Chreees Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 It is clearly stated in the rules that you are not supposed to mention illegal drugs on here. These rules are [i]supposed[/i] to be read when you sign up, so you should know better. Your topic is great (the one about the taxes in Sweden), and I hope you return in 7 days to resume the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magick777 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 While I have read the rules, and I broadly support them, I respectfully feel that to ban outright a new member, with a thoughtful and relevant topic, deserving of some support, is overkill. The guy was hardly asking how you smoke [insert improper substance here] out of a hookah, and with that sort of a welcome, I don't think he'll be back in a week. This concerns me, because while I haven't fallen out with anyone yet, I begin to think it is only a matter of time IF we as a community are too aggressive about moderation. The guy had a fair point, fairly expressed. Being pedantic, the substance referenced could not properly or accurately be described by the term "non-hookah tobacco" within the context provided by rule #2 (which refers to misunderstandings about the use of a hookah); I would take that as applying to the obvious illicit substance, but would have my doubts about using it as euphemism for the substance mentioned, on grounds of factual accuracy. Further, the reference was precisely as the extreme of something one should not be able to do, in furtherance of his point. To say that he would find it easier to acquire non-hookah tobacco dilutes and destroys the point the OP was making; yes, he can buy hand rolling tobacco at any newsagent. And finally, it is reasonable to presume that English is likely to be the OP's second language, so he may or may not be fully acquainted with issues of register and what consititutes appropriate terminology. Is this really the situation that that rule was written for? Seriously, being fully acquainted with the rules, and having just re-read rule number 8, too, can someone please explain why this measure is necessary and how it benefits or protects us as a community? What sort of community is it that ostracises thoughtful contributors? I appreciate that you have acted within the letter of the rules, but I would like some clarification of whether this response is within the spirit of them. I begin to fear that if that sort of hostility is routinely directed at new members, it's bound come my way sooner or later, and I begin to feel uncomfortable about posting here myself. I also feel that this has undermined the friendly and supportive response I gave him. Pursuant to rule number 8, if this is not an appropriate forum in which to discuss this matter, I am entirely happy to take the conversation private, but since the rules don't mention how and where I should do that, I'll leave it to your discretion to suggest an appropriate method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainUM Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 by having a no-tolerance rule i feel it lowers the level of people that will mention it and it shows how serious we, as a forum, are about that subject. i dont want to be associated with that stuff, as im sure the mods feel the same way. by making an example out of one, potentially many others will see it and decide that they shouldn't break the rules. is it really that necessary to bring up subjects like that, anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcane Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I'm not sure there is any hostility towards Johan. It's basic rules. The best analogy I could think of are laws. For example, a posted speed limit is 55mph. You are driving 56mph and get pulled over. Did you break the law? Yes. Is the officer valid to pull you over for speeding? Yes. Is ignorance an excuse? No. If the officer gives you a ticket, is it just? Yes. Granted, you could get off with a warning but, with a small community, it opens too many doors. It’s good practice to uphold the rules and hold everyone to the same standards. If you start making exceptions for individuals, people with throw the precedence(s) back at you and now you’ll have to lower the standards for everyone else. The rules are posted and for the most part, fairly clear. I’m not positive, but I believe there’s a notice for people to read the rules prior to registering for the site. If that user “chooses” to ignore that notice, does that really constitute a level of leniency? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted January 5, 2011 Author Share Posted January 5, 2011 Yep, rules are rules. They're clearly stated when you sign up. Problem is people don't read them. I want to mention this thread only exists because it's the only way we can let the person know they've been temporarily banned. It's not to out the person in specific in any way. We're serious about keeping illegal substance talk off of the forum. Google is constantly sniping here and we don't want to be associated with searches regarding NHT. Mush pretty much sums it up here (scroll down, it's under the rules): [url="http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/8169-discussion-mention-or-showing-of-illegal-substances/"]http://www.hookahfor...gal-substances/[/url] I understand and respect your opinion, magick777. You're a great member and hope this doesn't sway you away from us. It's just how we've always handled things. The rules are clearly stated,and it's also stated what happens if you break one of those rules. Regarding Rule #8, the