Would it surprise you to know...

.......
and by the way, there's is an appeals process for EVERY member of this board, and it doesn't happen overnight.
Originally Posted by Fancyinheels

I should have appealed those points Ike gave me after you hammered the rtm and nuked my inbox after that recent comment I made to LexieInBanville. oh.....that "off topic" comment.

On Topic: ....And how long was LexieInBanville's ban?

AWESOME game, first Super Bowl overtime in history in Houston! Woo HOO!

Maybe it's the endorphins, but I have gone from being sad and mad about WU dredging up ECCIE archeology to finding it funnily flattering that he evidently thinks I've had the power to influence every decision local admin has made about bans since 2015. Damned impressive! Would be ridiculous if it was true, but it's not. I know at least a couple of incidents that contradict, so as a mod himself, he must be aware of more. And therein lies the problem with this thread.

Allegations of partiality cannot be properly addressed without in-depth public examination of who did what to whom when, where, and why, the punishment they received, and how it was decided. Uh huh, that frog will get its privates dissected when pigs fly on bacon wings. WU's restricted to using relics and speculative smoke and mirrors, making this thread pretty much all hearsay serving his agenda.

He basically just poked a pile of poo with his stick to watch the flies rise up in the interest of his pre-Super Bowl entertainment. I applaud his creativity.

Oops, sorry, double post. Internet acting up. All the tweeting traffic about the game, most likely.

I should have appealed those points Ike gave me after you hammered the rtm and nuked my inbox after that recent comment I made ... Originally Posted by GlobeSpotter

Yep, you should have, but obviously he felt you deserved them. As has been mentioned, I don't make the rules. I just ding the pretty triangle.

What do y'all think about them having a lesser punishment for the same crime, all in the name of provider security? Originally Posted by Wakeup

So, the whores can out us with relatively few consequences...how does that sit with y'all? Originally Posted by Wakeup

So you're pissed off that improper masking isn't regarded as outing. You're pissed off that it only catches a 30 day ban instead of 12 months. I take it that you're looking for some backup from the fellas on the board? Perhaps wanting to influence mods to make a policy change?

If so, why don't you post a poll question instead of starting a thread with a nebulous title? If not, well, at least you got to vent some spleen...

Nah....you can appeal them for me.

You're the best at getting sentence reduction.

I mean 365 to 30....surely that's a record.

Nah....you can appeal them for me.

You're the best at getting sentence reduction.

I mean 365 to 30....surely that's a record. Originally Posted by GlobeSpotter

I charge $400 an hour for my legal services, way more than I do for my illegal ones.

Nah....you can appeal them for me.

You're the best at getting sentence reduction.

I mean 365 to 30....surely that's a record. Originally Posted by GlobeSpotter

You're joking, right? Super Mod 2 Dogs explained with great clarity the difference between a 30 day ban for a provider insuffiently masking a hobbyist's protected info in a private forum (e.g., the Ladies Lounge) versus a 365 day ban for a true outing. Fancy's regrettable but surely non-fatal conduct 2 years ago fell into the 30-day ban framework vs. the 365 day ban standard.

You're joking, right? Super Mod 2 Dogs explained with great clarity the difference between a 30 day ban for a provider insuffiently masking a hobbyist's protected info in a private forum (e.g., the Ladies Lounge) versus a 365 day ban for a true outing. Fancy's regrettable but surely non-fatal conduct 2 years ago fell into the 30-day ban framework vs. the 365 day ban standard. Originally Posted by pxmcc

Which part did you not understand?

Well it is not really clear to us out here what she really did.....the extent either whitewashed or refuted. But it was enough.....

Ms Fancy contacted me this morning & I am pleased to report that the MODS have reduced Fancyinheels' ban from a year to a month .....



~ Originally Posted by Lexieinhouston

.....
The sole infraction that got me kicked to the curb......I did post some incomplete data about the fellow who contacted me..... Originally Posted by Fancyinheels

Good gosh, 20-freaking-15! GS, are you and WU really so certain that a single instant out of one insignificant provider's whole 10-year carnal career irreparably changed an entire board to the point that making amends requires she gut herself like a trout and bleed into her computer 'til it shorts out? Will I hear the end of this then, or will you and he continue to slap my deceased and decaying zombie face with your dicks every few months just for fun, as you do now?

I blame it all on Jamison's

Because WU aka SC aka DG, etc's purpose is to generate "clicks", which generates income from the sponsors for the owners. More "clicks" = more money 💰. Simple economics, really. Originally Posted by Oralist

Cha-Ching, Cha-Ching, Cha-Ching.

Fancy's regrettable but surely non-fatal conduct 2 years ago fell into the 30-day ban framework vs. the 365 day ban standard. Originally Posted by pxmcc

You are incorrect...and that's pert of the problem. Fancy has already explained what she did, and she knows she should have been banned for a year for doing it. She got off easy, because when she did it, the guidelines weren't established yet. Whores had been outing us for so long that it was common practice to do so. As the mods have said, when she did it, the local mods set the guideline and punishment, yet somehow the punishment for what she did didn't apply to her, she got a lesser punishment.

That is obviously still happening...that's what you're missing in all of Fancy's "oh woe is me, Wakeup is picking on me, I'm a good person" schtick...she's a potty mouth outing whore...no different than any of the others, like Alyssa and Champagne Brown...she just tries to forget about it, while also ignoring that her situation was the catalyst that has allowed other whores to get away with it too...

As I said, flattered that the power to affect so much on ECCIE has been attributed to me, but simply not true. If someone wants policy change on punishment, he should work with those who administer it. I'm not a cog on anybody's wheel. WU knowingly ignores other examples he's no doubt well aware of to dangle me like a rabbit over ravenous wolves as it suits his agenda; insists nobody ever learns from or redeems a mistake; insinuates every lady is gossiping behind a man's back while downplaying the same on the part of the fellows (EQUALLY wrong); and believes both misdemeanors and felonies merit the death penalty.

Zombie Fancy is done with this topic. Talk over my corpse as much as you like. My resistance is futile. Just remember that WU is a gameplayer and ECCIE is his chessboard. Like Oralist said, cha-ching.

I blame it all on Jamison's Originally Posted by lookn4boobies

Don't blame the drinck; blame the drincker. (BTW, it's spelled Jameson.)

Zombie Fancy is done with this topic.[/COLOR] Originally Posted by Fancyinheels

Time will tell.