been banned, right alongside the aj's, que's, busybodies, m'ann's, lances, cleavers, miles', & hashtags. people act out too much, mama kitty takes out the trash.

i'd like to know who the OP considers to be the 'protected class'? could it just be that these members don't post material worthy of a ban? seems the most likely situation.

 

[silver gurl]

Makes me wonder what possess someone to use a picture of her spread butt cheeks as an avatar.

Is that you Princess?

 

[FakeNews]

Laurel has full justification for just ignoring any request from a previously banned poster because they have no standing here anymore. They should be gone.

Your lost your standing when girlsmiley sent you running to Laurel with your tail between your legs.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Is that you Princess?

https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/MakeSchool-Tutorials/Magic-8Ball-Swift4@35b74642ac78aabdcfdc7141e659894755bf25d8/P1-Getting-Started/assets/signs_point.jpg

 

[Kantarii]

Laurel has full justification for just ignoring any request from a previously banned poster because they have no standing here anymore. They should be gone.

No standing? Should be gone? Oh, really? That’s your opinion and it’s bullshit. So, here is where your ignorance really “shines”.

The trade secret is:

Authors banned from the forums aren’t restricted from posting stories on Lit. All an author has to do is attach an apology note on a submitted story. It takes about a week, but when Laurel sees the apology, she lifts a ban.

Why?

Because being banned in the forums restricts access to PM’s. What good is posting stories on Lit if an author can’t communicate with their fans? Lifting a ban on PM’s grants access to the forums.

Don’t believe me? Ask around the Authors Hangout Forum. As a matter of fact, ask electricblue66 or Blind Justice.

Until then, tell the whole story without leaving out the details with your ignorance.

 

[silver gurl]

https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/MakeSchool-Tutorials/Magic-8Ball-Swift4@35b74642ac78aabdcfdc7141e659894755bf25d8/P1-Getting-Started/assets/signs_point.jpg

He is the only one who makes "fun" of my pics...so I am guessing.

 

[suurfer]

Is it just me, or do butters and Keith talk as if they own the place, not Laurel,
and Laurel's job is to do their biddings?

 

[cowslinger64]

Hey; Sling! I think I'll miss you the most.

I respect your service to our country & I appreciate the hard work of all union members.

You're out of your mind if you think anyone believes the phd bit.


Jeezus, just when I didn't think you could be more of an idiot.

I'm not at all interested in your respect or appreciation.

 

[cowslinger64]

Is it just me, or do butters and Keith talk as if they own the place, not Laurel,
and Laurel's job is to do their biddings?

It's just you, queball.

 

[Shadwell41]

He is the only one who makes "fun" of my pics...so I am guessing.

True, but he is not the only bitter, angry, old little-man ‘round these parts, these days.

 

[Tristyn]

I was wondering if it was something like this, because it didn’t make sense. I thought of a different direction you were going though.

Laurel proved that selective enforcement of the TOS is real when she banned Cleaver.

I'm not at all surprised that Zumi, Luk & the others will be getting a pass.

 

[suurfer]

It's just you, queball.

Seriously. Just a sample:

there's that

a violation does not necessarily warrant a ban. multiple violations or very severe cases of violation may incur a ban, otherwise they generate warnings UNLESS Laurel decides otherwise. again, you don't like it, you know where the door is. be sure to ask for a refund on your subscription on the way out. oh, wait...

 

[butters]

He is the only one who makes "fun" of my pics...so I am guessing.

sounds more like eyer

 

[Aquagal]

I haven’t seen first, second or last warnings in a long time. Even for the never-been-banned.

 

[butters]

Seriously. Just a sample:

that's called simply explaining facts. some people are clearly struggling with ignorance of what may or may not constitute a ban or a warning. things may have changed since i modded on lit. ask neci or one of the other active mods on other boards here to clarify. stop obsessing over me.

 

[FukLuk]

Thanks! We'll see if Laurel bans Zumi & Luk.

Laurel proved that selective enforcement of the TOS is real when she banned Cleaver.

I'm not at all surprised that Zumi, Luk & the others will be getting a pass.

Luk was recently banned twice, miles.

 

[Tristyn]

True, but he is not the only bitter, angry, old little-man ‘round these parts, these days.

You should call the official 'Literotica General Board Moderator!' He has a badge & everything!

[posting personal info including real names, locations, emails, private messages or other correspondence, other identifying information from offsite is prohibited per our forum guidelines] - Last Warning

 

[von_Bismarck]

This isn't the first time miles tried to paint an elaborate picture of his misdeeds. Last time, it was all about being an ex-friend of Rory's, and coming back for the lulz.

 

[FukLuk]

You should call the official 'Literotica General Board Moderator!' He has a badge & everything!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/29874297@N00/

miles already posted this under Talk_Radio, miles.

 

[suurfer]

that's called simply explaining facts. some people are clearly struggling with ignorance of what may or may not constitute a ban or a warning. things may have changed since i modded on lit. ask neci or one of the other active mods on other boards here to clarify. stop obsessing over me.

Every time the subject pops up you're first on the scene, to provide your expert opinion.

 

[butters]

I haven’t seen first, second or last warnings in a long time. Even for the never-been-banned.

recently, i've only seen the removal of posts with the standard admin message, or seen the disappearance of posts/threads creating discussion.

maybe, given the climate of growing hate speech/aggression it's a case of admin administering tighter controls. i'm sure they reserve the right to remove any offensive material/ban anyone at their discretion in order to protect their business.