standard for NHT references is 14 days tempban. I chose to do 7. EDIT: Didn't see Jay's post, as he posted it right when I was making mine... Excellent analogy with laws and getting pulled over. Me personally I hold everyone to the same standards, even those on here that I've become really good friends with. If one of my good friends on here had made the NHT ref, it would have been 7 days for them as well. It's not fair to slap someone on the wrist with a warning but then do a full 14-day ban on someone else. And yes, when you register here you are prompted to read the rules during the registration process. If I recall correctly, they're shown right there for you before you finish the registration. Hell, you may even have to agree to them, but that I'm not sure of. Either way, I can tell you from experience most people don't read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magick777 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 The problem I have is this. Three people are now asserting that Johan "broke the rules" and must be exiled, [i]pour encourager les autres, [/i]as though it were perfectly obvious to anyone who had read the rules what he had done wrong. In the course of this discussion, I have reread the rules three times, and mushrat's explanatory post in the forum rules section once, and I still don't get how or why this was the right response. In my humble view, nothing in rule #2 CLEARLY prohibits Johan's choice of words. I'm not sure that to make the point, in lay English, that shisha in Sweden is now more difficult to get than hard drugs constitutes *discussing* the substance at all. To discuss is not the same thing as to mention. Further, if he did discuss it, then "[i][color=#1C2837][size=2]the only exception to this rule is in discussions regarding hookah misconceptions or problems you've had while smoking your hookah". [/size][/color][/i]I'd argue that taxing herbal molasses as tobacco is certainly a misconception, and lack of tobacco is certainly a problem when smoking your hookah. And no, I'm not just being bloody minded for the sake of it. We seem to have a huge witch hunt, as though he had acted with wilful disregard for rules that, by my reading of them, don't actually even prohibit what he said. Yet we don't owe him the courtesy of a quiet word, or an explanation, or a clarification, we just ostracise him. I understand why the rules are as they are, but, I would like to know whether the author of those rules feels that this is what he had in mind when he wrote them. It is not the rule that I am questioning, but the application of it. [i][color=#1C2837][size=2] [/size][/color][/i] [i][color=#1C2837][size=2] [/size][/color][/i] [i] [/i] [i] [/i] [i] [/i] [i] [/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheyCallMeDave Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 [quote name='magick777' timestamp='1294194560' post='493374'] The problem I have is this. Three people are now asserting that Johan "broke the rules" and must be exiled, [i]pour encourager les autres, [/i]as though it were perfectly obvious to anyone who had read the rules what he had done wrong. In the course of this discussion, I have reread the rules three times, and mushrat's explanatory post in the forum rules section once, and I still don't get how or why this was the right response. In my humble view, nothing in rule #2 CLEARLY prohibits Johan's choice of words. I'm not sure that to make the point, in lay English, that shisha in Sweden is now more difficult to get than hard drugs constitutes *discussing* the substance at all. To discuss is not the same thing as to mention. Further, if he did discuss it, then "[i][color="#1c2837"][size="2"]the only exception to this rule is in discussions regarding hookah misconceptions or problems you've had while smoking your hookah". [/size][/color][/i]I'd argue that taxing herbal molasses as tobacco is certainly a misconception, and lack of tobacco is certainly a problem when smoking your hookah. And no, I'm not just being bloody minded for the sake of it. We seem to have a huge witch hunt, as though he had acted with wilful disregard for rules that, by my reading of them, don't actually even prohibit what he said. Yet we don't owe him the courtesy of a quiet word, or an explanation, or a clarification, we just ostracise him. I understand why the rules are as they are, but, I would like to know whether the author of those rules feels that this is what he had in mind when he wrote them. It is not the rule that I am questioning, but the application of it. [/quote] As someone who has been banned/suspended before, I think there are some keynotes you are overlooking. - [b]If you didn't read the rules, you didn't start off taking this website seriously.[/b] We are all guilty of it at one point or another (maybe not here, but certainly on a different institution). With this in mind, not taking the website seriously and then proceeding to have the moderators not take THEIR website/rules seriously, doesn't show good moral implication of what we have set down. We don't ask much, but what we do ask, we also enforce. No questions asked. -[b] If you have to think about wether or not you are allowed to post it, you probably can't. [/b]We all know the rule of thumb, if you aren't sure if it's okay, it probably isn't. So if you DID get as far as to reading the rules, but posted something you weren't sure about and got banned, that is a lesson to be learned. If anything (I'm pretty sure this is mentioned in the rules) just PM a moderator or Mush and ask about the subject content, and save yourself a ban. - [b]Suspentions aren't as traumatic as people make them out to be.