WBAUnofficial

I need to update the central database.

What did he get canned for this time?

(04-07-2021, 01:14 PM)DJPunkRoc Wrote: [ -> ]I need to update the central database.

What did he get canned for this time?

Missed royalty payments to Lord Charles.

(04-07-2021, 01:16 PM)hudds Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-07-2021, 01:14 PM)DJPunkRoc Wrote: [ -> ]I need to update the central database.

What did he get canned for this time?

Missed royalty payments to Lord Charles.

Owes him a fortune, foreshaw.   

Repetitive slagging of Big Sam as far as I can tell Birdmao got him with his sniper and Nick fell to the dust.

Ypou can update your com poo ter now.

A number of people have been canned over the last few weeks, and it is the site owner's privilege to decide who can contribute.

It would be crass though if this thread degenerated to kicking these people when they no longer have a right of reply.

(04-08-2021, 12:39 AM)Kit Kat Chunky Wrote: [ -> ]A number of people have been canned over the last few weeks, and it is the site owner's privilege to decide who can contribute.

It would be crass though if this thread degenerated to kicking these people when they no longer have a right of reply.

Absolutely, we need to ensure the database is correct too.

(04-08-2021, 12:43 AM)SausEggBaton Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-08-2021, 12:39 AM)Kit Kat Chunky Wrote: [ -> ]A number of people have been canned over the last few weeks, and it is the site owner's privilege to decide who can contribute.

It would be crass though if this thread degenerated to kicking these people when they no longer have a right of reply.

Absolutely, we need to ensure the database is correct too.

Not sure what the purpose is of this database, but if the webmaster sees value in it then fair enough.

I'm more concerned with the bullying of former posters who have no right of reply. I think such antics should be added to the "mandatory ban" list.

(04-08-2021, 12:50 AM)Kit Kat Chunky Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-08-2021, 12:43 AM)SausEggBaton Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-08-2021, 12:39 AM)Kit Kat Chunky Wrote: [ -> ]A number of people have been canned over the last few weeks, and it is the site owner's privilege to decide who can contribute.

It would be crass though if this thread degenerated to kicking these people when they no longer have a right of reply.

Absolutely, we need to ensure the database is correct too.

Not sure what the purpose is of this database, but if the webmaster sees value in it then fair enough.

I'm more concerned with the bullying of former posters who have no right of reply. I think such antics should be added to the "mandatory ban" list.

Neither do i, currently this database exists in DJPunkRoc's mind, but I'm looking forward to interrogating its schema. 

Your further point is also valid, however there is no such thing as a mandatory ban list, merely bored guidelines and general house rules. We are an extremely diverse and lightly moderated forum, which I feel is a good thing and the reason for the amount of users we have. If bullying is spotted by or notified to, the moderators, it is dealt with accordingly, we do advise to use the report post function to assist for anything bored members would like raise to the moderators as these are sent to us directly.

I know he went on a bit at times but I thought Nick was generally alright on here to be honest, and Liquidator.

It's not about being "generally alright" its about repeatedly doing what the mods have repeatedly told you to stop doing. Being banned doesn't mean someone is evil it means they can't follow simple rules. I cannot fathom why some people have such problems with it.

having said that if you think liquidator was "generally alright" then you might need your moral compass re-aligned.