Wtf

Originally posted by Storm
It was Raz who banned her, so you can take this into account when you bring your grievance to him, and have a word with him.

Ceterum censeo OTF esse delendam.

Originally posted by Lana
Actually, Xavius, Snoopbert's situation is quite complex and you do have no understanding of it whatsoever 😛

Originally posted by Lana
Actually, Xavius, Snoopbert's situation is quite complex and you do have no understanding of it whatsoever 😛

LOL!

I'm sorry, when did I try to understand the situation?

Let me explain this to you as well. This is getting boring . . .

Originally posted by Xavius
Yeah, well then you pretty much got pwnt.

And it must've been damn apparent if they banned you without checking.

^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

Originally posted by Xavius
LOL!

I'm sorry, when did I try to understand the situation?

Let me explain this to you as well. This is getting boring . . .

^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

😱 And they were wrong! 😱

I don't see why it's any of your business anyways.

Originally posted by Xavius
LOL!

I'm sorry, when did I try to understand the situation?

Let me explain this to you as well. This is getting boring . . .

^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

And....that's not all of the story by half!

You don't know what happened, you weren't even a member when it all started. Okay?

^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

I was already banned, they couldn't ban me for being a sock in the first place.

Originally posted by Lana
And....that's not all of the story by half!

You don't know what happened, you weren't even a member when it all started. Okay?

I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. 😛

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. 🙂

Originally posted by Xavius
I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. 😛

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. 🙂

He wasn't banned for something he didn't do. He was nearly banned for something he didn't do.

The initial ban had nothing to do with that at all. Which was said already a few times.

Originally posted by Xavius
I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. 😛

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. 🙂

Originally posted by Xavius
I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. 😛

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. 🙂

Then don't read into things if you don't have the full story. Simple as that.

Originally posted by LanceWindu
Then don't read into things if you don't have the full story. Simple as that.

Everyone makes their mistakes. You've done the same before, I'm sure.

Originally posted by Lana
He wasn't banned for something he didn't do. He was nearly banned for something he didn't do.

The initial ban had nothing to do with that at all. Which was said already a few times.

Ah, well he said previously he was permanently banned from the forums.

Originally posted by Xavius
Ah, well he said previously he was permanently banned from the forums.

Originally posted by Xavius
Ah, well he said previously he was permanently banned from the forums.

Yes, but the socking incident had nothing to do with it at all.

Oh, damn . . . I misunderstood.

But yeah, I basically said if a Moderator had banned you for socking and didn't do a sock check under fair, unbiased circumstance, then it would be apparent that you WERE a sock.

My point still stands.

offtobed

Originally posted by Xavius
Oh, damn . . . I misunderstood.

But yeah, I basically said if a Moderator had banned you for socking and didn't do a sock check under fair, unbiased circumstance, then it would be apparent that you WERE a sock.

My point still stands.

And your point is wrong.

Someone had created an account and was spamming the forums, and due to certain actions, Snoopbert was accused with no evidence. However, it wasn't him.

You can be accused of socking and NOT be a sock, and you can be banned for it without actually being one.

And he wasn't banned for socking.

Originally posted by A.J
Why was angie banned, being my sock, what bull where is the proof ???

Originally posted by Lana
And your point is wrong.

Someone had created an account and was spamming the forums, and due to certain actions, Snoopbert was accused with no evidence. However, it wasn't him.

You can be accused of socking and NOT be a sock, and you can be banned for it without actually being one.

And he wasn't banned for socking.

How can you say my point is wrong? What you're explaining is irrelevant . . . Again.

I already said I misunderstood. I changed the topic, if that wasn't apparent to you.

I said

But yeah, I basically said if a Moderator had banned you for socking and didn't do a sock check under fair, unbiased circumstance, then it would be apparent that you WERE a sock.

Originally posted by Xavius
How can you say my point is wrong? What you're explaining is irrelevant . . . Again.

I already said I misunderstood. I changed the topic, if that wasn't apparent to you.

I said

And that point is wrong. Getting banned because you were accused of being a sock yet it was never checked does NOT mean you are a sock.