![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
deleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct infodeleting chars he has info to isnt technically against the rules. players are responsible for their own acct info
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
|
|||
|
Paragraphs are your friend. Jesus Christ not reading any of that word jumble.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#4
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#5
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#6
|
|||
|
I think Sirken was just using his discretion tho when changing his policy on the fly because he liked Rettiwalk - shits classic.
Rettiwalk took a tip from pudge prolly. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
calm your beard
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
Before the Ender incident with Mellow, when Northwest had been deleted and stripped by Retti and it was known by everyone, that was the response I got from Sirken. Then a couple months later they decide stripping / deleting is now perma bannable, and not only that, accounts which get items are also bannable. It's this inconsistency people dislike you tards, not the actual punishment of people who do douchebag things.
__________________
Checkraise Dragonslayer <Retired>
"My armor color matches my playstyle" | ||
|
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
I don't know if this is like your second or third forum account, or if you've been here before 2011 but I've been here on and off for few years and things are always in flux here. Hell Nilbog wants to ban acct selling so that's gonna rustle few feathers.
Rules change people change, get used to it. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#10
|
||||
|
Quote:
The first event triggered the other. Personally in this case I would have restored everything. Not banned anyone. Then made an announcement stating the new rules and what punishment would be if they happened again. This was the entire problem with the situation. GM far too often look at things in a vacuum. They don't understand the circumstances surround the events which happened which leads to many problems. | |||
|
|
||||
![]() |
|
|