(June 4, 2015 at 9:15 pm)Stimbo Wrote:(June 4, 2015 at 7:41 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: 1. I'm way outnumbered. Consequently, I can't join in too many threads because I would be swarmed.
Well, this is a discussion forum after all; can't really expect people not to post so much, especially in a thread inviting them to. Why do you think I haven't started my own "ask me" thread? I know not to bite off more than I can chew.
(June 4, 2015 at 7:41 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: 2. rexbeccarox specifically warned me about not posting often enough...even in my own threads. She was threatening to ban me if I did not step up my game. I think this was a matter of public record and not by PM, btw.
Then you will have no trouble posting the specific link, will you? I've scanned through every interaction she's had with you and the nearest I can find is a greenink suggesting you re-engage with this thread. There is no mention nor indeed intimation of a "threat to ban", nor can one Mod take that action unilaterally against a regular member. You're quite correct that no PMs on the subject were made; I have the logs in front of me.
(June 4, 2015 at 9:19 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote:(June 4, 2015 at 7:41 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: 2. rexbeccarox specifically warned me about not posting often enough...even in my own threads. She was threatening to ban me if I did not step up my game. I think this was a matter of public record and not by PM, btw.
1. Randy, your shitty reading comprehension doesn't make you exempt from the rules that you and every other member agreed to abide by when signing up here. Funny how we don't have so much trouble with any other member, religious or not.
2. I didn't warn you for not posting enough; I warned you for starting threads, then ignoring them to start new threads. It's spam, and against the rules.
3. I can't ban you without quorum, and I didn't even bring it up for a vote. I did make a case for officially warning you, and when that didn't happen, I decided I was hands-off when it comes to you. If, however, you continue to misrepresent me or anyone else, I have no doubt quorum will easily be met for your ban.
There you go, Stimbo.
rexbeccarox confirms that she "warned" me about "ignoring" my three threads. (I'm guessing that real spammers probably post 10 or 12 in rapid succession before you lock the account, right? And I haven't done anything remotely like that, have I?)
The truth is that one of the other forum members even chided her with the comment that it had only been two hours since I posted and that I should be given more time to respond. Two hours.
But hey, if I misunderstood the situation and spamming is NOT grounds for banning a member, then I clearly overstated the implied threat. My apologies.
However, if spamming is grounds for banning, then rexbeccarox's reference to the spamming rule does carry an implied threat of banning, doesn't it?
Aside from referencing this (not complaining, just explaining) incident to Jenny A, I have been behaving myself and following all the rules, correct?