I thought, though, that the poster's misunderstanding could use some pointing out. There seem to be a few things he doesn't get:
I understand that Gian is, apparently, your friend. As such, you surely feel the need to defend him. I think you need to stop, take a moment, and view this from a neutral point of view.Dragonfangs wrote:Gian told me last night you guys banned him again.
You guys are off base - he is a solid and honest guy who (as far as I see) made one feedback mistake back in 2008.
He never ripped anyone off here.
His current account (Glacius) had nothing but positive feedback since Oct 2010.
His original account (Glacius) had only positive feedback, save for one backout.
The other 2 accounts look like they were never used.
I realize you guys all get jacked to enforce a rule around here, but it's pretty SAD that you guys take one feedback mistake that was over 3 years ago and continue to hold it against someone who is clearly a solid member of this board and the miniature community.
The staff around here never seems to admit when they make mistakes, so I'm completely expecting you all to disagree...... but you guys are wrong here.
You should reinstate him.
In early 2008, Gian (as "Glacius") received a negative reference from kbolster12345. In return, Gian left a negative reference for kbolster12345 for the sole purpose of retaliation.
(Red text emphasis: mine)Rule #11: ITL or Reference intimidation
ITL (AKA Reference) intimidation is a first-offense ban.
What qualifies as ITL intimidation?
In its most direct form, ITL intimidation is when someone says something like "If you give me a bad trader report, I'm gonna give you one."
Anything that is not so direct, like "If you don't give me a good trade report, you'll regret it" also may qualify. Note that giving someone retaliatory feedback qualifies as well. No free hits.
If you are not sure, please contact either myself or one of the moderators. The equivalent level of evidence required for filing a bad trade report is necessary: emails with headers, PMs, and so forth.
YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO LEAVE FEEDBACK. If you don't, you can't really complain when someone says "this guy's a jerk - he never left me any feedback!" Should you just forget and someone leaves you what you consider to be an unjust reference, please see the 30-day feedback appeal rule below. I would consider leaving an appropriate feedback for them in exchange for having your own feedback edited acceptable and not 'intimidation' per se. Everyone makes mistakes, and not everyone is abundantly patient.
Ignorance of the rules is not a valid excuse for breaking them. If you join a site and do not read the rules of posting there, it's your own fault if something goes horribly wrong. So, whether or not he read the above rule (which has been a rule since AT LEAST 5/26/2007, when that post was written), he's expected to adhere to it.
Wait, though. Not only did Mr. Holland turn around THREE MORE times and start new accounts when the old ones were banned, violating another site rule in doing so:
But, we find out that he actually had ANOTHER ACCOUNT (tact_strat) prior to Glacius (the initial one we discussed here):Rule#3: Multiple User Accounts: One User Account Per Person, One Person Per User Account ONLY. EVER!
Having multiple accounts does not make one look like a trustworthy person. That is why it is forbidden. It makes you look like you're violating rule #1.
Furthermore, you may not share your Bartertown user account with anyone else. The only exception to this may occur with specific written administrative permission, and that's when a minor has an account and their parent or legal guardian is 'looking over their shoulder.' If you're a minor and your parent wants to see what you're doing here or post as you, have them contact me. I will require some manner of proof that they are who they say they are.
If you've forgotten your password, DO NOT CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT. Email Linrandir@bartertown.com for a reset. Be prepared to prove that you are who you claim to be.
Interesting factoids about tact_strat:
Last Visit: 9/14/08
Now, wait. If you're like me, you're thinking, "Wait. What's this? Those dates look... wrong... somehow."
Why, then, in that case, you'd be correct. You see, as "Glacius, his dates are:
Last Visit: 3/1/08
Wow. It seems your buddy had a little problem with multi accounting from almost the very beginning.
Yeah. His only violation is that one negative reference.
Umm... except that's not true, either. There was this little reference left for him (as tact_strat) by voodoopainter.
Other accounts not used?
What's his post count?
And the post count THERE?
Before you start defending people, know who you're defending and know the history. He received TWO negative references under TWO different accounts. He tried to hide at least one of those. He left a retaliatory negative reference. After he was banned for a rule violation, instead of appealing it to us as a man, he tried to be sneaky and join the site (in violation of another rule).
Your buddy's been up to shenanigans from the start. You're mistaken about what we did and did not do improperly. We're not holding ONE feedback mistake against him. We're holding a whole litany of rules violations and a history of disregard for the rules against him.