Violations against good taste.
 

Just HOW disgusting must a photo be before it is removed and the poster of said Pic banned?

I merely ask because this morning a disgruntled Forum Member took it upon himself to vent his spleen at a Moderator with some pretty foul language and then posted two of the vilest photos that I have ever seen on a site accessible by children. the thread was locked but the Pic was left viewable for well over an hour.

If "Reported" violations are only seen sort of sporadically perhaps a better system of reporting violations needs to be implemented!

I deleted that thread when I saw it, I didn't come on until about an hour or so after it was actually posted. And it had been locked by then, but I felt it should be deleted, rather than locked.

I do however, think that we should have the old system back of having reports PMed to us by the system. The way it is it is very easy to miss them sometimes, as we need to go into a separate forum to read them.

Actually going to mention that in admin.

Thanks for replying, It is really frustrating when something is "reported" but 'appears' to be being ignored!

Well, we obviously don't act on ALL reports. But something like that should have been removed straight away. It was vile.

Generally if I give infractions, I also remove the posts/make a comment in the thread. So that people know the report was not ignored. Seems to help a bit :)

What were the pictures of? Colour me curious.

The first was a pic of "shotgun suicide", you'd probably see it if you googled it. The second showed all these mutilated bodies. They weren't too pretty..