So you think we should leave it the way it is, just lighten down on the amount of warnings issued? I'm on both sides, because I can see the shortcomings of the current system in the way of fairness, yet it could just be a waste of time.
SeaRex, when we decide whether a post is spam / rule breaking we do so based on that post alone, not taking into consideration their past actions. This removes any partialness (is that a word?). By judging a member based on everything they've done, it requires us to make personal judgements that are far more open to interpretation and arguing than deleting a single post. It's hard to explain... It's just somewhat different.
My main argument is that members are going to start retailiating a helluva lot more when I have to ban them for being a continued nuisance, based on my personal opinion. As you can clearly see, my judgements are quite regularly opposed, unfortunately. I can only see more threads such as these arise
*eeek* I made this a little too personal... Hopefully you can understand what I'm trying to get at.
Alcar...