Quote from Azure Kite

Would I be blamed for week banning ACBeam? I mean, I know it's seem a bit like whiteknighting, but he said a lot of shit about Cami as if he were in the right, as well as essentially insulted Hew and Arch when he stepped into their conversation. And since Tsang isn't exactly around to handle his section....

No-one is going to blame you, if a member is saying shit about another mod, you have the right to stop them. Insulting other members isn't going to be tolerated full-stop.

Quote from Azure Kite

Out of curiosity, what is our actual policy on piracy? I've looked through some of the older infractions, and we've gotten people on asking for pirated stuff, telling others to get pirated stuff, saying they have pirated stuff.... Where do we actually draw the line on the matter?

Check the Mod's Handbook here.

The policy on Flash is asking how to get pirated software is a 3 point infraction (I include "free" software, since it still counts towards piracy and that user is asking for it, even if they "don't mean pirating it" because that's bullshit), telling a user how to get pirated software without links is a 5 point infraction, and supplying pirated links is worth 10 points. The handbook says just Flash, but it applies to pretty much any software if you ask me.

The reason I ask, is because a member implied to look up a torrent, but didn't provide a link, or specifically say to look up one. He did later say that finding one would be the best way, but I don't think he really meant any harm. I didn't infract him, but I was curious if such a scenario would be infractable since in the past, members have gotten infractions for stating/implying they pirate things.

Yes, that's absolutely infractable. I don't like the idea of people circumventing our "no piracy discussion" rules by being vague. We aren't a website to facilitate that kind of activity, if they really want to do that there are plenty of other places to go and ask at.

The original post being discussed was this:

Well that is one expensive book that might take a while to find a torrent for... Good luck on finding it

I don't think that's an attempt to circumvent our anti-piracy rules by being vague, unless we're not even allowed to acknowledge it exists.

edit: quoted the edited post on accident.

Oh that's a bit different. From the way it was described it sounded like someone just said, "look up a torrent" in response to "where can I get flash" or something. I don't think we should pretend it doesn't exist, but discussion on it should be very limited, since again we're not a vessel for piracy in any way.

Quote from Exilement

what are your PC's specs? did you purchase CS6 or are you using a pirated copy?

Looking back, this didn't get infracted, but the reply from Atomicapple, saying he did pirate, was, leading to some confusion in the matter.

Quote from I Pwn3d Jo0

Wait Azure is it really that bad to say the only way to read that book?... I mean let's face facts 2.5k for a book is way out of alot of people's price range and I know for sure it isn't legally online

Then this reply is what really had me wondering on the whole issue.

I only asked that because trying to give someone technical assistance with potentially unstable pirated software is a waste of time, I think that's a valid question. Kinda feel bad for baiting him into an infraction though.

It's why I'm wondering where exactly a line should be drawn. As shown, his first post didn't directly imply he wanted Zed to go pirating, but his second one, he pretty much clearly states you can't get the book by any means but paying an exorbitant price or getting it illegally. After all, there are libraries, and other ways to get the book, if only temporarily. It's why I only changed his post instead of infracting him, because it was an iffy call.

we can't draw absolute lines on most things. if you're unsure about something just bring it up here.

Hey guys, I noticed a lot of sectional mods are issuing infractions with a huge number of points in order to ban members. I'm going to ask that you stop doing this, and follow the original protocol I had laid out in the Moderator's Handbook. Sectional mods do not have banning members within their scope. If a user is banned because of the infraction limit, that's fine, but intentionally issuing huge infractions in order to reach that limit is an abuse of the system. Instead, the protocol is that you should escalate to a global mod or admin by posting here in the bat cave with a reason for the banning, so that a global mod may issue the ban through the mod control panel with a detailed reason as to why so other global mods and admins know.

Maybe this is a good time to ask everyone to read through the handbook again because I think much of what's in there is being ignored. We can also discuss changes if you think that's necessary.

The users we're banning are spam/adbots. In the moderator's handbook states that we should use the spam-o-matic, which was abolished some time ago. I'd understand that banning a normal user permanently for no reason and it being a 9999 point infraction would be an issue but in this case it's bots.

That makes sense, but I'd still prefer you to report from now on. I'll look in to installing some kind of spam tool for you guys today.

Forgive me if I'm confused Jeff, but the infraction points you're talking about are the ones for the bots right? Or is it for something else?

Edit: whoops haha~but okay, reporting instead then~

Alright then, will be using the report button next time.

You can use the report button but I think a better plan is to just post in the forum bans section or here for now. Hopefully you wont need to, I'm looking at anti-spam mods now.