Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

1.3K

This is directed primarily at the admins, but if any ordinary users have insight, I would appreciate hearing it. I would ping certain long-time users who might have insight, but last time I pinged users in a post I was threatened with a ban.

So, what's the deal? A user was banned for pinging and all I hear are crickets. It's like you people have learned nothing about the slippery slope after seven years of this nonsense. If there are not clearly defined boundaries, within which we understand we are able to operate, then what is to stop admins from "nuking" whoever they dislike?

A user has been banned for allegedly , and this is somehow related to his user of the ping feature? Can an admin or someone in the know explain how this works? What is my ping ration for the day? Is this just to do with admins, or everyone? Why does honest use of a site feature quality as "tampering".

If I am a user actively using this platform, as I have tried to be, clarity here would be appreciated. If you dismiss me without addressing this legitimate concern, I can't help you.

This is directed primarily at the admins, but if any ordinary users have insight, I would appreciate hearing it. I would ping certain long-time users who might have insight, but last time I pinged users in a post I was threatened with a ban. So, what's the deal? A user was banned for pinging and all I hear are crickets. It's like you people have learned nothing about the slippery slope after seven years of this nonsense. If there are not clearly defined boundaries, within which we understand we are able to operate, then what is to stop admins from "nuking" whoever they dislike? A user has been banned for *allegedly* [tampering with system resources](https://poal.co/s/LogosRising/258264/76f53351-610b-4a81-a98f-92ca8d4c438b#cmnts), and this is somehow related to his user of the ping feature? Can an admin or someone in the know explain how this works? What is my ping ration for the day? Is this just to do with admins, or everyone? Why does honest use of a site feature quality as "tampering". If I am a user actively using this platform, as I have tried to be, clarity here would be appreciated. If you dismiss me without addressing this legitimate concern, I can't help you.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (40).
[–] • 0 pt

Dude, peeps talk mad spit against the admin constantly. And he lets it slide. But like anyone if his letterbox has 10 or wtvr it was pings, hes gonna get a bit annoyed.

Fairly certain (from what i read) he asked the dude to quit. Dude doubled down and got spanked.

Was not a case of "oh no i broke an invisible rule and got nuked".

It was a "please stop bro"... "F U admin".... "sigh ...fine. click"

[–] • 0 pt

It was a "please stop bro"... "F U admin".... "sigh ...fine. click"

That is not justification for banning a user. The dubious "ToS violation" cited makes this all the more clear.

It frankly doesn't matter whether the admin is annoyed or not; even whether he asked someone to stop annoying him or not. What matters - alone - is whether the behaviour is contrary to website rules; and one had better hope that rues aren't arbitrary, or arbitrarily enforced, or the website won't be long for this world, in terms of active userbase anyway.

Putt, for all his faults, endured far worse than AOU has ever dealt with, and not once did Putt ban someone for annoying him. Consider that as you will.

[–] • 0 pt

>That is not justification for banning a user

It literally is. If it was an accident, of course it wouldnt be.

But dude told other dude to point blank stop harassing him by pinging him constantly.

Other dude refused, doubled down even and got spanked for it.

Play stupid games...

Putt was a jew soyboy who let the pedophile soapers control his site. Using him as an example is laughable.

[–] • 0 pt

Other dude refused, doubled down even and got spanked for it.

Again, a request is meaningless if it is not in line with some law.

Spam is specified category. ARM wasn't just sending numerous messages with pings in them, randomly. He was pinging AOU to specific comments. It wasn't unreasonable behaviour.