Dodge SRT Viper Forums : ViperAlley banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,948 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
ChicagoGTS has been suspended for 24 hours for making personal threats toward another member.

ChicagoGTS said:
P.S. - Be careful who you call a computer geek, you don't want to piss off the wrong person wink wink, remember where you are and how your talking to us. It doesn't take a whole hell of a lot to find out a whole hell a lot. Ya' catch my drift.
My wink wink was just implying that I was one of the ones insulted.
the original post could be interpreted a few ways. ChicagoGTS claimed he was just warning Smokin that he needs to be careful b/c his attacks could turn "real world" very easily. we the mods decided to issue a warning to him explaining that his post was walking a thin line. then, he issued a second response in which he admitted that he was one of the guys insulted. This gave us reason to believe he was personally threatening Smokin.

ChicagoGTS will be suspended 24 hours for his first offense of the Viperalley Constitution
 

·
Stow-N-Go, Baby!
Joined
·
10,163 Posts
Perhaps harmless foul, but:

1) The first post was definitely a threat, no question.
2) Trey then warned the guy--along the lines of "you might not know the rules but..."
3) He then essentially admits the threat, but seems to back off on his tone. I.e., he doesn't threaten again.

I think that since you gave him a warning for the first clear violation, punishing him for his follow-up was probably not warranted. If you had instead hammered him from the outset, it would have been appropriate.

Kinda like a cop pulling you over for a ticket, giving you a warning, sending you on your way, and then pulling you over again saying "I changed my mind--I'm giving you the ticket after all."

He deserves the punishment, but once you give the warning, you probably should have stuck with the decision.
 

·
Schadenfreude Connoisseur
Joined
·
10,474 Posts
Schillinger said:
Perhaps harmless foul, but:

1) The first post was definitely a threat, no question.
2) Trey then warned the guy--along the lines of "you might not know the rules but..."
3) He then essentially admits the threat, but seems to back off on his tone. I.e., he doesn't threaten again.

I think that since you gave him a warning for the first clear violation, punishing him for his follow-up was probably not warranted. If you had instead hammered him from the outset, it would have been appropriate.

Kinda like a cop pulling you over for a ticket, giving you a warning, sending you on your way, and then pulling you over again saying "I changed my mind--I'm giving you the ticket after all."

He deserves the punishment, but once you give the warning, you probably should have stuck with the decision.
Brian,
When a moderator identifies a threat, the first action is pretty much an immediate warning. What happens next requires moderator deliberation. Four separate moderators and an admin were involved in this discussion. There were discussions on the legitimacy and level of the threat. That does not happen quicky. The subsequent suspension was decided upon after the moderators pretty much unanimously decided that the violation was flagrant and was well beyond the already extremely lenient guidlines and enforcement methods of Viperalley. A suspension was decided upon and the membership was informed of the decision. Trey made the warning in accordance with Viperalley guidelines, but waited on any further actions until a larger number of moderators could participate in the discussion. That is why you saw a "two step process", where there was a warning and then a 24 hour suspension.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top