Ahhh... i love my avatar
I'd say that would have to be a given to be fair - as for images people post.Originally Posted by Neil Pickup
marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!
Anyone want to join the Society?
Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.
Shounak has brought out important points here.Originally Posted by shounak
1st filter and 2nf filter warnings and then bans are not being carried out. Also on the very few ocassions people are being warned it is not being put above their avatars.
People are not being warned for blatant filter breaches quite consistently. If the excuse is too many posts/threads to check out:
1) Then get more moderators.
2) And why is action not taken even when the report post option is used to report filter breaches.
CW should strive to be a family forum. I agree with the policy. Am very dissatisfied with the implementation.
Last edited by Pratters; 26-11-2005 at 12:39 AM.
Quite right. I'm also not happy with my message being ignored. It's simply showing inadaquacy on part of the mod or Admin team.. I've asked this about 3 times and I'm certain moderators have read it..
Is an answer too much to ask?
**Edited**Originally Posted by shounak
We take note of people's filter warnings outside of the user titles now rather.
If you report a post, a judgement call on whether it warrants a warning is made by the moderation team.
If a filter breach occurs, it is a filter breach. Senior members should be more aware. So a warning should be put in place and there is not much question of judgement calls in my opinion.
For a pointer Australia qualified for the World Cup and a lot of members breached filter in that thread. Maybe warning periods can be limited and if it is seen member is not breaching filter for a length of time again the warning can be revoked.
I definitely see the need for action on filter breaches more vigilantly.
Any way that is all I have to say on the matter.
Last edited by Pratters; 26-11-2005 at 01:05 AM.
What's the judgement call based on? I personally felt Pratyush's was rather innocuous, I've seen words used in a far worse context since then..
But fair enough. If everyone's being treated with the same (what I consider to be a) hard line, then I've got no problems whatsoever..
Let me get this right. Instead of saying sh*t, we have to write it out properly, ****. That's just stupid, causes confusion.
Why should senior members be more aware?Originally Posted by Pratyush
It's only the moderators who need to know.
No, it's not stupid, otherwise, why would the filter be there in the first place?Originally Posted by Buddhmaster
I can see Buddh's point, there are a few words which get changed to ****
RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990 - 15/4/2006
Isn't that the whole point of it? You're not supposed to know the word at all, otherwise it's just as bad as the real wordOriginally Posted by Jamee999
More aware of not creating breaches..Originally Posted by marc71178
It could completely change the meaning of a sentance!Originally Posted by burkey_1988
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)