[Locked] Kiraneko got a 3 day ban

It was annoying and I had to block every instance of it with adblock.

You all fought a losing battle.

Sometimes you have to try to a difference even if it's impossible.

When a moderator asks you to do something do yourself a favor and comply. Ignoring us will only harm you. What difference do you think it would have made?

Hence why i said you can't protest the hierarchy. We have no say on what jacob allows by proxy. Fakku isn't an authoritarian system... we can just not come.

Amy didn't do what she did to spite you she only did it because she felt she was not at fault and were instead her thought was, "Waar is just being Waar." You didn't disclose the reason you want her avatar to change. I assume it was Answer A in my Warr Multiple Choice Test, if you gave a explanation maybe she would probably have been more compliant with your request and if not then you had all right to ban. Just because a mod has the assumed power of knowing what is best for everyone that doesn't mean you know what is best all the time especially when the mod just acts like to mess with other people. As result something like this happens where it looks like you just banned Amy for no reason from people who don't know the whole story and you ban someone who would have just been compliant if you gave a reason.

Hrmm? Fakku is an authoritarianism system, you have to blindly follow the rules and have no say in them, nor who leads you. The only real difference is you do have a voice in that you can make a thread in feedback when you don't like something but whether the leaders choose to hear you out is entirely up to them alone. It's fairly close to totalitarianism in that we monitor every section closely and attempt to control all aspects of posting, and IB is your allowance of freedom(of a sort). If you meant Fakku isn't a democracy then that I agree with.

I had a reply explaining my actions written out for shotty but then I realized that I don't have to explain myself. When I ask a user to do something it's me politely saying "do it". I don't owe kir and explanation nor do I owe one to any of you. I don't have to justify my actions. For users to try and "protest" the ban by emulating actions that got another user banned is a poor method to deal with this, which is why they got a harsher punishment.

First of all, whut? Might want to rework that sentence a bit so it can be more cohesive.

Second of all there is no "whole" story. Everything that happened has already been explained.

Yes, he really is that petty.

Not that I have to but I did have a reason, I just don't feel like explaining myself.

In fact, kir should know about the reason as he or she got to me through a 3rd party on Skype.

None of this makes my statement wrong or invalid. You had your reason/s, and told her why. Not giving an elaborate or satisfactory respond is just part of the "whole story".

Sound like all my English Professors.

The Story was Waar told Amy to change her avi with no explanation. Amy said no. Waar banned her. Now we're here. There's crucial part of the story I want to know. Why did Waar ask Amy to change her avi? If it is the answer I think it is then I will drop it.

It's not the pettiness I have an problem with. I have problem with execution in the matter if Waar just told Amy why she needed to change it then Waar would get his wish and Amy would be here, a possible win/win.

Well he did say he didn't her avi and he told her to change it. She said no because she didn't think it violated any rules, he said it didn't matter and what he says goes.

He did give a reason. He doesn't need to elaborate any further than that because he has "authority".

You all should kiss.

C.C Lemon out.

The avi is annoying anyway. I appreciate gifs, but not this kind of gifs.

My point is: "Because Waar said so" is enough of a reason to comply. I did tell one of her pals what my real reason was but the fact that she rejected what I said for whatever reason is why she has 3 days off. This is not "listen to the moderator if you think what they're saying is fair", it's "a mod told me to do something, I'm going to do it". It's literally the same reason why koko was perma banned, she didn't agree with my judgement and decided her opinion superseded my authority, which it did not.

edit: Cruz, my objection was about the being called petty, which doesn't seem to fit in this case. I can be petty, but this time I'm just doing my job without holding a users hand.

I'm Gootecks bitches~! *Laugh*

I'm gonna drop it. I have walked this road before and it only leads nowhere. You're right though.

Thank god for adblock, I don't have to see ads or avis I don't particularly like.

People would be more willing to respect authority if you did, though.


And they cannot stop doing the wrong thing if they do not know what the wrong thing that they are doing wrong is.

Since I'm not missing any crucial piece of information, we'll leave at it, "We have different opinions about your behavior". There's absolutely nothing to indicate my assertion is wrong though.



Yep.