Complaint about the FULL NAME rule on the BOI.

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Sorry, but no, I don't work that way. I like to try to be as certain as possible that no other option is available before doing something that drastic..............

And my method of enforcing rules (which basically there are none stated) is to just immediately ban anyone who gets out of line.

I think the middle ground you have been treading here might be best for Fauna. Prior to your new rules, when there were few consequences, there were miserable people suffering at the hands of those who just wanted to jerk people around for no good reason other than to have some 'fun'. I am glad you have changed the rules to help prevent that sort of misery.

But if you were to immediately ban anyone who got out of line I would be gone because I violated the very rule this thread refers to, and that would make me very sad because my failure to abide by your rule was more of an oversight than any intentional stepping across a line in the sand. I have not made the same error after receiving my warning point so it did exactly what it was supposed to do, warn.

I think that as rules are firmly enforced people come to accept them and there is less aggravation in enforcing them. I lived through raising teenagers and they will test every rule made for them, and they were a royal pain in the behind for a while.
But they knew and respected certain inviolate rules. From the time they were wee ones, they knew that without a seat belt on, the car wasn't going to move period and I never varied that rule and it wasn't long before they never broke it.

But I did have to warn them, and tell them, at first.
And you have a sliding scale up to and including immediate removal if behavior warrants that sanction. But I do like the warning system for relatively innocent one time mistakes, and I would hope that neither here or at cornsnake.com would anyone ever be gone for such trifling errors done a single time, you are a fair person and I think that minor infractions deserve a warning.

"I like to give someone sufficient warning to be able to correct mannerisms that may just be a mistake in judgement before kicking them off the site for good."

I think small infractions deserve warnings. I think the posts that jerk people around, make them miserable, escalate the situation and are just flat mean do not. Even when my kids were small they had enough sense not to talk certain ways in front of certain people so there is just no excuse and those people need to go elsewhere, or to Hell.

Just my 2 cents.

This person is back. See links.
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...d=1#post442405
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...ad.php?t=89187

I just read the first few pages of this thread and it awaked an issue that had me pretty harelipped in the past concerning the full name on the post subject.

Last year, or perhaps earlier this year either my wife or I one posted in a thread (can't remember who or what thread it's been so long). Anyhoo, the next day we found a warning point on our record and the explanation was that our full name was required. It struck me as very odd since both of our names were and still are part of our automatic signiture at the bottom.

I don't remember which moderator gave the warning but I don't feel it is right or justified to have a warning point on our name when both of our names were and are on the auto sig and we are the only two that post on fauna. I really would like it if the warning point could be removed as we strive to always have a perfect record and it is a blemmish of sorts. Where does a feller go to contest these things? Is there such a place or service?

David Beauchemin

David, look at your post above, if you click on the "1" by warning points it will show who gave it to you and why. It also links back to the post.

Using one name in your profile and another in your signature violates the TOS of the BOI. In the event of two people sharing an account, each post must be signed as to who is actually making the post.