PM the mods! Courtesy of doughnuts!

[kellmellus50]

I try not to argue with those who are clearly missing some of the essential pieces. At any rate, the board ban is coming, so we'll soon be done with this. One piece of advice: tone it way the heck down if you want to stay on RealGM, period.

RealGM operates a three strike policy. Users will be warned a maximum of three times for any and all offences in a three month period. If the need arises for a fourth warning a suspension will be put in place of between 1 to 7 days.

I only have 1 strike (if you call it that for a reason i do not know of) so i should not be suspended

[Ben]

I try not to argue with those who are clearly missing some of the essential pieces. At any rate, the board ban is coming, so we'll soon be done with this. One piece of advice: tone it way the heck down if you want to stay on RealGM, period.

RealGM operates a three strike policy. Users will be warned a maximum of three times for any and all offences in a three month period. If the need arises for a fourth warning a suspension will be put in place of between 1 to 7 days.

I only have 1 strike (if you call it that) so i should not be suspended

Board bans have nothing to do with 3 strikes. But at any rate, you do have 3 and you would have no way of knowing that. Don't you know that you're just making things worse for yourself? And shouldn't you be in school right now?

[kellmellus50]

shouldn't you be in school right now?

Thats a condensending statement and I take offence to that....Your put on notice !

[Ben]

shouldn't you be in school right now?

Thats a condensending statement and I take offence to that....Your put on notice !

I have begun deleting your posts here and will continue to do so until the board ban sets in. You haven't learned a thing during the time you've been posting here. You've been told to use our yahoo account (posted on the first page of this sticky) b/c this thread is not made for the purpose of you berating, threatening, or simply lecturing the mods. You've continued to use this thread, though. I (along with a litany of other mods) have already described your various behaviors to the admins and soon we won't have to deal with you here. But for god's sake, in the meantime stop posting and give us a friggin' break!

[jax98]

For whatever it's worth, the entire Bulls mod staff is behind Ben here kellmellus. You have been acting like a troll for a while, and ignored several attempts to have this discussion behind closed doors (the email).

You snooze, you lose. I think a private conversation would have done both sides good, but when you're not interested in that, all we can do is react to the public comments you put out there.

So let me make myself very clear once and for all.

Ben B. did absolutely nothing wrong. You have every right to complain to whoever you like, but I can tell you immediately that Ben has done a grade A+ job in this situation, and the higher powers will undoubtedly agree.

[kyrv]

I love Ben B.

[TheAdmiral]

Could anyone please tell me what's up with the PM option? Is it still unavailable?

[Ben]

Yes, it's still unavailable. I wouldn't put any money on its ever being restored, although I can't believe that it would be all that hard to do.

[TB#1]

Could anyone please tell me what's up with the PM option? Is it still unavailable?

Yeah, its been unavailable since November 24, 2009, the day you registered and its still unavailable.

Actually, it was unavailable for a long time before that but since you registered November 24, 2009, I'm assuming you wouldn't know that.

[TheAdmiral]

Could anyone please tell me what's up with the PM option? Is it still unavailable?

Yeah, its been unavailable since November 24, 2009, the day you registered and its still unavailable.

Actually, it was unavailable for a long time before that but since you registered November 24, 2009, I'm assuming you wouldn't know that.

Alright, thanks. I did read the first couple of posts of this thread, about the PM option being unavailable, but I wasn't sure if it had been fixed by now. I mean, the issue was announced more than a year ago, is it that hard to fix? I know phpBB is very easy to use, so that's definitely not the reason, I'm assuming.

[luxuryjones]

Hey Brookyln Bulls you said you might be able to help me. I'm looking for a post I did probably a couple of years back. I have not had a ton of posts so hopefully it's not hard. It was a post comparing Tyrus Thomas to Stromile Swift..

Keywords would be LSU, Stromile, Swift, Tyrus, - any help is appreciated. thanks man

[jax98]

It should be noted comments cannot be located if they were posted before the Forum upgrade back in '08.

[BrooklynBulls]

Hey Brookyln Bulls you said you might be able to help me. I'm looking for a post I did probably a couple of years back. I have not had a ton of posts so hopefully it's not hard. It was a post comparing Tyrus Thomas to Stromile Swift..

Keywords would be LSU, Stromile, Swift, Tyrus, - any help is appreciated. thanks man

Sorry- looks like you posted that before the forum upgrade, and therefore I can't find it. I tried to use google to locate it, but no luck.

[BullsFan123]

Here is an example why I have a problem with the way you mod (Morten):

Seecocoaball posts an article from his blog, which will not be tolerated by you so you lock his thread. I assume that you would call it spamming or whatever to gain internet traffic for his blog.

But when Doug opens a thread and posts absolutely nothing in it except for a direct link to his Chicagonow article that he just wrote, all of a sudden that is not considered spamming and it is ok.

This is a perfect example of what annoys me with the way you mod; I would call it selective modding.

There is definitely a double standard here.

[jax98]

Here is an example why I have a problem with the way you mod (Morten):

Seecocoaball posts an article from his blog, which will not be tolerated by you so you lock his thread. I assume that you would call it spamming or whatever to gain internet traffic for his blog.

