board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web
It is currently Wed 15 Aug , 2018 2:04 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun 25 Jan , 2009 11:40 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 10:34 pm
Posts: 3463
Location: Fall River, MA
On January 23, 2009, sauronsfinger had his posting rights to the Symposium restricted.

His posting rights were restricted after several warnings from Rangers. Sauronsfinger continued to disrupt the Symposium forum in many threads with his arguing in a non-productive manner with halplm. The nature of this arguing created what we felt was a forum-wide disruption and prevented members from being able to participate in fruitful discussion in that forum.



There was no one action of sauronsfinger's that warranted any suspension of posting rights. It was the totality of the issue that forced the Rangers to act. Given the numerous complaints in regards to sauronsfinger, the Rangers felt a serious action was required.


The Rangers felt a 2-week suspension of posting rights in the Symposium was warranted .

As it stands now, sauronsfinger has not engaged in any actions that would qualify him for a banning under the current Charter. Our actions were taken in what we believed would best prevent him from disrupting Board77 and it's membership.


-Rebecca, Holbytla, and Riverthalos




Below is a current list of jurors for this hearing:
Erunáme
elfshadow
LalaithUrwen
Farawen
vison
RELStuart
Alatar

The Loremaster position will be filled by Lurker.

_________________
Image


Last edited by Rebecca on Tue 27 Jan , 2009 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
fixing poor editing (that sf pointed out below) and wording that Lurker requested I change.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 25 Jan , 2009 11:55 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 10:34 pm
Posts: 3463
Location: Fall River, MA
Taken from Article 5: Dispute Resolution in the Outside Forum:

Charter of b77 wrote:
¶4: Procedure for Hearings

When the Jury has sufficient information to decide the case, they may call an end to the hearing. They will post in the thread that the hearing is coming to an end twenty-four hours before actually beginning their deliberation so that the member has time to agree or present any additional information.

The purpose of the Jury deliberation is to decide whether the member has in fact violated the by-laws or committed a bannable offense beyond any reasonable doubt, and if so, to impose a penalty not to exceed the penalty provided in the by-laws. If no maximum penalty is specified in the by-laws the Jurors may use discretion based on the range of penalties contained in the by-laws for similar offenses.

Jury deliberations may be held in private, by PM or email. Jurors should strive to reach a decision within ten days. Agreement by four of the six Jurors that a by-law has been violated is required for imposition of a penalty. Four of the six Jurors must agree on the duration of the penalty, otherwise the lesser of all penalties considered by them will be imposed.

When the Jurors have reached a decision, they will email their decision to the member and then post their decision in the thread twenty-four hours later. Anything they have taken into consideration should be presented honestly when they state their decision.

Any Juror holding a minority position may express it in their post.

If the Jury has decided that the offense was not committed or that no additional penalties should be imposed, any suspended posting rights will be restored to the member within twenty-four hours.

If a penalty is imposed, a Ranger will change the necessary permissions within twenty-four hours. Time limits on penalties will be maintained by the Mayor and it is the responsibility of the Mayor to notify Rangers when the time limit on a penalty has expired.

If the decision of the Jury is to require something of the member, such as removal of a signature picture, the member will comply within twenty-four hours. Members who refuse to abide by a Jury decision may be considered for banning.

As soon as the Jury has posted their decision and that decision has been implemented, the thread will be locked. At the request of the member, it may be deleted.

Elements of the case may be summarized and preserved in the Archive with the name(s) of the involved member(s) and witnesses deleted.

A Jury may request that an independent member provide procedural oversight of their hearing to ensure that proper procedure is followed and to act as a resource for hearing participants, allowing the participants to concentrate on substantive issues. Members of the Jury Pool who have volunteered to familiarize themselves thoroughly with the Charter and to act in this oversight capacity are designated as Loremasters in the Jury Pool list. Service as a Loremaster in a particular hearing is voluntary.

A member may not serve as Loremaster to a Hearing if they are involved in the Hearing in any other capacity; and if a Hearing that employed a Loremaster is appealed, the Loremaster must be prepared to explain to the Appeals panel the rationale behind procedures that are in question.

