05-01-2024, 11:44 PM
(05-01-2024, 11:39 PM)Rowan383 Wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xsrjy7140Lw(05-01-2024, 11:29 PM)Dildo Shwaggins Wrote:Can you provide me with the relevant information concerning how the rules define trolling?(05-01-2024, 11:23 PM)Rowan383 Wrote:Your own evidence proves you were spamming him in psay which would fall under trolling rules. Being an annoyance to a staff member while they’re trying to carry out their duties falls well within those guidelines.(05-01-2024, 10:49 PM)Dildo Shwaggins Wrote: I don’t Format aside you claimed not to spam him and the only evidence to support any of your claims is you spamming him.Repeating a question 4 times over the span of a minute or so because I had reason to believe I was not being answered qualifies as "trolling/flaming?"
It’s a bold strategy Cotton, let’s see if it pays off for him
Trolling clearly implies bad faith, the fact that I stopped questioning after I had my answer proves it was in good faith.
Flaming is punishable if you're insulting someone and told to stop and fail to stop (correct me if I'm wrong).
Do any of you have any actual substantive reason that what I did qualifies as what Foxka accused me of?
"Being an annoyance to a staff member while they’re trying to carry out their duties falls well within those guidelines."
I was not a "hinderance." If anything I was the reason he began to properly fulfill his duties in the first place. Because, as shown in his screenshots, he only began to investigate AFTER he had already settled it and I began to ask for his reasoning.
He was failing to carry out his duties, you can see that from his own screenshots he provided.
(05-01-2024, 11:38 PM)slater Wrote:But it doesn't really work as a joke in this thread? Either you have a strange sense of humor or you didn't read my post.(05-01-2024, 11:32 PM)Rowan383 Wrote:cause it's pretty funny common generalization theme that happens with staff abuse reports dinks.(05-01-2024, 11:29 PM)slater Wrote:So then why did you reply implying that this was a post about a wrongful slay when I have no issue with the moderation decision?(05-01-2024, 11:24 PM)Rowan383 Wrote: Had you actually bothered to read before forming an opinion, you would've seen the following:I did read it lol
"Let me be clear, the reason Foxka did not slay Deerly was absolutely valid, I have zero issue with his moderation decision there"
Ex- TTT Mod
Dong's Favorite Tmod