A double standard would be if ruckmarch was warned and nobody else was. Warning actions are left up to the discretion of the DS, not your own personal feelings - sorry. As with all of our actions, warnings are contestable to the site owner. However, whining that we aren't heavy handed enough in dishing out warnings is like asking for a firing squad instead of a two year prison term. :
We aren't the Gestapo, KGB, CSIS, CIA, or MI6 (though I do look damn good in a tux). Feel free to speak out about what you feel is a failing, but please do it properly. Stirring the pot does nothing but demean yourself. I'm not going to silence or warn people - this is exactly why we have the public warning boards. Members effected this change, and we were happy to offer transparency. As for the number of bans and warnings, we are a large site that has operated for over a decade (not many sites can say that) - the warnings fit the crime and you'll notice for the most part that we justify most warnings with proof (special issues aside).
Also, for the record, the DS polices itself quite well. We discuss our own actions and will overturn them if we agree it necessary. This does nothing to affect our unity. We are all here for the good of the site. If one of us needs to calm down and take a breather, we'll tell each other, tactfully or not
.
With all respect to Roy, I'm not going to leave this open just so someone can toe the line or cross it. If anyone has a legitimate issue, please feel free to send me a PM. If you want to complain for the sake of being heard, write in a journal or something.
Regards,
Kyle Burrows
Milnet.ca Staff