Tweet
Yesterday, I replied to a message in a forum thread that I was the "owner" of, which had been going for a few weeks.
Yesterday afternoon I got a notice from an admin telling me to check out rule #5, which is all about replying and quoting very long messages full of images and stuff, and just saying something like "I agree." or "Yeah!" or something like that. It's for bandwidth reasons, you see.
Not understanding where I had crossed this line, I asked for clarification, and the admin told me which post it was in. I looked, and saw that I had quoted a little bit of extra text (9 lines) to make sure everyone knew what I was talking about when I replied. Yep, 9 lines of text. No images. I had even clipped the guy's YouTube link out. I think that back in the days of 9600 baud modems, 9 lines of text might have taken an extra 1/4 second to transmit, using a couple of bytes of bandwidth. My reply was 3 lines of test, so it amounted to about 30% of the original text. That's hardly a violation of the spirit OR the letter of that rule.
Well, I had been having kind of a grumpy day, and I felt that this was heavy handed and a little bit ridiculous, and I told him so. Of course, authority figured on internet forums must not be questioned by the sheeple, and he did his best to stomp on me. I should note that during this exchange, he quoted my 13 lines of text explaining my position, and his response was one line of text. So he had violated the rule by a much larger margin than my original "offense".
I finished up by telling him I didn't need/want to participate in a forum where the admins behave this way, and gave him my express permission to delete my account, ban my IP, and do whatever else he felt he needed to in order to feel that he had the upper hand on me.
Surprisingly, he cooled down at that point and has decided to ignore me for now, which suits me fine.
I have only participated in one thread on that forum, and have only one gun of that brand, so I dunno whether I care about that forum or not. I'm considering another gun of that brand, so I guess it might be a good idea not to get banned just yet - but being an IT guy with considerable resources, I can probably get on there one way or another if I need to.
Anyway, the reason I am telling you all of this (aside, of course, from my insecure desire for validation), is this:
I want to express my appreciation for the patient, mature, even-handed approach that the mods of this forum take. You guys have the right attitude, and you understand that the forum is about the community, and the conversations, and wouldn't be worth jack **** without the users that participate in it.
Thank you for your effort to make Kahr-Talk a user-friendly forum.
Yesterday afternoon I got a notice from an admin telling me to check out rule #5, which is all about replying and quoting very long messages full of images and stuff, and just saying something like "I agree." or "Yeah!" or something like that. It's for bandwidth reasons, you see.
Not understanding where I had crossed this line, I asked for clarification, and the admin told me which post it was in. I looked, and saw that I had quoted a little bit of extra text (9 lines) to make sure everyone knew what I was talking about when I replied. Yep, 9 lines of text. No images. I had even clipped the guy's YouTube link out. I think that back in the days of 9600 baud modems, 9 lines of text might have taken an extra 1/4 second to transmit, using a couple of bytes of bandwidth. My reply was 3 lines of test, so it amounted to about 30% of the original text. That's hardly a violation of the spirit OR the letter of that rule.
Well, I had been having kind of a grumpy day, and I felt that this was heavy handed and a little bit ridiculous, and I told him so. Of course, authority figured on internet forums must not be questioned by the sheeple, and he did his best to stomp on me. I should note that during this exchange, he quoted my 13 lines of text explaining my position, and his response was one line of text. So he had violated the rule by a much larger margin than my original "offense".
I finished up by telling him I didn't need/want to participate in a forum where the admins behave this way, and gave him my express permission to delete my account, ban my IP, and do whatever else he felt he needed to in order to feel that he had the upper hand on me.
Surprisingly, he cooled down at that point and has decided to ignore me for now, which suits me fine.
I have only participated in one thread on that forum, and have only one gun of that brand, so I dunno whether I care about that forum or not. I'm considering another gun of that brand, so I guess it might be a good idea not to get banned just yet - but being an IT guy with considerable resources, I can probably get on there one way or another if I need to.
Anyway, the reason I am telling you all of this (aside, of course, from my insecure desire for validation), is this:
I want to express my appreciation for the patient, mature, even-handed approach that the mods of this forum take. You guys have the right attitude, and you understand that the forum is about the community, and the conversations, and wouldn't be worth jack **** without the users that participate in it.
Thank you for your effort to make Kahr-Talk a user-friendly forum.
Just sayn
Comment