I HAVE MULTIPLE USER ACCOUNTS, I AM CHEEDER
Note for Ralle at bottom.
So he pointed out some flaws of the moderators, had a few of his non-flaming posts taken down for expressing his opinion of the faults he observed in the moderators, and now he's gone.
I heard, in the chatroom, that Shados gave him until morning to change his signature, and then 5 minutes later banned him until the 31st of December.
Is it not ok to point out Hitler in the midst of a crowd? Thats what he was doing in regards to a few of the biased moderators.
They have no valid reasons to do what they do, it seems, because the mods dish-out unfair treatment from one user to the next. I'm sure that's what led Cheeder to start pointing out the flaws of the moderators, and what you would call "flaming". Cheeder pointed it out in a few places where other people were flaming and nothing happened to them.
The mod's excuse? It was a joke. People know when it's a joke.
Flaming is flaming, no?
It only makes sense he would do what he did when the moderators pick-and-choose whom to bother with the rules. If all were equal under the RULES, as opposed to being unequal under the ones who have the power, he probably wouldn't have pointed out the truth of the matter.
So what happens to him for telling a mod that they are not doing a good job? What happens to you if you try to expose the bias of a mod? What happens when you try to expose an injustice in public? Ask Cheeder.
I think Cheeder was right, there needs to be a shift in power. The mods are unequivical in their dishing-out of justice. This will cause one, like Cheeder and others, to go on a rampage as he did, of trying to uncover the truth, that some of the mods have too much power and not enough wisdom to uphold the responsibility of that power.
I'm sure this thread will be deleted.. but it will live.
P.S.
Ralle, you do a shitty job of keeping your moderators in check.
Note for Ralle at bottom.
So he pointed out some flaws of the moderators, had a few of his non-flaming posts taken down for expressing his opinion of the faults he observed in the moderators, and now he's gone.
I heard, in the chatroom, that Shados gave him until morning to change his signature, and then 5 minutes later banned him until the 31st of December.
Is it not ok to point out Hitler in the midst of a crowd? Thats what he was doing in regards to a few of the biased moderators.
They have no valid reasons to do what they do, it seems, because the mods dish-out unfair treatment from one user to the next. I'm sure that's what led Cheeder to start pointing out the flaws of the moderators, and what you would call "flaming". Cheeder pointed it out in a few places where other people were flaming and nothing happened to them.
The mod's excuse? It was a joke. People know when it's a joke.
Flaming is flaming, no?
It only makes sense he would do what he did when the moderators pick-and-choose whom to bother with the rules. If all were equal under the RULES, as opposed to being unequal under the ones who have the power, he probably wouldn't have pointed out the truth of the matter.
So what happens to him for telling a mod that they are not doing a good job? What happens to you if you try to expose the bias of a mod? What happens when you try to expose an injustice in public? Ask Cheeder.
I think Cheeder was right, there needs to be a shift in power. The mods are unequivical in their dishing-out of justice. This will cause one, like Cheeder and others, to go on a rampage as he did, of trying to uncover the truth, that some of the mods have too much power and not enough wisdom to uphold the responsibility of that power.
I'm sure this thread will be deleted.. but it will live.
P.S.
Ralle, you do a shitty job of keeping your moderators in check.
Last edited by a moderator: