Feb 03 2012, 05:48 PM
My point is your trying to change the rules to confront a problem that doesn't exist.
Your poking at ignoring admins is not a valid reason to be punished, but ignore that the case you are using as the example the admin was enforcing a rule. 99% of the time ignoring admin is when they notify the player they are violating the rule. The other 1% the admin is usually relieved of his privileges, as you elaborate and naive reinforces.
Your tone implies a lot. I know my reaction is all probably because me not caring for your writing style or tone. I would say my tone is very abrasive in my responses, but your trying to identify a problem that isn't there. This is irritating because ru and myself put up with a lot of shit on a daily basis and when we try to bring civility to the game these admin abuse threads come, mostly unwarranted.
If you read old abuse threads you would see when admins overstep their bounds root/seniors correct the problem and a new precedent is set.
Its de ja vu, because I feel you take everything far to literal and you don't see the intent behind what is written. Point in case, your response to Matt misses his intent completely.
Your poking at ignoring admins is not a valid reason to be punished, but ignore that the case you are using as the example the admin was enforcing a rule. 99% of the time ignoring admin is when they notify the player they are violating the rule. The other 1% the admin is usually relieved of his privileges, as you elaborate and naive reinforces.
Your tone implies a lot. I know my reaction is all probably because me not caring for your writing style or tone. I would say my tone is very abrasive in my responses, but your trying to identify a problem that isn't there. This is irritating because ru and myself put up with a lot of shit on a daily basis and when we try to bring civility to the game these admin abuse threads come, mostly unwarranted.
If you read old abuse threads you would see when admins overstep their bounds root/seniors correct the problem and a new precedent is set.
Its de ja vu, because I feel you take everything far to literal and you don't see the intent behind what is written. Point in case, your response to Matt misses his intent completely.