Evil Semp wrote:
Campin_Killer wrote:That took about 5 minutes. But hell, I guess you cannot be bothered to look
This is one of the reasons we want the OP to do some of the leg work. They make a complaint and don't or won't back it up with facts. Say it only took five minutes to look up the facts. My question is why didn't you do that in the first place? Is your five minutes of time worth more than my five minutes of time?
Just because he has a page/s of all 1's doesn't make it abuse. Maybe he only rates the real bad players.
agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
True it isn't in the guidelines but then again how many people really read the guidelines? Common sense would be provide some proof when making a complaint.
Most folk provide some proof- the question is how much should be provided, surely?
Common sense doesn't say that 5 examples are needed in some cases. Why not 2? or 4? or 6?
The guidelines should be their to guide people. If they don't read them, fair enough, but if the info on how to make a valid complaint is absent, then it it seems unfair to dismiss complaints once they have been made on the basis of unwritten rules that the complainant had no way of knowing about.
Indeed, it makes the complainant look bad, whereas they have stuck to the strict guidelines as laid out.