Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,526
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Gonzalo00
    Newest Member
    Gonzalo00
    Joined

Fab Feb. SNE Banter/Disco Leggins


HoarfrostHubb

Recommended Posts

omg this is exciting... send up the signal!

 

 

FLOOD WARNINGNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TAUNTON MA804 AM EST THU FEB 28 2013RIC009-281700-/O.NEW.KBOX.FA.W.0001.130228T1304Z-130228T1700Z//00000.0.RS.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.OO/WASHINGTON RI-804 AM EST THU FEB 28 2013THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN TAUNTON HAS ISSUED A* URBAN AND SMALL STREAM FLOOD WARNING FOR...  RAIN AND SNOW MELT IN...  SOUTHWESTERN WASHINGTON COUNTY IN RHODE ISLAND...* UNTIL 1200 PM EST* AT 754 AM EST...THE PAWCATUCK RIVER IN WESTERLY RHODE ISLAND WAS  APPROACHING FLOOD STAGE AT 8 AM. THE PAWCATUCK IS INFLUENCED BY  LOCAL TIDES AND HIGH TIDE WILL OCCUR AROUND 1030 AM. THEREFORE  EXPECT MINOR FLOODING ALONG THE PAWCATUCK THROUGH 11 AM. THIS  FLOODING IS A RESULT OF HEAVY RAIN YESTERDAY ALONG WITH SNOW MELT.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 879
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Just wanted to post about why ChrisM was banned this morning. 

 

A few weeks ago he started editing the Tolland, CT Wikipedia page to include Kevin as a notable person complete with a short bio about him. He made multiple edits. He took it down and after the fact someone else put more stuff up. 

 

The staff thought that the posting of Kevin's full name and information about him on a public page was harassment and the decision was made to ban him.

 

This isn't the first run in ChrisM has had with staff - he's also been caught logging in with different names and having multiple accounts. 

 

I spoke with Chris this morning and explained everything to him. Hopefully, this is a good reminder that the staff takes harassment of any member seriously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drive by bannings now without explanation. He might have done something, but banning without explanation isn't cool

 

 

Guys don't assume there isn't a reason we don't know that.

The admin has layed out the rules in the NYC subforum among others. They aren't unreasonable. My only request would be a general, rough explanation to other members. If we don't know roughly what happened there's no way of knowing what we are to avoid or what line was crossed. Jmho it's informative just as much as its a deterrent to others.

I am not taking any side I have no idea what happened and have never had an issue with Chris.

 

This ain't a democracy unfortunately.

 

Chris seems like a damn nice guy.

 

I suppose I could wander over to Pete's site to cut and paste all his posts over to here, that wouldn't upset the mods would it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wanted to post about why ChrisM was banned this morning. 

 

A few weeks ago he started editing the Tolland, CT Wikipedia page to include Kevin as a notable person complete with a short bio about him. He made multiple edits. He took it down and after the fact someone else put more stuff up. 

 

The staff thought that the posting of Kevin's full name and information about him on a public page was harassment and the decision was made to ban him.

 

This isn't the first run in ChrisM has had with staff - he's also been caught logging in with different names and having multiple accounts. 

 

I spoke with Chris this morning and explained everything to him. Hopefully, this is a good reminder that the staff takes harassment of any member seriously. 

 

And there you have it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys don't assume there isn't a reason we don't know that.

The admin has layed out the rules in the NYC subforum among others. They aren't unreasonable. My only request would be a general, rough explanation to other members. If we don't know roughly what happened there's no way of knowing what we are to avoid or what line was crossed. Jmho it's informative just as much as its a deterrent to others.

I am not taking any side I have no idea what happened and have never had an issue with Chris.

 

Thanks for being patient and reasonable and not assume stuff about "drive by bannings".  The explanation would have been posted sooner if it hadn't happened during a slow period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted an explanation. 

 

Yeah, I didn't see that until after I posted.  

 

I think people sometimes take this board too personally and let that effect their better judgement. 

 

Not that I ever do anything remotely ban worthy but I was thinking how I would buy myself an extra hour of free time per day if i were banned.  lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snownh did the same thing to me yesterday. I don't know if he took it down or not. Someone made me aware of both of them. Chris M was just a dumb college prank but you guys know how I feel about Snownh. He has stalked me for sometime.

 

You are famous now...so you have to deal with these issues like real celebrities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for being patient and reasonable and not assume stuff about "drive by bannings".  The explanation would have been posted sooner if it hadn't happened during a slow period.

 

Randy I support the staff and I like the idea of the stepped approach posted in the NYC subforum long as rough explanations are posted so we all know where the lines are being drawn.  The explanations keep the natives from getting restless and also provide a guideline for all of us.    JMHO, more adherence to that type of stepped approached (form the NYC subforum) will end up preventing overall/swift bannings in the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Randy I support the staff and I like the idea of the stepped approach posted in the NYC subforum long as rough explanations are posted so we all know where the lines are being drawn.  The explanations keep the natives from getting restless and also provide a guideline for all of us.    JMHO, more adherence to that type of stepped approached (form the NYC subforum) will end up preventing overall/swift bannings in the long term.

 

I agree with that when it comes to things like trolling and general board behavior. When it's something involving harassment of a member I have no problem going right to the top especially when there were/have been other issues (multiple accounts, etc). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe you thought we banned somebody for calling you a dummy, dummy. 

 

Now I'm voting to ban you.

 

Honestly, editing a wiki page would be the last thing on my mind. I thought it was something he said on here...and that was the only thing I can think of..as silly as it sounds. I thought maybe WeatherNC went on a power trip again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that when it comes to things like trolling and general board behavior. When it's something involving harassment of a member I have no problem going right to the top especially when there were/have been other issues (multiple accounts, etc). 

I wonder how many here have actually read the Forum rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Randy I support the staff and I like the idea of the stepped approach posted in the NYC subforum long as rough explanations are posted so we all know where the lines are being drawn.  The explanations keep the natives from getting restless and also provide a guideline for all of us.    JMHO, more adherence to that type of stepped approached (form the NYC subforum) will end up preventing overall/swift bannings in the long term.

 

Thanks.  We're not out to ban folks.  In fact, we get criticized a lot for NOT banning people.  We try to give everyone, even bad eggs, a decent shot.   I don't have any personal issues with ChrisM and in fact, we are (were?) friends on FB.   His banning was actually more for cumulative actions and this last one was the last straw.  With that said, we do take members' privacy extremely serious and posting personal info is a huge no no and a bannable offense by itself.   We changed policy a while ago and started to offer explanations for banned members (except those that needed none i.e somebody using racial, homophobic, sexist slurs etc).   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...