[/b] As you saw, Chris didn't even give our friend here a full sentance. He was slightly leniant, but still strong in his decision. When I was banned, all that was required of me was to reporduce the exact place in the bylaws that I had broken, explain why it had been broken and vow to not do it agian. A simple measure of comprehension is all that is asked. If you notice, you can browse nearly all of the forum without being logged in, just not post. So if Johan tries to log in and sees that his account has been suspended, he might fancy an investigation as a lurker. My main point here is that RULES ARE RULES. We are all 18 or over here, and all have comprehension of when something incorrect or 'illegal' occurs. Johan will be fine. If he is curious or headstrong about contributing and learning from the forum, he'll just learn from his mistakes like I-and many other appreciated members on this forum-did. That's all there is to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king_lunchb0x Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I must agree with MAgick the Swed's english was not the best...however by agreeing to the terms on starting an account you acknowledge that you understand and will follow these rules..no matter how they are used in a post. I wasn't able to read the post all that well on my phone and of course its gone now so I don't know exactly how he was intending to use his post. But anyone who post anything referring to Rule 2 should know its fine line. And all our mods stand by it.. as wel as (all?) forum members. I am not sure if he will be back but ousting is not what we are trying to do. I gues posting funny ban-hammer pics don't help but the threads give an explanation to what happened and why. Maybe people will go a little easy on the ban threads..less funnies maybe? I dont know if that would make the difference to even bring someone back after ban...they got banned for some reason http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/39285-snugz13-take-a-short-vacation/page__p__480804__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry480804 people still remember this...this is how much they stand by the rule http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/38960-del-takes-a-5-day-vacation/page__p__477802__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry477802 http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/38785-yasseah-takes-a-vacation/page__p__476066__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry476066 http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/33591-maccattack13-takes-2-weeks-vacation/page__p__412252__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry412252 http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/33556-tpatt90-earns-a-14-day-vacation/page__p__411869__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry411869 http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/32498-cgore-gets-a-7-day-vacation/page__p__396345__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry396345 http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/32452-hookdonhookah-and-brandon-get-a-7-day-vacation/page__p__395893__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry395893 http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/32184-russianwizard-takes-a-7-days-vacation/page__p__392421__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry392421 http://www.hookahforum.com/topic/9109-gordonmac-takes-a-vacation/page__p__110895__hl__vacation__fromsearch__1#entry110895 almost all ban threads deal with breaking rule number 2. If your unsure ask a mod they are there to help not just to ban me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcane Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Dave's #3 point is pretty accurate. The only one that seems it's a big deal is you, magick. It's a 7-day ban. It's not a permanent ban, or exile as you like to put it. He's not ostracized. He just can't post for a week. Is that really such a big deal? Dave took a ban and came back, Brigit was banned for being underage and came back when she turned 18, and even Eric (Sonthert) took a self-imposed ban for breaking a rule. He's not prohibited from reading any posts or even using the search function. The only thing he misses out on is the ability to post. Now, going to your argument as whether he did in fact break the rules and if the response was appropriate. I'll point you to mushrat's elaboration in where the topic clearly states "Discussion, Mention, Or Showing". Now, I didn't see the post but, since you're aware of what Johan said, I'm assuming it was "mentioned". So, I think I've established that a rule was in fact broken. Now, let's go to Rule 8 which states that the moderation team decides on ban length. Since this is basically an open statement, where anything from 10 seconds to 10 years is allowed, and clearly explained, we can validate the 1 week ban is appropriate. So, where is the confusion? Could the punishment have been less severe? Yes. Could it have been more severe? Absolutely (typical ban is 14 days). But, it's entirely up to the discretion of the moderation team. I'm sorry you feel as though there's a witch hunt focusing on new members, but I honestly don't see it. Then again, maybe the older members are just used to the results when members break the rules and it's part of the day to day happenings to which we're accustomed. As a new member, I can see how that can catch you off guard. But, if you think about it for some of us who've been here a year or longer..1 week