If the Jury makes use of a Loremaster, the Loremaster's name and function will be listed in the first post of the thread alon


Charter of b77 wrote:
¶8: Appealing the Decision of a Jury

Only decisions that result in a penalty being placed upon a member can be appealed, and only by that member.

If a decision or a penalty is to be appealed, the member must appeal within three months of the date the Hearing was closed, or before the penalty has expired, whichever comes first. After that time, an appeal will not be allowed.

All timely requests for an appeal must be heard, and decisions made by an Appeals panel are final.

The Appeals panel will consist of four former Rangers. Starting with the Ranger whose term ended most recently, and moving in reverse order through terms served, former Rangers will express their availability and willingness to serve until four of them are assembled.

A member will present their Appeal in writing to a current Ranger, who will convene the panel of former Rangers. Each member of the panel will review the original Hearing Thread to evaluate the merit of the Appeal. They may confer among themselves in private by PM or email. Agreement by three of the four members of the panel will constitute a decision. Their decision must state whether to uphold or overturn the decision of the Jury, and whether to void, reduce or uphold the penalty imposed by the Jury. Any factors which they took into consideration should be stated honestly in their decision.

The decision will be sent to the member by email, and posted in the original Hearing Thread twenty-four hours later. The names of the Appeal panel are posted with their decision.

Ideally, an Appeals process should not take longer than seven full days.

Jury decisions and penalties can be appealed under the following circumstances:
• A decision can be appealed if the Hearing procedure specified in the by-laws was not followed. If the Appeals panel decides that the member was disadvantaged in any way by a breach of procedure, such as failure of notification, failure to announce the close of the hearing, failure to pursue witnesses, etc., they may overturn the Jury decision and void all penalties. The hearing must then be held again for that offense. The posting rights of the member cannot be restricted over the course of the second hearing until a proper Jury decision has been reached.

• A decision can be appealed if the statement which opens the Hearing Thread, or the statement of the Jury’s decision exhibits any bias based on nationality, ethnicity, religion, native language, gender, age or collateral relationships that Rangers or Jury members might have with the member in question either in person or on other websites. A Jury decision can be overturned and all penalties voided in this case. If demonstrable bias exists, no second hearing will be held for the same offense.

• A decision can be appealed if new evidence comes to light before a penalty has expired.

• A decision can be appealed if there was insufficient evidence to support the finding that a violation occurred. The appeals panel can not overturn evidence. However, they can decide that the facts of the case do not justify a decision that the violation occurred.

• A penalty can be appealed if there were delays in executing the hearing, or if Jury deliberations took longer than seems reasonable for the type of offense in question. This might happen if the responsible Ranger was off-line at a critical time, or if witnesses did not appear promptly, or if Jurors did not deliberate promptly. If the member upon whom the penalty was imposed was restricted to the Jury Room for the duration of the hearing, they may appeal for “time served” to be deducted from the penalty.

• A penalty can be appealed if the Jury had discretion in determining the penalty, and the penalty they imposed is excessive by comparison with other penalties specified in the by-laws for similar offenses.


Charter of b77 wrote:
¶9: Offenses That Merit a Penalty

The following penalties are available to Juries:
• Disabling PM privileges;
• Temporary Suspension of posting rights in a specific forum;
• Permanent Suspension of posting rights in a specific forum;
• Temporary Confinement to the Bike Racks (a suspension of board-wide posting rights);
• Temporary Ban;
• Immediate or Indefinite Ban (per Article 3, poster must appeal for reversal no sooner than one month after the ban is executed, and Rangers may wait an additional two months before convening a hearing).

There are no permanent, irreversible bans on Board77. But when a hearing is held to petition the reversal of a ban, the Jury is permitted to uphold the ban and specify a duration.

General Guidelines for imposing penalties
The Jury generally has discretion to impose the penalty it considers appropriate as long as the maximum penalties specified below are not exceeded.

If this is a first offense and the Jury feels that the time already restricted to the Bike Racks or the Jury Room is sufficient, or if they feel confident that because of the circumstances in which the error took place it is very unlikely to be repeated, they are not obligated to impose a penalty.

If the offense is restricted to a single forum (e.g. There and Back Again or Thinking of England) the penalty may also be restricted to that forum (e.g. temporary or permanent suspension of posting rights).

