by nowandagain » Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:02 pm
TheMailman wrote:In my personal opinion, and from previous clashes, I'd say Andy316 needs to be atleast warned.
He violates the reputation system and is foul to everyone. He has sworn in quite a few places. A while ago, I gave him a
for it and he then went out of his way to give me a
in response.
You can't give a warning unless it's associated with a specific post that he's posted. If you try to give him a warning from a really old post, it's kind of unjustified because if he was to receive a warning from that post - it should have been done promptly.
Plus, I don't recommend you giving out the warning unless it's ultimately necessary as he may bring back some sort of 'retaliation' (e.g. playing around with the reputation system
). It's probably best if admin was to give the warning in this instance.
Just my thoughts.
nowandagain [rockon]
[quote="TheMailman"]In my personal opinion, and from previous clashes, I'd say Andy316 needs to be atleast warned.
He violates the reputation system and is foul to everyone. He has sworn in quite a few places. A while ago, I gave him a {down} for it and he then went out of his way to give me a {down} in response.[/quote]
You can't give a warning unless it's associated with a specific post that he's posted. If you try to give him a warning from a really old post, it's kind of unjustified because if he was to receive a warning from that post - it should have been done promptly.
Plus, I don't recommend you giving out the warning unless it's ultimately necessary as he may bring back some sort of 'retaliation' (e.g. playing around with the reputation system {down}). It's probably best if admin was to give the warning in this instance.
Just my thoughts.
nowandagain [rockon]
Upload your pictures here: Surf My Pictures | Google Photos | Imgbb | Tumblr | Imgur