isn't the end of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king_lunchb0x Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) [quote name='mushrat' timestamp='1281093666' post='477953'] not banned...just a 5 day suspension. The rules apply even more stringently to mods to be honest. We are supposed to set the standard, not be part of a problem. But ey, we are also human so... [/quote] ^^^^this was from another ban thread^^^^ Maybe I am reading into Mush's words to much but simply put, it was an honest mistake but cant go unpunished. I think this applies to all rules..but like it says its a vacation not a ban..everyone gets a second chance even if they decide not to come back Edited January 5, 2011 by king_lunchb0x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travis Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Wow, way to blow this out of proportion eh? Little do you know, there are plenty of members who sign up here, and neglect to read the rules. After editing someones post/deleting posts/warning somebody, things start to get a bit ridiculous. I'm all for the first offense idea. Break a rule, get suspended, simple as that. Having it applied to everybody is even more important. None of this "Oh well he's new, just warn him and hopefully he wont do it again". Plus, getting suspended isn't the worst thing in the world, and certainly is no "exile". I've been suspended before.....and when It happened, I read why and was like "Oh shit, I didnt even realize I said that. Oh well, I'll just log back in when it's over with". I didn't cry, I didn't think I was being voted off the island, I didn't feel like it was some sort of cruel and unusual punishment. I deserved what I got, and so does he. Trust me, If anyone else slipped up and broke a rule, they would face the same thing. Doesn't matter who it is, The rules are there for a everybody. How can we learn from our mistakes, if they go unpunished? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ih303 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 [quote name='Travis' timestamp='1294223929' post='493430'] Wow, way to blow this out of proportion eh? [/quote] True dat. We were talking about this on chat the other day, and I would be lying if I said it has never crossed my mind that the censorship around here can sometimes be a bit extreme. But the way I see it, when I go to someone's house and they ask me to take off my shoes at the door, I do it. I may think it's a little silly and would certainly never do it at my house, [b]but it's not my house[/b]. It's as simple as that. Honestly, the reason why this is my forum of choice is because the moderators do such a good job of keeping out the riff raff. I'm not saying that Johan or anyone else who has ever been tapped by the ban hammer is necessarily riff raff. Only that the rules preserve the integrity of the forum, and everyone around here has to play by them. I've never been banned (as far as I can remember, at least), but I have had a few shots fired across my bow. Sure it's kind of a shot to the ol' ego, but I get the message and eventually get over it. No biggie. I say we put this thing to bed and get back to smoking hookah, shiknow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magick777 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Very well; I am forced to observe that my own views on freedom of speech force me to accept your right to dissent... and I do seem to be in a minority of one. Therefore, I will moderate my objection in recognition of the fact that the mods in this situation [b]do[/b] seem to be acting in the interest and with the support of the wider community. It is a fair analogy; in my house, you don't take your shoes off at the door, but, I do so where that is expected. Accordingly, therefore, I am entirely willing in principle to comply with the stated rules of the forum, as a matter of respect and courtesy. However, there but for fortune go I, because (having thoroughly read the rules and accompanying explanatory posts) it was certainly not obvious to me that the use he made of the language in question would, in the eyes of the majority, be a breach of the spirit of the rules, and I might innocently enough have done something similar. Clearly, I now stand corrected, and I accept that the popular view is what it is, but I continue to find it less than welcoming. Speaking only for myself, I approach this forum with respect and courtesy, and if any person has any concerns about anything that I may have to say, I hope they will tell me about it in good faith and expect that they will be taken seriously. I entirely support a Draconian response to flagrant disrespect for the rules, but subjectively, I wish that there were more emphasis on the word "flagrant". I would be most disappointed if I found myself in Johan's situation, and my contributions to the forum would be likely to dry up. I guess the conclusion is that I would make a lousy moderator, in that case, and I thank you for the clarification of this forum's policy. I can only hope that the (correct and proper) enforcement of that policy does not lose us any thoughtful, respectful contributors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joytron Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 [quote name='magick777' timestamp='1294271466' post='493495'] Very well; I am forced to observe that my own views on freedom of speech force me to accept your right to dissent... and I do seem to be in a minority of one. Therefore, I will moderate my objection in recognition of the fact that the mods in this situation [b]do[/b] seem to be