Regarding the Arc-V 46 Thread and the Forum's Warning System

[NeoArkadia]

As to the rest of the thread: Master Ghost got warned. Revise got warned. Probably one or two other members got warned. Why weren't they banned? First warning. As mentioned in the first post.

So disagreeing is a "behavior meant to lower the enjoyment of the forum for everyone"? It would be nice if you put that in the forum rules, so others and myself may know this and it not be some arbitrary thing that a mod can decide.

Except, it will always be for a mod to decide. Trolling is inherently a subjective issue based on inductive reasoning. i.e. "A Duck Test". There can't be a hard metric on this.

The system used to make the decisions to warn people is full of holes that I keep bringing up and only get met with "Well, Terrorking is an asshole so..." from the staff.

"If it looks like a troll, swims like a troll and quacks like a troll, then it's probably a troll.". I'm not sure what you want. We cannot provide a hard metric for trolling. Trolling is a subjective determination. I apologize if that bothers both you and TerrorKing but trolling is going to remain a loose metric.

As Mako said, the determination of behavior via the mods is going to be subjective based on our rules. Do we need to update rules? Probably, but we are waiting to do that on a larger scale (i.e. we have a certain event we've been waiting for to let us overhaul them, but certain things in the background has been holding that back), but at the same time, the lack of certain items is not going to be allowed to paralyze the ability of a moderator or administrator to dispense warnings and bans.

If and when we do update the rules, not every little item of minutia is going to be clarified. Are there parts of the rules that could use fleshing out? Yes. But there also needs to be some level of flexibility in the rules in case of situations.