banned

23 Sep 2006

We were banned once upon a time for 'having multiple user names' which actually turned out to be a case of mistaken identity.
We did see a massive drop in the number of pms and contacts after that, as people had obviously spotted that and understandabley been a bit wary of us, which we were a bit miffed about seeing as it wasn't anything to do with us!
Just thought I'd throw that in in case they were banned for the same reason!
Maz xx

24 Sep 2006

Quote by davej
The vast majority of bans are placed for breaking the site AUP and then normally after at least one warning and in most instances, several warnings, so I wouldn't advocate not meeting someone on the grounds that they have been banned, because the liklyhood is that the ban is for ignoring previous warnings to desist from breaking rules and not for some henious crime against mankind.
The earlier answer about asking these folk outright why they've been banned seems a reasonable one to me.

OOO!! I do so like the use of double negatives.... :twisted:
If I knew what the fuck they were, which I don't, I'd use them mor often wink

"so I wouldn't advocate not meeting someone...." the bold items are the double negatives
So, therefore... you would advocate meeting someone
I know I'm a thick twat, but isnt that what I said dunno

...I aint got no time for this double negative stuff I've grunting and knuckle scraping to be getting on with.
...opps is that another one :doh:
I'm not so sure I agree with this statement Dave. What you are in essence saying is that someone who has been banned is still ok to meet!!! Well we, the general public, don't usually know what someone has been banned for ..... and now you've said well people are banned for all things and it might just be something as simple as inappropriate photos.
So anyone banned for abuse, now reading this, has a legitimate excuse, anyone asking them what they were banned for can be lied to, and the banned person could abuse again!
Sorry for the crap way of putting it (heavy night last night) but that sucks! Anyone banned from the SH site is that banned and there shouldn't be attending events under the SH name, and arranging meets.
If someone has broken the rules/aup can this not be added to their ban notification? At least allowing someone to make an informed choice based on facts and not the persons "side".
Cx

24 Sep 2006

Photos will be deleted if they contain any of the following:
Anyone who looks under the age of 18.

Well, thats me not putting up any face pics then, I look about 14 (I'm 24 though btw).

24 Sep 2006

yeah me too, i barely look 18, cough
staggy

24 Sep 2006

Quote by wild rose and the stag
yeah me too, i barely look 18, cough
staggy

:laughabove: I notice you never quoted your real age Staggy bolt

C x

24 Sep 2006

there was no way i was going to do that just in case there was an upper age limit on the site too, im not risking a ban
staggy rolleyes

24 Sep 2006

Quote by davej
The vast majority of bans are placed for breaking the site AUP and then normally after at least one warning and in most instances, several warnings, so I wouldn't advocate not meeting someone on the grounds that they have been banned, because the liklyhood is that the ban is for ignoring previous warnings to desist from breaking rules and not for some henious crime against mankind.
The earlier answer about asking these folk outright why they've been banned seems a reasonable one to me.

Bloody Hell Dave, you been at the sensible pills again have you? :shock: lol

Were your ears burning last night?