NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm rather surprised to have gotten this:
NationStates Moderators
Received: 111 minutes ago warned: spamming

Can someone please explain why I got this warning? :confused:

Did you post anything in Sinuhue's leaving thread(s)?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=495526

Did you post anything in Sinuhue's leaving thread(s)?

Nope. I haven't posted anything in any of her threads in some time.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=495526

Say what?
That comes back as a 404:
Not Found
The requested URL /showpost.ph...0&postcount=68 was not found on this server.

Apache/1.3.34 Server at forums3.jolt.co.uk Port 80

Nope. I haven't posted anything in any of her threads in some time.
It's quite possibly this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11522841#post11522841).

It's quite possibly this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11522841#post11522841).

Couldn't be that. Kat suggested it was some thread I don't know about, and I've seen LOTS worse w/o any warning at all. (If that were warning worthy, I could name a couple dozen posters who'd have been deleted for about 100 warnings...)

Couldn't be that. Kat suggested it was some thread I don't know about, and I've seen LOTS worse w/o any warning at all. (If that were warning worthy, I could name a couple dozen posters who'd have been deleted for about 100 warnings...)

Judging by Katganistan's final post in that thread, I'd bet my bottom dollar on it being that post.

whats the chat forum?? or more to the point where is it! :confused:

Judging by Katganistan's final post in that thread, I'd bet my bottom dollar on it being that post.

I could see a "knock it off", but an official warning is highly unwarrented.

Kat, is that what the warning was for? Or was it the unknown thread you posted? Either way, could I please have an explanation.

What's the difference between an unofficial and an official warning?

An unofficial warning is "you're getting close to being over the line. Considering the situation you're in, we understand why you're at that point, but you still need to calm down a bit"

An official warning is "you're over the line"

Spam in a spam thread is over the line and isn't due to any situation. Spam because a joke came up in a thread and you ended up hijacking it, that might get you an unofficial warning - depending on how you spammed exactly.

(not a mod)

The telegram is in your box.

There has been a LOT of spamming going on lately, and keeping threads which clearly have no merit or are a shining example of how not to behave front and center. Maybe people are bored because it's late summer, I don't know.

The only advice I can offer is what I said in the other thread -- if you see a train wreck in progress, if you see a spamfest that you know is likely to be locked... kindly don't post.

The telegram is in your box.

There has been a LOT of spamming going on lately, and keeping threads which clearly have no merit or are a shining example of how not to behave front and center. Maybe people are bored because it's late summer, I don't know.

The only advice I can offer is what I said in the other thread -- if you see a train wreck in progress, if you see a spamfest that you know is likely to be locked... kindly don't post.

OK. I've read the TGs and understand what it was for. But I am still confused as to the harshness of the penalty. Of all the spam, why did I get singled out for an official warning for one offense, when there are several posters with many times more spam than I've ever posted, who've only gotten "knock it off" or "thread closed".

OK. I've read the TGs and understand what it was for. But I am still confused as to the harshness of the penalty. Of all the spam, why did I get singled out for an official warning for one offense, when there are several posters with many times more spam than I've ever posted, who've only gotten "knock it off" or "thread closed".

In real life, most of the time the cops will give you 10 over the speed limit (5 if you measure by miles). This is because they try to be nice and fair.

Every so often, a judge will tell them to start cracking down and people pick up tickets for being one over the speed limit. Why does it happen? Because sometimes the judges are sick of these people either expecting they'll get away or just refusing to respect the speed limits. Can you argue them in court? No. Why? Because you technically broke the rules.

Yes, past offenses in real life have an impact on your fine, but situations the society is under at that time will also impact the situation. Kat just said that there's been a lot of excess spam as of late - this could be why the stricter penalties are floating around right now. As we speak, people are emptying out water bottles at airports because of a terrorist threat. Same core reasons

(not a mod)

Bump for a reply to my question.

I am still unsure why this was singled out while others have been allowed much worse.

Try doing a little looking around - you weren't singled out. I've seen at least one other thread about the exact same thing, and mentions here and there that several were warned for it. If it was delivered in tg, how would you know you're the 'only one' anyways? That's a big assumption. And apparently, untrue.

Bump for a reply to my question.

I am still unsure why this was singled out while others have been allowed much worse.

Because their name wasn't drawn out of the proverbial hat.

Like Forgottenlands said, it's like speeding. Most cops will give you five or ten over the speed limit mostly because it'd be impossible to nab everyone, as well as rediculously stupid and inefficient. If you're not standing out, it's basically up to random chance. But all nails that stick out are pounded down...

And from there, it depends on the cop. Some cops will give you a warning and tell you to bugger off. Some cops will give you your penalty and dispute it in court and they'll help you out. Other cops will slap you with the fine and tell you to shut up and deal with it.

You technically broke the rules*, so technically deserve an official warning. Granted, why that particular thread wasn't just moved to the spam forum and done with, I don't know -- that's what I would have expected.

It's all a matter of chance, really. Fate drawing names out of the hat. You were the unlucky one who got his name drawn.






*Granted, some could argue about the validity of speed limits and spam bans, but in a privately owned forum, you have to go by Socrates' philosophy that since you have the privileges of posting, you have to abide by the rules. *shrugs*

Last i checked several people were warned for spamming from that thread before it was moved to the Mods only forum...