The penalty ought to relate as closely as possible to the offense; for example, if abusive use of PM’s is the offense, then PM privileges may be disabled.

Penalties may be greater for second, third or multiple offenses than they are for first offenses.

If Juries are in doubt as to an appropriate penalty, they should review penalties imposed for similar problems in the past and try to be consistent.

Offenses for which the maximum penalty for a first offense is an immediate ban

• Spamming the board with ads;
• Spamming the board with pornography;
• Hacking the board;
• Refusing to abide by the Decision of the Jury in a Hearing [maximum penalty is mandated by Article 3];
• Threats of real life violence or other criminal acts against members
[maximum penalty is mandated by Article 3];
• Deliberately introducing a virus to members of the board.
• Falsely accusing a member of harmful RL actions in order to deny them access to the Thinking of England forum.

Offenses for which the maximum penalty for a first offense is temporary restriction to the Bike Racks

In the Jury Room, any interference with a Hearing. [At the termination of the Hearing in which the poster interfered, a Hearing for that poster is held to determine any penalty.]

Offenses for which the maximum penalty is a temporary ban if this is not the first offense and the problem appears to be persistent

• Persistent posting of objectionable content:
1. abusive language toward another poster;
2. attacks of a personal nature;
3. defamatory remarks targeting nationality, ethnicity, native language, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or age;
4. advertisement of products for personal gain.

• Persistent posting of offensive pictures:
1. pictures a reasonable person would find pornographic;
2. pictures a reasonable person would find gratuitously violent or distasteful, that is, designed to shock and/or dismay other posters.

• Deliberately posting personal, real life information about another member such that their privacy is compromised, or posting any personal information about a minor.

• Using the board to solicit the participation of members in illegal activities.

• Repeatedly exposing the members to viruses through negligence.

• In the Bike Racks, repeated interference with other members’ thread.

• Use of PM or Email to:
1. harass another member;
2. make defamatory remarks targeting nationality, ethnicity, native; language, religion, gender, sexual orientation or age.

Offenses for which the maximum penalty is permanent suspension of access to a particular forum

• In the There and Back Again forum, repeatedly posting in a manner that prevents another character(s) from participating or greatly circumscribes their activity

• In the Thinking of England Forum, posting in a manner that ridicules, demeans or threatens other posters




How To Use the Jury Room

Handbook for Jurors, Mediators, and Loremasters

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 2:54 pm 
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar

Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6642
This hearing is now underway.
The rangers will now step away and it is up to the jurors and loremaster to conduct this hearing.
The rangers are still available to adjust permissions as needed but will, from this point on, not be involved in the process.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 3:46 pm 
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
Posts: 19842
Quote:
• If you are selected for the Jury as a regular juror, an alternate, or a Loremaster, your posting rights in the Jury Room will be enabled. The Hearing takes place in a single thread and the first post of the thread will state the reason for the Hearing. Your full screen name will also appear in the thread so that potential witnesses can contact you by PM if necessary. Once the thread is started and the necessary posters are enabled, the Ranger will leave the thread.


The first post does state the reason for the Hearing. If any witnesses wish to contact jurors via PM, the list is in the first post.

Quote:
Six jurors and one alternate hear each case. The alternate is there in case a regular juror must leave in the middle of the Hearing. Only six jurors will participate in the deliberation and make the decision. Article 5, ¶3


I think one of the first things we need to do as jurors is decide if we'll confer with each other via PM or email. (And I'm not trying to take over here.) Then we'll need to decide who is the alternate.

I vote for email, though the PM function here is good, too. It lets you see past conversations, but I think email might be easier.

The next step after that is:

Quote:
The member for whom the hearing is held states their side of the case. You may ask questions, call witnesses, or authorize witnesses who have contacted you. The member called to the hearing may also call witnesses on his/her own behalf. You should confer with your fellow jurors while the Hearing is in progress, and make sure that Rangers are notified in timely manner to enable the posting rights of witnesses.


...to open the hearing.


Lali

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 5:22 pm 
Far out
User avatar

Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:11 pm
Posts: 1295
Location: State of Confusion
I think email is fine, and I have a suggestion: yahoogroups provides an email/communication platform thingie that serves as a mailing list, and has an archive for messages. I don't think we'll need the other fancy stuff (calendar, files, etc.) but it's there if the need arises. People can choose whether to receive emails via the mailing list, read them on the group site only, or both.

