FAO mods

[Wolves & Lions]

1. I was given infractions twice for the same thing.
2. I was given these infractions for "ignoring" a warning, when in actuality I replied to the moderator in question with a descriptive explanation as to why my post was technically within the rules, which was kindly truly ignored by said moderator.
3. After ignoring my explanation, said moderator decided it would be best to give me false infractions.

Now, I don't really mind having the infractions, but it's the principle of the thing.

 

[CassinoChips]

1. You were given an infraction for each time you ignored a moderator's warning.

2. You replied in a flippant manner with an abrasive tone, as if you were trying to one-up the Mod who asked you to expand on your post.

3. The infractions were deserved. Thus, not false.

 

[Wolves & Lions]

1. Like I said, I explained and replied, hence NOT ignoring. I was also sent one warning, so I don't see where your double warning stance is coming from.

2. I was rather polite in my explanation, if you cared to read it. If you did read it and saw it as "flippant", it should be noted that I was referring to the written rules in a descriptive manner, which is actually pretty obvious.

3. Again, I didn't ignore anything. Thus, false.

 

[Serah]

Kandy warned you twice. You got nasty and cocky with her the first time. Then you ignored her the second time. I believe Shu also you warned you, and you ignored him as well. Your infractions are perfectly valid and they will stick. Do not make another thread about this, or you will receive another infraction, and this time it'll be from me.

*closed*