Last i checked several people were warned for spamming from that thread before it was moved to the Mods only forum...

To continue the metaphor, police can often extend certain "saftey corridors" where fines can be harsher and laws enforced with more...effectiveness?...than normal.

I still don't see why it wasn't just moved to the spam forum, but I didn't see the thread, so I don't know if it had objectionable content and should have been moved to the vaults of the ministry of objectionable content.... :)

I think the mods are still going over the entirety of the thread, looking for more rulebreakers.


Although I can't be positive about that...

I think the mods are still going over the entirety of the thread, looking for more rulebreakers.


Although I can't be positive about that...

I do find it hard to believe they would waste their time. The moderators have a great many responsibilities, most more important than studying one single thread to look for various steps out of line just to slam a warning on someone. From my interactions with most of the moderators, none of them are that reminiscent of the NKVD. At least, I hope.

Maybe they're using it as a case study. Kat was indicating a wider problem was at stake here when the rulings were made.

Last i checked several people were warned for spamming from that thread before it was moved to the Mods only forum...
Then I for one would like it moved back so we can see what these rulings were. I was posting in that thread, and I sure as hell don't want to find out that I've picked up a warning that I didn't know about.

Then I for one would like it moved back so we can see what these rulings were. I was posting in that thread, and I sure as hell don't want to find out that I've picked up a warning that I didn't know about.I think that would be why telegrams were sent out.

Maybe they're using it as a case study. Kat was indicating a wider problem was at stake here when the rulings were made.

I suppose that's a possibility.

I think that would be why telegrams were sent out.

Often, though, the telegramme doesn't explain why. In fact, it never does (since it's automated :)). If the mods are going to blanketwarn everyone who posted in a specific thread, then there better be a damn good reason. But, from the looks of it, they didn't, they just decided to pick and choose, judging by the fact Philosophy posted in that thread and wasn't warned.

It's the random picking and choosing that bothers me a tad. With Das's post, if he just wrote what was on the spam lite can instead of posting the picture, then I don't think that would have gotten him an official warning (I don't think.)

Or I may have everything wrong, which is possible since I don't know a whole lot about it.

Well, considering how many of the posts in that thread were flaming, bait, egging on someone going for suicide-by-mod, encouraging others to 'rise up against the corrupt system', and veiled 'in before lock' types of posts, I'm not terribly surprised warnings, official or otherwise, got handed out. It's not like most folks in there were newbies who didn't know any better after all. No, not speaking on any authority, just making an educated guess.

Come on folks - doesn't matter who you are, if you push the line, it's gonna catch up with you eventually.

Well, considering how many of the posts in that thread were flaming, bait, egging on someone going for suicide-by-mod, encouraging others to 'rise up against the corrupt system', and veiled 'in before lock' types of posts, I'm not terribly surprised warnings, official or otherwise, got handed out.

Oooh, okay. I just did what I do with all threads, scan, not read.

That matter was settled the same night it happened. It is done. No-one is still working on it.

Dread Lady Nathicana has it about right. It depends what people posted and how many times. "Go girl! / Fight the Power! / Best thread ever! / LOLOLOL! / random conversation that belongs elsewhere etc" - warning. It's that simple. Post a one-line comment in a suicide-by-mod thread and you will wish you hadn't.

You know why? Because when people feel the urge to break the addiction by posting porn, gore or bitching out half a dozen players, we don't want the thread getting bumped, and we especially don't want people posting encouraging comments, thus ensuring that the next guy who thinks about trying it will know that they will get a hero's send-off complete with cookie.

It's worth repeating. Someone deliberately trying to get themselves deleted? Don't. Post. Not in that thread. Not even to say goodbye. We're not kidding.

You can MSN them and congratulate them on a great performance on your own bandwidth.

Since this seems to have gone off in an odd direction with people seemingly have confused the reason for the warning, here's what Kat said it was for: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11522841&postcount=16

It wasn't for posting in Sinhues SBM.

And TG, "It depends what people posted and how many times" is exactly why I'm not quite sure why I got spanked. The only time I ever did anything like that, which was borderline from what I see here day inb and day out, and I get an official warning. I see many other people here getting away with much worse on a regular basis, so perhapse you can uderstand why I may be a consternated.

Anyhow, just to make things perfectly clear:

1) I'm not trying to contest this.
2) But, can a mod please explain why this was pegged and the regular spammers continue to get away with this exact same sort of thing sans any warnings?

Oh, is that what it was for?

Heh, my mistake.

I'm still waiting for answers.

A few examples of spam threads that are going right now where no warnings appear to have been handed out:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=496015
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=496100
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=496094
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=496104

Every post on those threads was equally as spammy as mine. Will all these posters garner official warnings?

Since this seems to have gone off in an odd direction with people seemingly have confused the reason for the warning, here's what Kat said it was for: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11522841&postcount=16
Did you not see my TG reply?

I was warned too..

I'm still waiting for answers.

You got your answer in telegram form, but since apparently it did not make sense to you, here it is:

Posting a big picture of canned Spam in a spam thread was not particularly well-thought out.