So it seems then, that to get a ban, you would more than likely have to have your posts reported before anything is done? However, if you blatantly break the AUP, no-one complains, you're more than likely to get off? That there is, at the least an unfair inconsistency.Antiriad2097 wrote:I don't think there's a deliberate double standard applied, just a reaction from mods to reports.
For instance, I suspect The Laird has a macro set up to report any instance of anything ever that doesn't explicitly agree with his view at any given time. Unfortunately, this means mods have to react to that and act appropriately.
On the other hand, as Clarance has said, he doesn't report stuff, so hence you get things like The Beans' aggressive posts going untouched, since Clarance hasn't indicated he's upset or offended by them, he just posts a response in the thread if he feels like it and moves on.
So, not so much a double standard from the mods, more just different people being different and acting/reacting differently.
And just for the record, I don't want The Beans given a ban, or anyone else for that matter. I happen to think bans are, for the most part, petty and pointless (Isn't DRIP still posting under an different name now?) Merely pointing out inconsistencies that leads to people (me!) getting peed-off.