[Vanessa]

Yeah, it's not up to us.

[Jake.]

Still love how people sugar-coat 'Mollie' like some loving, adorable member. That was the avatar and posting style talking. Anybody who plans to meet with somebody, allows them to spend vasts amount of money and ditches them (sorry David, if you don't want this posted I can remove it), isn't a nice person. End of.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by Germyle

Ok, this needs to be said before the thread gets deleted

Jessica, you always have to be on the admins/mods side, sometimes a little bit too much, I think you are trying too hard to try and prove something or even get a tibb staff member job. (im not even being rude im just reading so let me continue), I was gonna PM you all of this but the post you just did wasn't really needed and it's a bit of a "haha" to Jordan.

Even when Salman was banned last week you were going on as if you were a tibb staff member and giving your opinions on his ban when nobody asked for it.

That is all

Zero relevance to the topic and immensely rude IMO

[Shaun]

The short answer is no.

The long answer is **** no.

[Jake.]

And as for Stacey, if she's a nice person now (she seems to be so this isn't me running her down), talk to her offline like you have been for the past two years, she was clearly banned on here for a reason.

[Gstar]

Originally Posted by Good King Glennceslas

Zero relevance to the topic and immensely rude IMO

arrest me if i'm breaking the law

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

The other situation was when Mollie was outed and members contacted her friends and family in real life. How is that not worse and more worrying for members than Stacey childishly saving photos incase she needed to use them against someone? you already noted how horrible tibb was back then.

For what its worth, my opinion on the mollie thing is this

The person (I wont name names but I know who it was) who contacted her family should have been permabanned immediately. That is a gross invasion of privacy and not something that should ever be tolerated.

I dont know too much about the rest of it, but I kinda get why the 'investigation' happened, as 'mollie' has been planning on meeting one of our members...and I think that member actually did go to where they were meant to meet?

But the contacting her family was absolutely disgusting and everytime I see that ****ing stalker post I feel nothing but contempt for him. Which is a shame because I liked him before that.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

For what its worth, my opinion on the mollie thing is this

The person (I wont name names but I know who it was) who contacted her family should have been permabanned immediately. That is a gross invasion of privacy and not something that should ever be tolerated.

I dont know too much about the rest of it, but I kinda get why the 'investigation' happened, as 'mollie' has been planning on meeting one of our members...and I think that member actually did go to where they were meant to meet?

But the contacting her family was absolutely disgusting and everytime I see that ****ing stalker post I feel nothing but contempt for him. Which is a shame because I liked him before that.

This I agree with.

[Pete.]

this is so disturbing

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Snowjakes

And as for Stacey, if she's a nice person now (she seems to be so this isn't me running her down), talk to her offline like you have been for the past two years, she was clearly banned on here for a reason.

As were other people who have had their bans overturned, people can and do change, and I think it is a shame to demonise a 15 year old girl.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by The baby Zeesus

I know why it's frustrating for members when the rules don't seem to be consistent, but rather than thinking of moderators as people who simply enforce rules, think of it more as like a jury at a trial - each case is different and they have to take into account all of the factors that they know about, and they dish out the punishment according to what they think will be best for the person they're punishing and the rest of the community. Sometimes it's just a slap on the wrist, other times it's a lengthy ban in the hope that they will reform, and other times it's an indefinite or permanent ban if they don't feel that the member will learn their lesson.

Edit: Just like a jury in a trial, they have to go with the majority consensus when they make their decision. You'd be surprised how many decisions in the admin forum get debated extensively before action is taken - and that's me speaking from experiences that were over two years ago; I'm sure it's still the same today.

It is, I dont think there has ever been a unanimous decision made, on anything. We argue between ourselves so much when it comes to punishments and stuff. But there is no way to do it really except for going wih the majority decision (be that 7/1 or 4/3) or admin stepping in and making the decision for us :S

[Drew.]

So for those accusing myself, Leon, David or Andy for contacting her family that finally confirms it wasnt us.

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by Cherie

[/B]


As were other people who have had their bans overturned, people can and do change, and I think it is a shame to demonise a 15 year old girl.

I agree with that.

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by James

I wish you would stop, on here and elsewhere, misrepresenting staff decisions, and stop making these half-baked comparisons. As usual you only give half the story.

The comparison you make with the other situation is way off. That was provoked to some extent by someone lying about his identity to the whole forum, using a fake picture, and even, from what has been reported, planning to meet someone. In my opinion those facts mitigate what the other person (I am told) did, as stupid as it was.

What Stacey did was more than just saving pictures posted on the forum as the quoted posts above claim - she had a folder for virtually every active member on the forum, which the forum found out about when she then shared a screenshot with someone else. Not just one or two pictures taken from the Meet the Members thread on this forum, but pictures taken from members' social networking and image account profiles - of people who have never posted pictures on the forum or put a link up to their Facebook or other profiles - and also saved images from group webcam chats.

It was a big invasion of privacy. It involved lots of people - even ones have been on the site from way back and never get into dramas or involved in cliques or anything like that.

