New Terms of Service

[Fulg0reSama]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

No it's not different. They would ban without warning if needed. It doesn't matter if it's for server stability, it's still the point that they would ban someone without warning them. UN is simply telling players that it can happen if it needs to happen. This is important because not every situation is the same. Massing porn for example. Maybe massing goatse would qualify to let them off with a warning, MAYBE(and that's being lenient). But massing CP? Does that mean because the rules say you're allowed a warning first that massing CP would get you off with a warning since it was just your first time? Do you think that's acceptable? No. Therefor the disclosure makes sense.

I seriously don't see what the hell all the commotion/confusion is about.

Goatse I'm certain would not be a warning at all. Last I checked the ******* is as offensive as any other part of the middle region of the body, back or front.

But back on topic: I think I'm understanding better, I promise my intention isn't to play devil's advocate.
Like you said, there's commotion and confusion, I'm merely on the confused portion.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by Fulg0reSama

Goatse I'm certain would not be a warning at all. Last I checked the ******* is as offensive as any other part of the middle region of the body, back or front.

Exactly. No warning = the rule everyone is whining about is being applied. What's the problem? Certain situations call for punishment without warning, which is what that clause covers. It has to be vague because they can't predict or narrow down every circumstance that would qualify for action without warning.

I get the feeling people are throwing up their arms in protest for very little reason other than the fact they want to act like a problem is there when it's not for drama or something.