Strenuus
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2013
- Messages
- 50,993
- Likes
- 36,373
- Points
- 113
First I am not the one that assumed ban. Second, I not sure what "only warning" accomplishes. That means there is something more than a warning next time? What would that be? Third even those who break the cardinal rule in here get many more than only 1 warning. Fourth, there have been plenty of bets in here. I have paid @SlyPokerDog 120 bucks on a lost bet before. Bets aren't against any rules. Once again, I not a mod so take this with a grain of salt but I think the whole post was better left unwritten, in any form.
Edit: Actually it was 200 bucks! Ouch.
I guess I -do- have to spell it out word for word.
1) I said some - I wasn't implying you. I know you didn't say that. I thought that was clear.
2) I have no ban privileges. It would have just been deletion of posts. That's it and that's all. No banning, no words of banning. Just wanting to curtail it.
3) It's ridiculous the assumptions people make. It's pretty clear. I wanted to ban the troll yesterday, but I have no ban privileges.
I'm glad you paid up. Thats great. Theres nothing against betting, that's between the people. But when it turns personal on the forum, I'll nip it in the bud. I have no problem with doing that. I was not the only one that took the words as jabs rather than "complimenting" him, which it really wasn't, and wasn't taken that way by the recipient of the 'compliment'. Therefore, I stepped in. It would turn cyclical very quickly.
I used my discretion, I issued a warning. There were no ban implications made. But apparently, they were assumed. Now it's cleared up. Lets drop it.



