Go back
Forum bans

Forum bans

General

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Palynka
Pseudo-equality of rights, that's what I said.
Chess is a game intended to be started on equal terms.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Chess is a game intended to be started on equal terms.
Aren't simuls chess to you?

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Palynka
Aren't simuls chess to you?
Standard chess is a game intended to be started on equal terms.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Palynka
Self-insult is to insult as masturbation is to sex.

Ban ban, you're dead.
With the abysmal quality of insults around here, it's a lot more pleasurable doing it to myself.

I died years ago.

😞

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
Well, I know from experience that you can get a ban without having the slightest clue that you might have done anything wrong. But your experience says that can't be, so I must be an idiot who doesn't have a place in modern society.

I am sure most bans are for reasons the poster will be able to figure out xymself, and apparently sometimes people d ...[text shortened]... explanation, you basically say that people like me or Dr Strangelove are lying. We aren't.
Not an idiot, a softie. I think your reaction - and those who argue along the same lines - to the actions of those who volunteer to moderate these forums shows a lack of respect for the time they put in, the good work they do, and the fact that they may have to act quickly when situation requires. To demand explanations / warnings etc is going to place a further burden on these volunteers.

The TOS states: RHP reserves the right at any time and from time to time to modify or discontinue, temporarily or permanently, the Service (or any part thereof) with or without notice.

Until you get the TOS changed, then this crusade is pointless.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Standard chess is a game intended to be started on equal terms.
If it were truly equal, then one side would not get to move first. Hence the need to balance games out into pairs.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Standard chess is a game intended to be started on equal terms.
There are many variants of chess. That doesn't make any one of them "lesser" forms of chess. Besides, statistically white has an advantage over black. Should all games be forced to be of at least two matches, so that it can be "started on equal terms"?

It's a non-argument really.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nordlys
Yes, I noticed that wasn't all that logical. 😳 So to clear that up, he basically calls me an idiot or a liar (although if I'd be a liar, he might call me an idiot for being a liar), i.e. either being too stupied to understand the moderators decisions or making it up. As I am not making it up, idiot will do fine.
You're calling yourself an idiot. I generalised the whingers to be a bunch of softies.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Daemon Sin
If it were truly equal, then one side would not get to move first. Hence the need to balance games out into pairs.
I'm happy you agree. 🙂

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

why do people feel the need to know why other people were banned? in what way will this knowledge affect you? trev33 was banned for using bad language-is anybody going to cool theirs down? of course not!

yes, inform each person individually, but do we really need to make a big fuss every time someone gets banned?

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Palynka
There are many variants of chess. That doesn't make any one of them "lesser" forms of chess. Besides, statistically white has an advantage over black. Should all games be forced to be of at least two matches, so that it can be "started on equal terms"?

It's a non-argument really.
FFS. One side has to begin, that doesn't make it unfair.
One side having 36 times the others timebank certainly does make it unfair.

Clock
Vote Up
1
Vote Down

From what I've learned, rmacken was banned 3 days for general creepiness.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by genius
why do people feel the need to know why other people were banned? in what way will this knowledge affect you? trev33 was banned for using bad language-is anybody going to cool theirs down? of course not!

yes, inform each person individually, but do we really need to make a big fuss every time someone gets banned?
You ever see those Police camera shows where some mook is getting arrested and all their drunk friends come bundling over to try and interfere?

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
FFS. One side has to begin, that doesn't make it unfair.
One side having 36 times the others timebank certainly does make it unfair.
It's not unfair because the terms were agreed implicitly whenever you started a game with a subscriber.

The only ones you can actually have a little bit of a point (but it's still massive whinging) are the ones that were ongoing when the system changed. But this only shows how petty your point is.

Clock
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Sunburnt
rmacken wasn't given an explanation, just the ban
Maybe he wasn't given an explanation, but he knows, as do all of us that were active in his threads yesterday, exactly why he was banned. He was banned for language and he was blistering it way before Trev arrived. Trev got noticed, told everyone he had been noticed, and then made his choice to press it. There really wasn't much question that someone was going to get banned soon as far as they pushed the envelope.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.