• The regular administrative staff are taking a vacation, and in the meantime, Biigoh is taking over. See here for more information.
  • A notice about Rule 3 regarding sites hosting pirated/unauthorized content has been made. Please see here for details.
  • Staff is working to deal with the problem of synonymous tags. See here for more information and to suggest tag mergers.
  • Due to issues with external spam filters, QQ is currently unable to send any mail to Microsoft E-mail addresses. This includes any account at live.com, hotmail.com or msn.com. Signing up to the forum with one of these addresses will result in your verification E-mail never arriving. For best results, please use a different E-mail provider for your QQ address.
  • For prospective new members, a word of warning: don't use common names like Dennis, Simon, or Kenny if you decide to create an account. Spammers have used them all before you and gotten those names flagged in the anti-spam databases. Your account registration will be rejected because of it.
  • Since it has happened MULTIPLE times now, I want to be very clear about this. You do not get to abandon an account and create a new one. You do not get to pass an account to someone else and create a new one. If you do so anyway, you will be banned for creating sockpuppets.
  • Due to the actions of particularly persistent spammers and trolls, we will be banning disposable email addresses from today onward.

Mass Tagging Clarification

Iandude0

Versed in the lewd.
Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Messages
1,799
Likes received
7,756
Today I had received a mod warning about my mass tagging of someone. While I can understand the reasoning behind it, I looked to see if it was it was the rules.

It was not. While I wouldn't personally say a blanket ban would be in order for that specific action, I ask at least recommend some provisions against it be added either way to clarify things (whether a blanket ban or provisions against abusing it in thread). I thought what I had done, while not necessarily encouraged, did not warrant a mod post in and of itself.

I would just like an official ruling since I didn't feel I deserved the warning for something not stated to be in violation of the rules (specifically rule 1, which after a lookover seemed the closest to what the ruling might've meant).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top