Official Infraction Appeal thread.

[Toma RNK]

Valid, the infraction was valid and was reversed more on TBC's prerogative than on merit.

[Rikudo Sennin]

"I read the first post in it's entirety. abc91001"
"I was infracted by <TheBlackChidori> on <01-03-11>"

Trying to be a mod and stating obvious things:
I know from the start my doing were unacceptable making me a nuisance to this forum. I have accepted that I was stating obvious things that common sense can tell. But, trying to be a Mod? At first I thought yeah I was acting like a mod. But Now I realize what did i do that I look like a Mod. I didnt even tell even once in my post that I am an official of this forum. And if posting the trademark "Requesting Thread Closure" seems like a moddish act, why does requesting a certain closure of a thread a backseat-modding act? It would be a backseat-modding act if i Told "Locking this Thread". But i never did even said once. And a Never-Expiring infraction? Even worse to the infraction that Err gave to that guy, thus he stating that it will expire in May 2011 but its still written as "Never" in the date of expiration.

Complaining About Infractions:
I did create a thread about my infraction, but it was not meant for any infraction complaints. That was meant for something like a news that saying Rikudo Sennin just got a new record, he was the first one to get this certain infraction etc. etc. But if exploiting my own infraction to the public is restricted then I will freely accept the said infraction.

I have nothing against TheBlackChidori and the officials, I just want to clear this in my mind as it is quite bugging me in the past few days.

[AshenREAPER]

Originally Posted by Rikudo Sennin

"I read the first post in it's entirety. abc91001"
"I was infracted by <TheBlackChidori> on <01-03-11>"

Trying to be a mod and stating obvious things:
I know from the start my doing were unacceptable making me a nuisance to this forum. I have accepted that I was stating obvious things that common sense can tell. But, trying to be a Mod? At first I thought yeah I was acting like a mod. But Now I realize what did i do that I look like a Mod. I didnt even tell even once in my post that I am an official of this forum. And if posting the trademark "Requesting Thread Closure" seems like a moddish act, why does requesting a certain closure of a thread a backseat-modding act? It would be a backseat-modding act if i Told "Locking this Thread". But i never did even said once. And a Never-Expiring infraction? Even worse to the infraction that Err gave to that guy, thus he stating that it will expire in May 2011 but its still written as "Never" in the date of expiration.

Complaining About Infractions:
I did create a thread about my infraction, but it was not meant for any infraction complaints. That was meant for something like a news that saying Rikudo Sennin just got a new record, he was the first one to get this certain infraction etc. etc. But if exploiting my own infraction to the public is restricted then I will freely accept the said infraction.

I have nothing against TheBlackChidori and the officials, I just want to clear this in my mind as it is quite bugging me in the past few days.

@your "Trying to be a mod and stating obvious things"

I can't tell if it's that you don't trust us to see when a thread is lockable or not, or if it's that you just want to have a sense of control over us for following your locking request, or perhaps you're trying to impress someone so that you can become a mod and lock stuff on your own? Whatever it is, it looks like you're trying to exercise a sense of power by deeming threads lockable when it's totally not your call to make, in other words it's called Backseat-Moderation. Furthermore, you do it often... Too often... which only emphasizes that "sense of power" statement.

Regardless of your reasoning, the facts are that: it's not your call to decide when a tech help thread gets closed, your thread lock requests are so needless and yet done so habitually that it's as good as spamming, you were asked to stop prior to the infraction meaning you had fair warning.

All in all, I think it was deserved, and I think 5 points is appropriate. The only thing I question is the unexpiring part of the infraction, so I'll probably consider expiring it in a year or so granted you don't do it again.


@your "Complaining About Infractions"

You were told not to joke about it, but you made a joke thread about it anyway. This either shows A. you're trying to passively complain about it simply by bringing it up after you were told not to, or B. you just wanted to joke about something that's really not all that grand to gloat about. Either way it was an immature thing to do after being warned not to do it so I'm perfectly fine with letting the infraction stand as is.

Penalty infraction waived. The unexpiring infraction didn't make this a total waste of time even if it IS going to stay there for a while.

[shinigan no sora]

I read the first post in its entirety. shinigan no sora

I was infracted by aurega on june 10 2012

The infraction was for inappropriate language by bypassing the word filter.

All I did was substitute asteriks(*) for a expletive in an atempt of self censoring and was infracted I believe unjustly and would like it reversed

[TheBlackChidori]

Had you not received a warning for this same thing before, I'd consider it.

That said, a copy of the rules but straight to the point.

Harassment

• Flaming - Insulting or baiting another to insult is not allowed.
• Trolling - Doing things to purposely anger users is not allowed.
• Swearing - The below applies when these words are NOT used for example purposes.
  • "The word you censored out, SnS" - Never allowed in any way shape or form. This even includes it being partially censored when the intent is obvious.

That said, while I'm not the one who infracted you as I tend to let things like that slide, I can speak for the Greens in saying that this infraction isn't going to be reversed and I hope it can be dropped like that. It was a small 2 point infraction, compared to another 5 Cult got last week. But either way, after that whole mess in the BG convo with you, cult, sns, and those KD fellas, your side got out of it with a slap on the wrist regardless of IWD's situation which was a seperate entity, while their party got permanently banned from the forum.

I hope such an outcome would prove that we aren't your enemies and hope to keep you as an active poster with us, but regardless it was a broken rule that you did in a topic that had already received enough mod attention to know better than to try to slide one by.

Infraction stands, and feel free to PM me if you wanna discuss it more.

[tsuki]

I read the first post in it's entirety. acb90210"
"I was infracted by <Kingsnoke> on <6/25/2012>"

I was infracted for flaming. If you read the discussion I was clearly insulting the valedictorian student from the article and not JLI2infinity.

[tsuki]

Originally Posted by Rasen_Chidori

You flamed and you used the 'F' word, censored or not, that always earns an infraction.

I flamed a person who does not exist on this site. You can't infract me for that. I recognize I used the f-word, but that is a different infraction. If you want to infract me for language, then use the correct infraction.

Spoiler:

Of course my post was edited by a mod, so an infraction for language is now invalid since the language no longer exists.

[AshenREAPER]

Originally Posted by tsuki

I flamed a person who does not exist on this site. You can't infract me for that.

"Keep discussions civil and respectful. Debate is good, flaming and harassment are not."

Rules are quite clear, as was your intent to flame. Who you directed it towards really doesn't matter in the slightest and is a direct rule violation all the same making it fair game for an infraction. To think that we can't infract you for it is nothing but your assumption, and was a poor gamble to make on your part.

The infraction stands. Penalty waived.

[Rikudo Sennin]

"I read the first post in it's entirety. abc90210"
"I was infracted by <TheBlackChidori> on <01-03-11>"

Trying to be a mod and stating obvious things:
One year and almost eight months had passed, and I am not back-modding anymore. This infraction says that it will never expire, and I think it should expire now since im not doing the said activity.