I have created one for illustration purposes ;), if you guys want to go ahead and see what you think of it: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hearing_sf


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 5:28 pm 
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
Posts: 19842
Works for me! I registered. :)

ETA: If anyone doesn't want to create a Yahoo ID to register for the group, they can send their email to Farawen (as moderator of the group), and she can manually add their emails to the group. (I have to do this all of the time for people who simply do not know how to create a Yahoo ID, not that they just don't want to.)


Lali

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 9:51 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
I have a question before we start/

I was notified that I was given a two week suspension for feuding with Halplm and my penalty was that suspension of rights to post in the Symposium..

Then I asked for a hearing on that action.

Then I read this:

Quote:
Initially, the Rangers felt a 2-week suspension of posting rights in the Symposium was warranted his extensive history with forum disruptions, the Rangers feel further action is needed.

As it stands now, sauronsfinger has not engaged in any actions that would qualify him for a banning under the current Charter. Therefore, the Rangers are asking the jury to mete out a punishment that is stern enough to deter this behavior from happening again


Please clarify.

It seems that if I do NOT ask for a hearing - then my punishment is fixed at the two week Symposium ban and then I come back with full rights. But if I ask for a hearing, and it is held, my punishment could be more "STERN". That seems like a severe violation to the very idea of due process and is held as a club to discourage people from asking for a hearing.

I hope I am being paranoid and am reading that completely wrong. Could you please clarify this question of mine before we proceed?

thank you.

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 9:55 pm 
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar

Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6642
It is a typo or rather poor editing. To save time we did a lot of copying and pasting and that was somehow missed in the process.

This is what it should read:

The Rangers felt a 2-week suspension of posting rights in the Symposium was warranted .
As it stands now, sauronsfinger has not engaged in any actions that would qualify him for a banning under the current Charter. Therefore, the Rangers are asking the jury to mete out a punishment that is stern enough to deter this behavior from happening again.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 10:10 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
Thank you.
But I am still not clear.
I asked for the hearing in response to the 2 week suspension in Symposium.

Is that the maximum punishment I can be given as a result of this hearing?

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 10:14 pm 
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar

Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6642
The way it works is we are bringing this hearing to see if our decision is justified.
The jury gets to decide the length of the punishment. They can choose to make it less, keep it as is, or make it longer.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan , 2009 10:40 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
Thank you for this opportunity. I appreciate the time of all of you.

I will not the waste of anyone by going into a detailed post-by-post history or blow-by-blow account of my last two weeks with Halplm. I assume you can read that for yourself. If anyone has any questions in that area I will be glad to answer them.


I would like to present some new information.
Information that nobody on this board has.
It is information which explains what has happened in the past two weeks.

On January 13, 2009, Halplm posted a reply to a post I made at Hall of Fire. I noticed that he had not posted there at all since November 14. But after a two month absence he had returned and it seemed he returned only to pick a fight with me. He then posted again, a far more personal attack, and I wrote to the HofF administrator - Voronwe about it. I told him I suspected Hal had returned only to attack me.

He posted a couple of more times, each time to attack something I had written or to tell me outright to "SHUT UP". He replied to no other posts besides mine.

On January 17, he posted a very personal attack, calling me names, and insulting me. I copied it, added the line "Is this appropriate?" and wrote Voronwe again. He removed the posts.
The post from Halplm was the last seen on Hall of Fire. He has not been back since. Hall of Fire does not publicize administrative punitive actions but I suspect his absence is not of his own will.

Then, just two days after that incident, Halplm comes back to B77 on January 19. He had been inactive for a period from December 8 through January 18. When he returned he went directly to Symposium threads I was active in and took issue with my positions and posts.

And over 300 of Halplm's post later... here we are.

Earlier this week, TED tried to start a thread where he stated that Hal came back for the purpose of attacking me. That was based on his observation and he did not even have this information I am now providing to you.

I think when you put together the dates, Hals activity, his vigorous and enthusiastic attacks towards me, the picture is fairly clear. I suspected all along that he was out to gain some revenge, some sort of payback, some retribution for his post on Hall of Fire which has caused his subsequent absence.