acting in the interest and with the support of the wider community. It is a fair analogy; in my house, you don't take your shoes off at the door, but, I do so where that is expected. Accordingly, therefore, I am entirely willing in principle to comply with the stated rules of the forum, as a matter of respect and courtesy. However, there but for fortune go I, because (having thoroughly read the rules and accompanying explanatory posts) it was certainly not obvious to me that the use he made of the language in question would, in the eyes of the majority, be a breach of the spirit of the rules, and I might innocently enough have done something similar. Clearly, I now stand corrected, and I accept that the popular view is what it is, but I continue to find it less than welcoming. Speaking only for myself, I approach this forum with respect and courtesy, and if any person has any concerns about anything that I may have to say, I hope they will tell me about it in good faith and expect that they will be taken seriously. I entirely support a Draconian response to flagrant disrespect for the rules, but subjectively, I wish that there were more emphasis on the word "flagrant". I would be most disappointed if I found myself in Johan's situation, and my contributions to the forum would be likely to dry up. I guess the conclusion is that I would make a lousy moderator, in that case, and I thank you for the clarification of this forum's policy. I can only hope that the (correct and proper) enforcement of that policy does not lose us any thoughtful, respectful contributors. [/quote] Interesting read, and glad to hear your take on the matter. I occasionally find myself viewing this forum being run by The National Fascist Party of Italy. Censorship and stifling disagreements is a betrayal to debate, often resulting in uninspired posts. While I agree that if I came into your home I would respect your wishes, I like to think of the forum as being a public place. But as we all know, and as moderators have stated, this is not a democracy. I have always been someone who thinks that vague rules must be interpreted by using ones best judgment. In the same token, when a rule is indeed broken, the infraction should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. The rules of the forum are here to treat us like children, by drawing lines in the sand and demanding we do not cross. I think there is no harm in questioning the rules, especially when one feels there is negligence in the way they are enforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king_lunchb0x Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 [quote name='magick777' timestamp='1294271466' post='493495'] Very well; I am forced to observe that my own views on freedom of speech force me to accept your right to dissent... and I do seem to be in a minority of one. Therefore, I will moderate my objection in recognition of the fact that the mods in this situation [b]do[/b] seem to be acting in the interest and with the support of the wider community. It is a fair analogy; in my house, you don't take your shoes off at the door, but, I do so where that is expected. Accordingly, therefore, I am entirely willing in principle to comply with the stated rules of the forum, as a matter of respect and courtesy. However, there but for fortune go I, because (having thoroughly read the rules and accompanying explanatory posts) it was certainly not obvious to me that the use he made of the language in question would, in the eyes of the majority, be a breach of the spirit of the rules, and I might innocently enough have done something similar. Clearly, I now stand corrected, and I accept that the popular view is what it is, but I continue to find it less than welcoming. Speaking only for myself, I approach this forum with respect and courtesy, and if any person has any concerns about anything that I may have to say, I hope they will tell me about it in good faith and expect that they will be taken seriously. I entirely support a Draconian response to flagrant disrespect for the rules, but subjectively, I wish that there were more emphasis on the word "flagrant". I would be most disappointed if I found myself in Johan's situation, and my contributions to the forum would be likely to dry up. I guess the conclusion is that I would make a lousy moderator, in that case, and I thank you for the clarification of this forum's policy. I can only hope that the (correct and proper) enforcement of that policy does not lose us any thoughtful, respectful contributors. [/quote] i must say your linguistic skills are crazy good...you must have been in debate or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1v3th3ad Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 wow, didn't expect to see one of my ban threads lol...thought that was permanent history lol I agree with the gen pop...rules are stated, follow them...I've learned, I broke the rules once years ago out of poor humor and I took my ban and am still active to this day, no bum-hurt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I have major issues with people who break this particular rule. I mean really, how many kinds of stupid can you be? Every time you log on to any site including your browser home page, some where your IP address and it's location in the world are recorded. How many crimes have been solved because some idiot bragged or just talked about it somewhere? Anybody remember the former member who had a relative get bumped to a child porn website while surfing, where an automatic download began? Next thing he knew he had the feds showing up on his doorstep - with handcuffs. His life was pretty much destroyed over an accidental visit to a dangerous website, so let's be totally stupid and go online and talk about illicit and illegal practices and substances, right? Most of that stuff is illegal in most of the world. I don't give a rats ass what anyone does in their personal life, but don't be a completely jackass and expect to go anonymously online and not have it bite you in the ass one way or another. Every time somebody just goes ahead my first assumption is that at least mentally they're about fourteen and need to be bitch slapped. Immediately. It's just so obviously stupid that it triggers my automatic rant complex. 