Search results

Well, my only input here is - initiation is not required if there is a reason for whatever action is taken. So maybe @Sam Wong can explain what his reason was and then @Nick can explain why it wasn't a sufficient reason enough.

@Nick , Where in rules does it say anything about this type of initiation being required?

@ELIASS , @sp00fy , @Wyn , @Tyler promoted to Administrators.

Unbanned - you be careful driving now.

Ban has expired if nothing's changed here, so let's just conclude this one.

@DystopianRaven promoted to Senior Administrator. Congratulations!

You will be unbanned sometime before Christmas (25th). Concluded.

@Kocayine resigned.

@Tyler added as Trial Moderator.

I know full-well that Lola has nothing against homosexual people. When she briefly wrote that comment, it was surely meant as a joke. I'm not finding it any amusing, but a lot of people do mess around with that type of language. I can therefore feel that it's a shame how this wasn't resolved in...

Okay, so I missed the rule stating that emergency service cannot carry any weaponry. With that rule taken into consideration, this staff report is legitimate. I've spoken to Devul and we're not sure that the rule in question in necessary to have, and that weaponry questions like that should...

Modified Rule 4.2.5

I see no broken rules or abuse here - at worst some form of misunderstanding, but the IC intensions were motivated. Denied.

Denied.

Changed 5:1:8

@zeffa added as Trial Moderator.

@sp00fy added as Trial Moderator.

Over 4000 forum members!