Private
Private
Private
0
0
0
0
To join the forums you need to be logged in.
Arthema wrote:
and it is speculations when they not do it right once, twice, but it's SO many times in SO many different topics its just
not speculation at this point
brunhilde wrote:
i agree that the mods don't seem to be on the same page on all things, though it also happens that people don't read entire threads. we don't know the whole story behind their work hours so a lot of this is pure speculation
then you did misunderstand, there was no fighting at all.Abby wrote:
there was never a fight there?
how can someone fight about a damn soup topping lmao you sound ridiculous
also the second thread.. a moderator answering on it like it's totally okay????????????
then another one closing it
like bruh please rules??? rules are out the window when the people that supposed to be enforcing them are not properly
like i said previously, you could've just made a separate thread about the croutons since it is a completely different topic. this thread right at the start could be counted as "fighting" in nature, though i might also be misreading your emotions bc you don't indicate them in other means besides a ton of question marks.brunhilde wrote:
the thread was literally named "pt 2", and the first pages were discussion about the closed one. this is what it says in the rules:
"Discussions of closed threads: After a thread is closed, the topic is no longer up for discussion. This includes making other threads trying to continue the conversation or demanding reasons why a thread was closed. If you have a problem regarding the closure, message a moderator for a further discussion."
this could also apply
"Fighting in threads: Heated discussions that become provoking or malicious when dealing with unpopular opinions, political matters, or controversial topics etc. Threads may be closed to prevent fighting from occurring. Due to the fact we are unable to provide examples of every type of fight, it is up to Moderator discretion when dealing with these cases. "
and that's that - if you wanted to change topic you could've made another thread. i get that it's not supposed to be a big deal, but that's the rules?? i don't get what you're trying to insinuate by telling me i'm wrong.
the thread was literally named "pt 2", and the first pages were discussion about the closed one. this is what it says in the rules:
"Discussions of closed threads: After a thread is closed, the topic is no longer up for discussion. This includes making other threads trying to continue the conversation or demanding reasons why a thread was closed. If you have a problem regarding the closure, message a moderator for a further discussion."
this could also apply
"Fighting in threads: Heated discussions that become provoking or malicious when dealing with unpopular opinions, political matters, or controversial topics etc. Threads may be closed to prevent fighting from occurring. Due to the fact we are unable to provide examples of every type of fight, it is up to Moderator discretion when dealing with these cases. "
and that's that - if you wanted to change topic you could've made another thread. i get that it's not supposed to be a big deal, but that's the rules?? i don't get what you're trying to insinuate by telling me i'm wrong.
there was never a fight there?
how can someone fight about a damn soup topping lmao you sound ridiculous
also the second thread.. a moderator answering on it like it's totally okay????????????
then another one closing it
like bruh please rules??? rules are out the window when the people that supposed to be enforcing them are not properly
i agree that the mods don't seem to be on the same page on all things, though it also happens that people don't read entire threads. we don't know the whole story behind their work hours so a lot of this is pure speculation
and it is speculations when they not do it right once, twice, but it's SO many times in SO many different topics its just
not speculation at this point
17
