Wait, are we being told we can't ping anyone? I took this to mean just admin.
To me, it's not clear. Petty tyrant AOU didn't cite "being annoyed" as his justification for banning ARM; he cited "tampering with site resources" - which is the most outrageous of stretched interpretations I think I've ever seen - which leads me to believe it is simply the overuse of pinging itself that causes some "burden" to Poal.
The line needs to be drawn. As I suggested in my post, if there is a limit to the amount of pinging Poal can take, limit the use of the feature per user. If he is referring to himself as the resource, then not only is his interpretation of the ToS even more of a stretch, but he's basically saying he doesn't like an unmanageably flooded inbox and so he'll ban whoever contributes to overflooding it.
Totally outrageous. The stench of this place is rapidly becoming to rancid to endure.
AOU or PMYB2 - if either of you see this, since I daren't ping - which is it, specifically, that led to the ban? AOU's inbox being a little more flooded than he would like, or Poal not being able to handle too many pings? Hard to imagine ARM was a breaking point in either case.
Do you so-called admins have any idea how many pings Putts got each day? I don't recall him banning anyone for it.
The language of 'tampering with site resources' is being stretched further than a Pharisee putting scripture in his hat.
Ironically, this guy, and others in the thread, all seem to think it was just a matter of being annoyed - and they're fine with that. Incredible.
I told KOWA about that goatpen place. Seems cozy - the name itself bespeaks love for Voat and what it stood for, rather than disdain, as this place emanates. Might find myself spending more time there, if this is the treatment I'm supposed to expect and "just accept" on Poal.
But I want to expose the hypocrisy of those who viewed Poal as better than Voat all this time before I leave this cesspit.
(post is archived)