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shalowlow Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I have been banned before for mentioning a "non hookah tobacco product" in the context of addiction and how it relates to addiction to "hookah tobacco product". I don't see that as "all kinds of stupid", but to each his own. The rule is needed because people would be talking about "non hookah tobacco products" and "non-hookaing" them in a "hookah". But as you can see, there should definitely be a better way to enforce it without stifling discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camelflage Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 we do the best we can with what we are given. the rules are put in place with the hope that people will be reasonable. if we cut some people slack and vacation others, then we get called out for being biased and playing favorites.. if we just treat everyone the same and enforce the rules flatly, then we are griped at for being too strict and harsh. anyone with any common sense can come to this forum and see that our #1 priority is to let people share all their hookah information with other hookah smokers easily. our #2 priority is to try and keep people from associating hookah smoking with other things that have less than desirable reputations in the public eye. i dont care if you are pro alternative substances, pro free speech, pro whatever, but when the general public sees this place in search results for NHT things, they dont know any better. in order to keep this place from losing all integrity and turning into a madhouse we need everyone to help us out by just playing by the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchard Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Blown out of proportion topic is blown out of proportion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushrat Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Wow, this is the calmest I've ever seen this topic discussed. Sorry to have missed most of it. But allow me to put in my 2 cents again on this subject. We treat everyone as equally as we can that way there are no complaints of Favoritism. Simple as that. Hard to argue fairness when one person gets a warning and another gets a vacation. As for the Freedom of speech argument. Its not valid here as this is a privately owned and run forum and not protected under the fictitious idea of freedom of speech. We don't really have freedom of speech in this country anyways so.... Essentially, its a case of if you don't like it you don't have to play in our sandbox. Those of you who have been guest mods understand, those of you who haven't, you'll understand when you get your turn. Thank you for being reasonable in this discussion and please feel free to continue it as I do like to keep up with what people are thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainUM Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 [quote name='mitchard' timestamp='1294424844' post='493708'] Blown out of proportion topic is blown out of proportion. [/quote] mos def Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushrat Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 not really...just obviously a point of interest around here. I prefer to have stuff in the open than people being pissed off and not discussing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venger Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 [quote name='mushrat' timestamp='1294459519' post='493752'] not really...just obviously a point of interest around here. I prefer to have stuff in the open than people being pissed off and not discussing it. [/quote] i completely agree that this is the time and the place to have this little talk.Its good for people to understand where we stand and why we stand there.It should be understood that it was not malice or an attack on a noob. I have seen senior members banned just as quickly and the come right back feeling a little silly for having made the rookie mistake. Ray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Venger' timestamp='1294522508' post='493804'] [quote name='mushrat' timestamp='1294459519' post='493752'] not really...just obviously a point of interest around here. I prefer to have stuff in the open than people being pissed off and not discussing it. [/quote] i completely agree that this is the time and the place to have this little talk.Its good for people to understand where we stand and why we stand there.It should be understood that it was not malice or an attack on a noob. I have seen senior members banned just as quickly and the come right back feeling a little silly for having made the rookie mistake. Ray [/quote] I'm not sure you're a REAL member until you've been "Mush-slapped" at least once..........[img]http://www.hookahforum.com/public/style_emoticons/default/2403.gif[/img] 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now