Who edited my signature?

[NaboCane]

The highlighted part refers to political signatures. The off topic posts should be the one dealt with. Thats like saying my signature is wrong because I am implieing that the other Dolphan Qb's sucked and people are responding to my signature. This is your logic and I think that your thinking is somewhat right but really the TOS does not really cover this issue on signatures.

This isn't moot court, we're not here for the deconstruction of the rules set forth by site management, nor to pick apart "loopholes." Their intent is clear, and should be adhered to in that manner.

 

[Barry White]

This isn't moot court, we're not here for the deconstruction of the rules set forth by site management, nor to pick apart "loopholes." Their intent is clear, and should be adhered to in that manner.

makin sense. better to follow the laws of the town than live in there jail.

 

[WharfRat]

whatever Mindwarp. The TOS specifically addresses Signatures in its own section and even added the verbage on political sigs. Your a mod and you are going to do whatever you like but that does not make you correct. So spell out what you need but I have no problem with my reading comprehension. This is your implied interpretation of the rules, definately not clear cut according to the TOS.

Let's put it this way then. Since I'm one who helped write the TOS in the first place, we'll assume that my interpretation is relatively correct. I happen to think it's quite clear as to the intent, and there is no need to split hairs over verbage.
Thanks for your concern however, we do appreciate the input.

 

[dlockz]

Let's put it this way then. Since I'm one who helped write the TOS in the first place, we'll assume that my interpretation is relatively correct. I happen to think it's quite clear as to the intent, and there is no need to split hairs over verbage.
Thanks for your concern however, we do appreciate the input.

We can intend to place alot of things in rules,but my point it was not clear cut is fairly valid. One thing I must say about Nabo and WharfRat is that I do for the most part like the way you deal with subjects in your moderation and feel that other moderators could learn alot from you. My point though from the beginning is there is nothing very political or upsetting in the guy's signature, its just that the very subject of Nublar seems to always create comments. If my sig said that Frerotte sucks, is it my fault that people keep talking about my sig, instead of my post. The people that do that are the ones actually violating the TOS. In reality there should be no problem with his signature, its just that Nublar is very popular on this board and alot of people miss his highlights so they comment.

 

[WharfRat]

Duely noted.

 

[poisonphin]

We can intend to place alot of things in rules,but my point it was not clear cut is fairly valid. One thing I must say about Nabo and WharfRat is that I do for the most part like the way you deal with subjects in your moderation and feel that other moderators could learn alot from you. My point though from the beginning is there is nothing very political or upsetting in the guy's signature, its just that the very subject of Nublar seems to always create comments. If my sig said that Frerotte sucks, is it my fault that people keep talking about my sig, instead of my post. The people that do that are the ones actually violating the TOS. In reality there should be no problem with his signature, its just that Nublar is very popular on this board and alot of people miss his highlights so they comment.

Very well spoken, I agree. IMHO the mods should just address everyone exactly what happened to Nublar and then be done with it. Then I don't think their would be this sence of not knowing what happened.

 

[Jimmy James]

Was anyone actually given points for the signature quote? If not, I see no reason for concern. I would agree that the face of the TOS doesn't spell this out, and I would suggest that the off topic posts provision should be clarified. I also agree that the intent is clear even though it doesn't appear on the face of the TOS.

I see the TOS as a document that highlights the issues that can be problematic and that might result in points or a ban. It shouldn't be construed to limit the moderators from taking action when there is a problem that falls outside the scope of the document.

I don't blame people for raising this issue in this forum. For one, that's what this forum should be for. I dislike that some in the past have construed this forum as being the whine forum. I also have to say that Nublar7 was an extremely popular member who did not have a reputation for causing trouble prior to his ban. I have put together everything I know to have a pretty good guess as to what happened, and I'm not going to blast the staff for that choice or the choice not to address the matter in public. I will say that I hope that the staff is prepared for this topic coming up months into the future because there's little way of stopping it.

That's my two cents.

 

[poisonphin]

Was anyone actually given points for the signature quote? If not, I see no reason for concern. I would agree that the face of the TOS doesn't spell this out, and I would suggest that the off topic posts provision should be clarified. I also agree that the intent is clear even though it doesn't appear on the face of the TOS.

I see the TOS as a document that highlights the issues that can be problematic and that might result in points or a ban. It shouldn't be construed to limit the moderators from taking action when there is a problem that falls outside the scope of the document.

I don't blame people for raising this issue in this forum. For one, that's what this forum should be for. I dislike that some in the past have construed this forum as being the whine forum. I also have to say that Nublar7 was an extremely popular member who did not have a reputation for causing trouble prior to his ban. I have put together everything I know to have a pretty good guess as to what happened, and I'm not going to blast the staff for that choice or the choice not to address the matter in public. I will say that I hope that the staff is prepared for this topic coming up months into the future because there's little way of stopping it.

That's my two cents.

That's why I said they should just address it head on and let it be done.

 

[Fin Fan in Cali]

That's why I said they should just address it head on and let it be done.

The issue with Nublar7 is between the staff and himself. We want to keep it that way out of respect for Nublar7. We are not interested about dragging anyone through the mud here. This is a privacy issue, and it will remain that way.:wink:

 

[dlockz]

The issue with Nublar7 is between the staff and himself. We want to keep it that way out of respect for Nublar7. We are not interested about dragging anyone through the mud here. This is a privacy issue, and it will remain that way.:wink:

i don't truly think we could drag Nublar through the mud because he is so well respected by members of this site.

 

[Fin Fan in Cali]

i don't truly think we could drag Nublar through the mud because he is so well respected by members of this site.

The staff has made there decision.:wink: I look forward to your future positive posts.:wink:

 

[poisonphin]

The issue with Nublar7 is between the staff and himself. We want to keep it that way out of respect for Nublar7. We are not interested about dragging anyone through the mud here. This is a privacy issue, and it will remain that way.:wink:

Not trying to argue or anything but I dont think this topic will ever go away unless people find out what happened.

 

[Fin Fan in Cali]

Not trying to argue or anything but I dont think this topic will ever go away unless people find out what happened.

I understand what you are saying. The staff thought this was in the best interest of the site.

 

[cnc66]

hey, I just got thrown out and it asked me to log back in....you don't think I remembered my password do ya..arrrrgggg. I would like to compliment whoever set up the password recovery for dummies. It worked flawlessly and with zero delay, I was impressed. Thanks Andrew or 3P or Mindwarp....thanks

 

[dlockz]

The staff has made there decision.:wink: I look forward to your future positive posts.:wink:

Actually nothing negative about my post, I guess it all in how you take things. I disagreed with the take on the TOS, does that make me negative?