Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Python.

Definition of spam

Recommended Posts

Python.

Spam is shitposting (AKA irrelevant nonsense) on threads in a short time span

 

Cecily didn't spam. dunno if whoever banned her read what she posted on those threads

Yes, she did post on a lot of threads in a short amount of time, but all her comments were relevant

The reason she did this is because she has little time online these days plus her last ban, so she posted and commented on what she wanted to before she left again for a while due to school/last ban. This isn't a reason for a ban, right? Or am I misinformed on my definition?

 

Show me a comment where she posted something irrelevant or drama-related or utterly stupid

I just want justification for what happened, because I don't think this was very justified

 

And I posted this on my own accord. She didn't ask me to or even bring it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Дебра

Spam = annoying useless crap, often in bulk.

 

 

 

It's fixed apparently now? Or am I late to the party?

If you believe this, on a dead thread which was clearly resolved, isn't spam then idk what is spam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Python.

If you believe this, on a dead thread which was clearly resolved, isn't spam then idk what is spam.

 

And your definition of a dead thread is...2 days old?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Дебра

And your definition of a dead thread is...2 days old?

 

Yes. The OP had a working gif in their signature so I'm pretty sure it was resolved but idk...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lib3l

And your definition of a dead thread is...2 days old?

The issue was the guys gif in his sig. It could be seen clearly working. There was no reason to post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Python.

The issue was the guys gif in his sig. It could be seen clearly working. There was no reason to post.

 

And that might be one example, even if I assumed you were right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Дебра

And that might be one example, even if I assumed you were right

 

It was clear he was posting just for the sake of posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Python.

It was clear he was posting just for the sake of posting.

 

She was posting because she was away for a long while, and school is taking up most of her time

 

Either way, I wanna hear from a mod on this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
puddingkip

Well I was the one that banned cecily. Cecily posted 30 odd posts in the span of 15 minutes, none of them really contributing to any thread whatsoever. If done individually I probably would have ignored it but with it happening in such massive quantities I felt a warning was in place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Python.

Well I was the one that banned cecily. Cecily posted 30 odd posts in the span of 15 minutes, none of them really contributing to any thread whatsoever. If done individually I probably would have ignored it but with it happening in such massive quantities I felt a warning was in place

 

Honest question, is it possible to have a mod reconsider or even void a ban that's in place?

 

I mean, she just got back, and I told ya why she posted that much in that short time

I'd honestly do the same if in her situation. Easier than waiting 15 minutes to post on every thread I missed and genuinely wanted to post on

I'd probably forget, and in that situation, I would have to wait another 24 hours 

 

This being said, I won't fight it, she's not #1 top priority, just asking for a little reconsideration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Betasecret

http://i.imgur.com/klSJMjC.png?1

And if you look at the one thread forb posted in you'll see the previous comment was also from Cecily.

 

I can understand Cecily was happy that she got unbanned, but just because you get unbanned doesn't mean you should post in each thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Python.

http://i.imgur.com/klSJMjC.png?1

And if you look at the one thread forb posted in you'll see the previous comment was also from Cecily.

 

I can understand Cecily was happy that she got unbanned, but just because you get unbanned doesn't mean you should post in each thread. 

 

I've done the same thing in the last community I was in and wasn't even scorned for it

Who was she hurting by posting 18 times on separate threads with mostly genuine comments because she wouldn't have a chance for another couple days

 

Wait, I said I wouldn't fight this. Whoops. I'll wait for puddingkip's reconsideration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
puddingkip

Honest question, is it possible to have a mod reconsider or even void a ban that's in place?

 

I mean, she just got back, and I told ya why she posted that much in that short time

I'd honestly do the same if in her situation. Easier than waiting 15 minutes to post on every thread I missed and genuinely wanted to post on

I'd probably forget, and in that situation, I would have to wait another 24 hours 

 

This being said, I won't fight it, she's not #1 top priority, just asking for a little reconsideration

 

Yes a ban can be reconsidered or appealed.

 

And it's not the posting. Posting a whole lot of quality content is not a problem, the problem is posting whole lots of low-quality and pretty much useless content. That is what spamming is, and in my judgement is what cecily did, hence the warning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Dusk

Honest question, is it possible to have a mod reconsider or even void a ban that's in place?

 

I mean, she just got back, and I told ya why she posted that much in that short time

I'd honestly do the same if in her situation. Easier than waiting 15 minutes to post on every thread I missed and genuinely wanted to post on

I'd probably forget, and in that situation, I would have to wait another 24 hours 

 

This being said, I won't fight it, she's not #1 top priority, just asking for a little reconsideration

look on the bright side man, its only 24 hrs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Avenging Flame

Well I was the one that banned cecily. Cecily posted 30 odd posts in the span of 15 minutes, none of them really contributing to any thread whatsoever. If done individually I probably would have ignored it but with it happening in such massive quantities I felt a warning was in place

You and Awesome used to do that all the time and top it off with "Whhheee I have the last post in every forum" status. I didn't personally check every post but the ones I did see were on topic and contributing to the topic, often much more so than the stuff you used to post when you would do this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CourtneyWendysCommercials

It's common knowledge that she's not my favourite person, but I agree, that's a little extreme. a few were obviously unneeded comments just to scrape a few extra posts on her post count, she may have stretched a bit, but a ban was a little unnecessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
puddingkip

You and Awesome used to do that all the time and top it off with "Whhheee I have the last post in every forum" status. I didn't personally check every post but the ones I did see were on topic and contributing to the topic, often much more so than the stuff you used to post when you would do this.

Cecily was not the first to do this, no

Cecily was also not the first to receive a warning for doing this. Plus, wouldn't that be Santa or Chigga? I don't ever recall awesome trying this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Avenging Flame

I remember instances of Awesome doing it, you, Santa, Pyroman, even I did it once. The point is that she should have received a warning for it, not a ban. The precedent has always been a warning, so why was she banned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Teeny Tiny Cat

Idk the context of other bans or anything, but whether someone gets a warning vs a ban generally depends on their history, surely? If she'd never been banned before she might have just got a warning but that's not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
puddingkip

I remember instances of Awesome doing it, you, Santa, Pyroman, even I did it once. The point is that she should have received a warning for it, not a ban. The precedent has always been a warning, so why was she banned?

  

Idk the context of other bans or anything, but whether someone gets a warning vs a ban generally depends on their history, surely? If she'd never been banned before she might have just got a warning but that's not the case.

Yes this. Warnings get you banned if your warning count is 5 or higher. Longer bans for people with more warnings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...