Ljubljana's trial

Yea instead of PMing you or stuff like that I will post it here for others to see and because it will reach you faster than a PM LJS. Basically the reason I make this thread is because in the court section nobody can write anything apart from you and some other random ppl with colored name tags.

Now before I give my suggestion I'd like to know more about the ACH incident there ...

I agree with Iv.
Also it would be useful if it was public knowledge (like as in being written down beneth the rules) what the protocol is so people can actually follow it.
This is the Court of Appeals and I appeal for Ljub to recieve justice.

No here LJS is right you only appeal on decisions mods made, in general you report a specific content to the moderator for him to take action, if you are not satisfied with it you may appeal, that was the order in which I wrote it in my prev post if it wasn’t clear.

The way this should work is:
1. Member who feels he/she has been wronged by another member alerts moderators to the situation (PM is the easiest way to do this)
2. Moderator looks at whatever happened and decides whether or not it's an issue
3. If there's some doubt, Moderator creates a thread in the Courts section so other Moderators can weigh in
4. Whatever the Moderators decide happens

Other members voting on whether one of their own should be punished isn't on that list. That's what Moderators are for.

ACH was the one who said Bronies had a hormonal imbalance. And I'm not sure why y'all are so butthurt over me disliking MLP.

Wish we had a copy of that post here because the way it was written is quite important here. Either way I don't think this should end up in a ban and also either way that post should be deleted (already done), as of the last thing on my suggestion list, the official warning, I can't really tell if it should be applied unless I take a closer look at that post ...

I didn't exactly keep up with that thread, but I don't think serious antagonisation can occur on one thread alone, I don't even think it can be caused by typed words alone, but then again, I can't exactly give a valid opinion on antagonisation, nobody here is capable of pissing me off.

Prototype wrote:

I didn't exactly keep up with that thread, but I don't think serious antagonisation can occur on one thread alone, I don't even think it can be caused by typed words alone, but then again, I can't exactly give a valid opinion on antagonisation, nobody here is capable of pissing me off.

Yeah. That rule is intended more to deal with someone picking a specific other member to hate and continuing that for an extended period of time. An argument in one thread shouldn't qualify.

Serious antagonising would be placing a dismembered horses head in someone's house every single day.

But last time I tried, you can't do that over the Internet.

It wasn't even an argument, I politely requested that they not post gay horses, half of them did and I laughed it off. Then ACH started listing reasons why bronies are whatever and we started discussing it. Y'all need to stop getting so offended.

Well either way that didn't end up well and so for future reference I would request you not post such things anymore.

Yes, how dare anyone specify what types of post they'd not like in their thread.

Absolutely terrible.

Yes, you are not allowed to say anything you want, "Dogs and Jews are forbidden from entering this park", a common sign in German parks, 1936.

This looks like a good time to bail out of this thread.

Prototype wrote:

This looks like a good time to bail out of this thread.

I agree. Locked.