A plea for non-discrimination

[cpr]

Well seeing that post on its own, I'd say the tone and mannor is very patronising, and would likely provoke a reaction from someone who doesnt like being condescended.

'dear most respected sir'
'o most distinguished member'

Not exactly written in a style that portrays respect

 

[Cevno]

Tbf, that whole conversation was in a similar tone from both the sides.

 

[cpr]

The only post I've seen is the one here, not followed whether it is, but the question was about that post so commented on the evidence he provided.

 

[benchmark00]

Have a cry ****, fmd.

 

[Bun]

I see my thread on inconsistency in ban lengths have been deleted. Fusion has been kind enough to put in a VM to that effect.

I will summarise my issue without reference to specific members here, as I have forgotten my email ID with which I registered here. My grouse chiefly being that some members are continuing to get away with very light ban period regardless of the multiple instances of getting banned in a short time frame, wheras some others immediately get served lengthy ban periods for first offence. A review of the ban announcements thread should suffice as proof for this I surmise.

 

[Prince EWS]

Ban lengths are automatic with infraction points; we don't set them manually. Any inconsistency is in your head.

 

[Hurricane]

name names

 

[Hurricane]

Ban lengths are automatic with infraction points; we don't set them manually. Any inconsistency is in your head.

Next time one of my threads gets deleted can I start it up again in another thread?
Please advise. I wish to be treated consistently;

 

[Bun]

Ban lengths are automatic with infraction points; we don't set them manually. Any inconsistency is in your head.

name names

I won't as it will turn this into a **** fest.

Prince, I have told Fusion about this.

 

[Prince EWS]

Prince, I have told Fusion about this.

Well that changes everything. As you've told Fusion about this, ban lengths are actually entirely arbitrary and usually decided upon on the basis of race, religion or favourite brand of toothpaste.

 

[Fusion]

I see my thread on inconsistency in ban lengths have been deleted. Fusion has been kind enough to put in a VM to that effect.

I will summarise my issue without reference to specific members here, as I have forgotten my email ID with which I registered here. My grouse chiefly being that some members are continuing to get away with very light ban period regardless of the multiple instances of getting banned in a short time frame, wheras some others immediately get served lengthy ban periods for first offence. A review of the ban announcements thread should suffice as proof for this I surmise.

Bans are based on the type of infraction incurred and do not necessarily increase in length with each subsequent banning. Also, each infraction comes with an expiration date. Therefore if the infraction expires, so do the points associated with them, hence reducing the chance of a lengthy ban. I'm going to reiterate what I wrote to you earlier: It is not your responsibility to police the other members and lobby for their punishment. If you have problems with a post or a member, please report them and the mods will take action if necessary.

I will also appreciate it people do not respond further to this and just let it be.

 

[Johnners]

Well that changes everything. As you've told Fusion about this, ban lengths are actually entirely arbitrary and usually decided upon on the basis of race, religion of favourite brand of toothpaste.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Well that changes everything. As you've told Fusion about this, ban lengths are actually entirely arbitrary and usually decided upon on the basis of race, religion of favourite brand of toothpaste.

Ooo, ya sarky sod...

 

[GIMH]

Well that changes everything. As you've told Fusion about this, ban lengths are actually entirely arbitrary and usually decided upon on the basis of race, religion of favourite brand of toothpaste.

Great post.

 

[fredfertang]

CW Moderator Training clearly the same as that provided to Magistrates

 

[Flem274*]

Banging the hammer was my favourite part.

 

[Bun]

Well that changes everything. As you've told Fusion about this, ban lengths are actually entirely arbitrary and usually decided upon on the basis of race, religion or favourite brand of toothpaste.

Yeah make fun when one member poses a valid question after gagging his mouth with intimidation. How surprising

I have some respect for the set up here that's why I have refrained from taking this down the **** route.

Thank you Fusion for your efforts, although I am not 100% satisfied.

 

[Nate]

Thank you Fusion for your efforts, although I am not 100% satisfied.

Same here. Your average song on the radio lasts longer, is less annoying to listen to and you might hear it again the next day.

 

[cpr]

Banging the hammer was my favourite part.

So as a mod you can touch this?

Yeah make fun when one member poses a valid question after gagging his mouth with intimidation. How surprising

Intimidation, more effective than old socks

I have some respect for the set up here that's why I have refrained from taking this down the **** route.

Thank you Fusion for your efforts, although I am not 100% satisfied.

Oh so asking the same question again and again until you get the answer you want, rather than the correct one, is not the **** route?

 

[Burgey]

Didn't know where else to put this, but there are a lot of "extreme" threads in CC at the mo.

Best 'keeper/ batsman
Best Australian quick
Worst ever umpiring decision
Best catch ever
Greatest ever ODI innings.
Best ever Ashes series

They've been made by a number of different usernames too, in recent times. What is the reason for this phenomenon? Anyone know?