Yes, I was maybe a bit harsh earlier issuing you with a warning so quickly so my apologies for that one, but this is hardly the first time you have belittled a mapper in his own thread. That being said I absolutely agree with you that warnings should be handled in a professional manner and be written up in an offical way and PM'd to the user keeping it private. We will use this idea from now on in.
Lol that's really what you got from this? A hugbox? It's your choice if you want to start hugging people, I'm not telling you to.
A hugbox is a derogatory term for an environment, usually on the internet, in which a group with similar interests gathers to discuss topics in what they intend to be a safe, comforting, and confrontation-free environment.
There's more than one mod, and there's no such thing as a non biased person. Its unrealistic to expect us to do this perfectly but we're going to try our best.
So you admit that bias could *potentially* influence whether a warning or ban is given? That mods/admins could pull a random rule out of the planes of nonexistence and issue a warning for something like telling someone how to cheat on a map simply because of bias. A rule that was never mentioned beforehand.
Just cos its not directly in rules doesnt mean its against rules. Clearly mapper doesnt want people to cheat in his map, so you disrespected his choice by telling people how to modify his script to remove something he has added
To be honest, I don't think extreme rules are so effective. Restricting the forum also makes it worse. I'd say offensive and hateful people should be dealt with seriously, and derailment too, but at the same time, having the freedom to talk on the forum in always needed, and being respectful and friendly towards other members is a must. This way, the community will be a better place to visit.
Not what i meant by 'hugbox'. I meant this:Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hugbox
So you admit that bias could *potentially* influence whether a warning or ban is given?
That mods/admins could pull a random rule out of the planes of nonexistence and issue a warning for something like telling someone how to cheat on a map simply because of bias. A rule that was never mentioned beforehand.
So you outright admit that the warning was harsh(uncalled for) and my supposed past offenses influenced your decision to give me a warning(bias) yet you won't repeal it.
By that logic a person asking a mapper to add or change a feature(in a nice way or not) that they put into a map would be considered not respecting their choice.