(February 5, 2016 at 4:13 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:(February 3, 2016 at 9:18 am)LastPoet Wrote: And that would require said member to acknowledge said wairnings.
I disagree. The warning sent via PM can stand for itself. The refusal to even read such a warning is actually more evidence that a pigeon is uninterested in interacting.
Ignorance of the rules is no excuse for violating them; ignoring warnings is no defense against their consequences.
That said, if a dipshit won't post in his own thread, he either got owned or is afraid.
This is the position I take. PM is how the staff communicates warnings. We can't force you to read them, but we do make it bleedingly obvious that you have PMs to read.
You don't want to read the rules? You don't want to acknowledge staff PMs? That's all fine, but you're still bound by them here - and explicitly agreed to when you signed up. Doesn't really matter if you read that, either.
(Obviously I'm using "you" in the general sense here, Thump.