How can she be unbanned when so many people were creeped out by it? Even people who were active on the forum then but aren't now - what if they returned and saw that she was back posting. What kind of message does that send out?

Some of you don't seem to understand the harm stuff like this can cause to people.

And I don't understand why this should be subject to a forum poll. A lot of people on here now weren't on the forum when she got banned, or wouldn't have been aware of what happened.

The other point people seem to be perpetuating is that members are getting banned for one incident when in fact there has been an accumulation of incidents, and have been causing lots of trouble and never seem to change.

I'll leave this topic open for a little while longer if anyone wants to respond, and then close it again and delete it, as these topics always result in more division and drama being caused.

I'm not disputing what she did wasn't creepy and ban worthy at all because it was. But I'm looking at this now 3 years on and she isn't an immature 15 year old anymore, she isn't going to come back insulting people and saving photos again because she's learnt from her mistake and suffered because of the ban. It seems unfair that many have been given second chances or trial periods to redeem themselves yet this isn't an option for Stacey even after all this time.

[Pete.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

For what its worth, my opinion on the mollie thing is this

The person (I wont name names but I know who it was) who contacted her family should have been permabanned immediately. That is a gross invasion of privacy and not something that should ever be tolerated.

I dont know too much about the rest of it, but I kinda get why the 'investigation' happened, as 'mollie' has been planning on meeting one of our members...and I think that member actually did go to where they were meant to meet?

But the contacting her family was absolutely disgusting and everytime I see that ****ing stalker post I feel nothing but contempt for him. Which is a shame because I liked him before that.

I'm surprised you didn't focus on Jordan thinking that using someone's photo against them was seemingly harmless

[arista]

Posted by James today :

[What Stacey did was more than just saving pictures posted on the forum as the quoted posts above claim - she had a folder for virtually every active member on the forum, which the forum found out about when she then shared a screenshot with someone else. Not just one or two pictures taken from the Meet the Members thread on this forum, but pictures taken from members' social networking and image account profiles - of people who have never posted pictures on the forum or put a link up to their Facebook or other profiles - and also saved images from group webcam chats.

It was a big invasion of privacy. It involved lots of people - even ones have been on the site from way back and never get into dramas or involved in cliques or anything like that.

How can she be unbanned when so many people were creeped out by it? Even people who were active on the forum then but aren't now - what if they returned and saw that she was back posting. What kind of message does that send out?

Some of you don't seem to understand the harm stuff like this can cause to people.]



I say thanks for giving us the truth
"bigger and bigger
than many of us thought."
And keep up the great work you do here.

[Z]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

I'm not disputing what she did wasn't creepy and ban worthy at all because it was. But I'm looking at this now 3 years on and she isn't an immature 15 year old anymore, she isn't going to come back insulting people and saving photos again because she's learnt from her mistake and suffered because of the ban. It seems unfair that many have been given second chances or trial periods to redeem themselves yet this isn't an option for Stacey even after all this time.

I think the only people who've ever been permanently banned and been given a second chance were lily, who came back without a fuss, and Thomas C, who spectacularly blew up as most of the forum expected he would. Thomas ruined it for everyone else, essentially, he should never have been allowed back. Comparing Stacey to the circumstances of other people, as I said to you earlier, isn't helping her cause out whatsoever.

[Jake.]

Originally Posted by Santi Claus

So for those accusing myself, Leon, David or Andy for contacting her family that finally confirms it wasnt us.

It was only a few, I wouldn't worry, I think most actually get what happened

[Pete.]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

I'm not disputing what she did wasn't creepy and ban worthy at all because it was. But I'm looking at this now 3 years on and she isn't an immature 15 year old anymore, she isn't going to come back insulting people and saving photos again because she's learnt from her mistake and suffered because of the ban. It seems unfair that many have been given second chances or trial periods to redeem themselves yet this isn't an option for Stacey even after all this time.

No one can be too careful tbh - I don't think she should come back and I agree with this permaban

[Shaun]

can we also just dismiss the lily. thing since it was a completely different warning system then?

[Black Dagger]

Originally Posted by Santi Claus

So for those accusing myself, Leon, David or Andy for contacting her family that finally confirms it wasnt us.

[Pete.]

Originally Posted by arista

I say thanks for giving us the truth
"bigger and bigger
than many of us thought."
And keep up the great work you do here.

I agree

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Petemitch123

No one can be too careful tbh - I don't think she should come back and I agree with this permaban

Yeah I'm aware, you don't have to keep chipping in everytime I post.

[Pete.]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Yeah I'm aware, you don't have to keep chipping in everytime I post.

I value your opinion, value my opinions and other member's opinions

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Petemitch123

I'm surprised you didn't focus on Jordan thinking that using someone's photo against them was seemingly harmless

I was giving my opinion on the mollie situation, which is totally unrelated to stacey...

I agree that blackmailing someone with their photos (that you hunted down offsite) is very very wrong. And that it could really upset someone. I mentioned in my last post how creepy it is and stuff