you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jet199 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (9 children)

Weekend saiditors, lol.

Where's the commitment to arguing with strangers on the internet about things neither of you have any influence over?

[–][deleted]  (8 children)

[removed]

    [–]Blackbrownfreestuff 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

    I never asked the admins to permanently ban socks. I reported a rule violation. The ban was their call.

    [–]FediNetizen 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

    I never asked the admins to permanently ban socks

    These right here are some weasel words. The most recent several dozen comments are you making a mountain out of a molehill. You technically didn't directly ask for the ban, but it was what you were hoping for.

    [–]Blackbrownfreestuff 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

    I think socks should be allowed back on saidit. I think a temporary ban along with an agreement to follow the rules in the future would have been more appropriate, but I'm not an admin.

    [–]magnora7 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    We've already done that with him, twice... he's been given so many chances and has chosen to continue to break the rules.

    [–]neomarxist_bullshit 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Just like AHS is just monitoring "hate subs".

    [–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Not really. Socks hasn't been banned before, just told off, so that's what most people reporting him would have expected.

    [–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    socks was banned before, for a week (and ban evaded), then earned 3 strikes.