But when Doug opens a thread and posts absolutely nothing in it except for a direct link to his Chicagonow article that he just wrote, all of a sudden that is not considered spamming and it is ok.

This is a perfect example of what annoys me with the way you mod; I would call it selective modding.

There is definitely a double standard here.

And yet, you didn't have the common decency to use the email account which I have invited you to on three seperate occasions.

Besides, Doug is a long-term member of the forums and his contributions are often directly connected to Chicago Bulls related subjects. Seecocoaball is a completely new poster who has already started two topics in which he's posted pieces from his blog. That is much more inclined to be categorized as spamming.

So, for a fourth time; If you have a problem with the way I moderate, contact the modstaff through the email. Thank you.

[Ben]

BullsFan123, please use the bullsrgm account (yahoo) if you want to talk about this, as Morten requested. Also, Doug doesn't create entire threads to promote individual blog posts, such as the one that Morten locked. And he certainly doesn't start threads about sweeping racial stereotypes.

But at any rate, please do contact us at the email account and we can talk about it further.

[dougthonus]

Here is an example why I have a problem with the way you mod (Morten):

Seecocoaball posts an article from his blog, which will not be tolerated by you so you lock his thread. I assume that you would call it spamming or whatever to gain internet traffic for his blog.

But when Doug opens a thread and posts absolutely nothing in it except for a direct link to his Chicagonow article that he just wrote, all of a sudden that is not considered spamming and it is ok.

This is a perfect example of what annoys me with the way you mod; I would call it selective modding.

There is definitely a double standard here.

There are two defining differences between Seecocoaball and other people who've linked their blog.
1) He's not a regular user part of this community. He's someone who only came here to link his blog.
2) He's not linking newsworthy information. He's linking editorials [this would probably still be fine occasionally if he was part of group #1]

If you consider there to be two standards for a guy with 10 posts and a guy with 1000s of posts, then you are correct. There are different standards for people who've been long time regularly contributing members of our community here than people who've never been here when it comes to borderline issues. Do you think that's wrong? If a friend you've seen 1000 times asks to borrow $10 you'll probably react considerably differently than if some guy you're meeting for the first time asks.

As an example, SherronShabazz is regularly linking his blog for the examiner where he has interviews with players he does at the UC. Sherron is linking newsworthy information, and he's a long time regular user. He always gets a positive response. When I link my blog it's almost always to report news that hasn't been reported yet.

Mort is certainly one of the best moderator we have right now, because he's really dedicated himself to making the forum better, and he's really carrying a lot of the water for guys [like me for example] who don't have as much time as they used to. I'm sorry you aren't happy with his decision in this case. Moderating isn't always a straight forward decision, it's a difficult and generally thankless job, since anytime you do it, you basically are pissing someone off. Afterall, no one likes to be moderated.

[BullsFan123]

Sorry about not using the email, I really thought that I was supposed to use this thread...

Anyway, I just thought that seecoco posted an interesting topic to talk about and still don't see anything wrong with someone advertising his blog. It is good to be able to talk about other basketball related topics outside of the Bulls. It is not like he is pasting direct links to his blog; to be honest I didn't even notice his blog adress in his signature until you locked the thread.

I have been a member of other forums and have seen new accounts pop up just to promote their own websites or blogs, but in order to be successful they realised that they have to add value to the forum in order to get some traffic. And after a while they would become valuable contributors to those forums.

Still neither one of your explanations is good enough for me. I remember pduh started a thread just to promote his blog. If he is able to do that just because he has a couple of thousand posts, and others can't then there is something terribly wrong here. Spamming is either spamming or it isn't, there is no such thing as a different definition of spamming based on your number of posts. Go to urbandictionary.com and check out the definition for yourselves if you guys don't understand that.

In your $10 lending analogy Doug, you a comparing apples to oranges and it isn't representative of the situation. I can come up with a better analogy here that is more apples to apples:

Lets say you go to a bank (a public place that anyone has access to just like this forum) to borrow $10 dollars, but you get rejected because you are a new customer and don't have a checking account with them, but the guy that does have an account and borrowed money many times before gets the loan with no questions asked. Well guess what that first customer is never going to come back and he will not open a checking account with that bank, because he can't even get a loan when others have taken out several loans before.

What you described in your example Doug is that this forum is a gentleman's club, where if you become friends with the moderators then you will have more leeway to spam and promote your own products for your own benefit. While others are just spammers.

[jax98]

Sorry about not using the email, I really thought that I was supposed to use this thread...

Given that I have sent you a PM about this, and twice publically invited you to use the email instead of doing this in public, I quite simply don't believe you.

It's also rather confusing to me that you again use this thread to air it out. I am currently logged in to our email account, and I see nothing from you. Yet, I see a long post here after myself and Ben B. informed you to use the Yahoo account.

So I'll try for the fifth and final time. Please use the Yahoo email account. We're all ready to engange in civil conversation, and we would prefer to keep personal issues off the boards.

I will gladly respond to your comments as soon as I see something from you in our inbox.

Thank you.

[SHO'NUFF]

OT: Other Bulls forums? Thread was locked. I posted a link to Pro Sports Daily website.

Im just curious, where in the guidelines (Forum Policies) or (Bulls Forum Rules) does it say not to post another sports website? Or even post links to other forums. Just curious. Thanks.