Any member posting something that even touches the well known laws of Thailand can expect similar consequences.
Any member posting something that even touches the well known laws of Thailand can expect similar consequences.
Does that include the laws on prostitution?Originally Posted by arsenal
Heartening to see your now a legal expert, Len - as well as knowing every other fucking thing. How do you manage it I wonder
And incidentally, Moses, I didn't really want to know what ChristianPFC had said because I strongly suspect he said nothing at all, as (unlike some Head Judges) Christian has a sense of proportion, and doesn't have an ego the size of Jupiter (I don't mean the GoGo bar).
However, feel free to tell me I'm wrong.
Ok, cool. Who got banned though?
Is it really that big of a secret? Who was it?
Do you really think that anyone enjoys his comments? I'm aware that the posting guidelines would not rid the board of him. But it's a private organization, not subject to legal constraints. Owner can do what he wants. As I've said several times in the past. And several times in the past I've been reminded of the posting guidelines.
I do not expect him to be removed permanently unless he repeats his recent type of posts. Other board members have a greater ability than I do to tolerate him.
Oh snap, was it latin that got banned? hahahaha....
Or am I wrong? Who was it? Help a blind guy out, and tell me, who was it that gor banned?
Frequent
bOh, it was fequent? Can't say I like the guy, but will miss his smug, asshole, cynical outlook on life.
Could one of the Three Stooges(aka Moderators) confirm who they have banned. That would end the speculation and make it all seem a little more above board, and a little less like some overnight purge.
I'm hoping that it isn't a poster with whom one of the stooges has had a long standing beef.
Read the rules.
Moderation and Sanctions
4.3 4.3 A Moderating action or decision may be clearly explained in red within the post or thread concerned. A reference to the rule that has been breached will be included. In the case of loss of posting privileges, the advice will be sent by PM; it will not be delivered publicly.
What took you so long?
If you want to discuss the member in question, I suggest you ask the board owner to suspend the following rule:
4.4 After the explanation has been published or sent by PM, all communication with the member(s) being sanctioned will be by PM or email. There will be no public discussion
I don't want to "discuss the member in question", I just want to know who you have banned(later revised to one month only).
This doesn't seem an unreasonable question and if you had applied the guideline that you have quoted, 4.3, there would have been a note in red in the offending post that would have enabled us to see who was being banned.
Instead you decided to open a new thread on which others could post, thus rather contradicting your own assertion that Rule 4.4 needs to be suspended before any public discussion could take place.
In fact as seems obvious from the reading of 4.4 that is about communication with the member, and is irrelevant in the context of my simple request to confirm the board name of the person suspended, as has normally been done in the past.
Posting Permissions