In the last two weeks I have attempted to defend myself.

I realize I did so with too much zeal.

I realize I did so far too often.

I realize I did so in a way so that Halplm and I dominated too many Symposium threads and discouraged others from posting.

I am sorry for that.

I got caught up in it. I was caught in the trees and could not see the greater forest.

I would point out that I do not have any problem with others here. Even my old foe CG -... just this past week we had a very good and polite exchange over the issue of the Klan in the South and filled a page with our exchanges, always being on topic, always being polite and never getting out of control.

I can discuss issues with conservatives, Freddy comes to mind, without the rancor of Halplm. And I think that is because Halplm was intent on a huge fight to extract his revenge for the Hall of Fire incident which he caused and committed on his own.

I also think much of this was precipitated by the work that TED did which is now at the start of the Symposium menu. Halplm complained last year about my use of Ad Homenim attacks and thought he had a weapon to silence me. Then TED did a great deal of work on it, posted many authorititave links and examples. And he effectively showed that my use of certain debating techniques was right and proper and no violation or Ad Homenim attacks at all. Halplm was angry about that and shortly after than vanished for a while.

I realize I am but the latest in the battles with Halplm. I also realize that while I was not here, Hals battles with many others went on. But now I guess its my turn in the barrell.

I hope that explains much of this.

I will be glad to answer any questions anyone may have.

thank you for the opportunity to explain.

SF

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 12:07 am 
Best friends forever
User avatar

Joined: Fri 04 Feb , 2005 4:49 am
Posts: 6546
I'm here, in the right thread now!

_________________
Living on Earth is expensive,
but it does include a free trip
around the sun every year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 12:10 am 
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
User avatar

Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
Posts: 19842
:) Glad to have you here!


Lali

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 12:41 am 
Legendury speller
User avatar

Joined: Mon 14 Mar , 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 1208
Location: US of A
I have a few questions. Not sure if the Loremaster is the more appropriate person to answer or one/several of the Rangers.

First of all my understanding is that there are two purposes for the jury. One is to ascertain guilt and the other to decide on an appropriate punishment. Sauronsfinger (SF) has admitted wrongdoing here and has a repentant attitude about it.

There was no one act of wrongdoing so my understanding is that there would be several threads or posts to look at to determine if a rule or rules had been broken. Is there more we need to consider on the guilt phase or do we need to call that part done?

If so do we move on the sentencing phase?

Can SF at this point request the hearing be terminated and go with the temp suspension the Rangers were going to impose?


Second, the evidence, questions, testimony will all take place in this thread? The e-mail thing would only be for jury deliberations?

Thanks.

_________________
"When people don't believe in you, you have to believe in yourself. "
Pierce Brosnan

"Please don't disillusion me. I haven't had breakfast yet." Card


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 1:13 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 10:42 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Body in Calgary, Alberta, Soul in Toronto
RELStuart wrote:
I have a few questions. Not sure if the Loremaster is the more appropriate person to answer or one/several of the Rangers.

First of all my understanding is that there are two purposes for the jury. One is to ascertain guilt and the other to decide on an appropriate punishment. Sauronsfinger (SF) has admitted wrongdoing here and has a repentant attitude about it.

There was no one act of wrongdoing so my understanding is that there would be several threads or posts to look at to determine if a rule or rules had been broken. Is there more we need to consider on the guilt phase or do we need to call that part done?

If so do we move on the sentencing phase?


I been reading the charter over and over again and I do not see any reason why we can't move on to the sentencing phase, since SF himself has been repentant.

Quote:
Can SF at this point request the hearing be terminated and go with the temp suspension the Rangers were going to impose?


From what I read it is up to the jury to decide whether to impose the temp suspension or to lessen the suspension just as long it doesn't exceed the two weeks already imposed. Or "If this is a first offense and the Jury feels that the time already restricted to the Bike Racks or the Jury Room is sufficient, or if they feel confident that because of the circumstances in which the error took place it is very unlikely to be repeated, they are not obligated to impose a penalty."

Edit to Add:
Penalties may be greater for second, third or multiple offenses than they are for first offenses.


Quote:
Second, the evidence, questions, testimony will all take place in this thread? The e-mail thing would only be for jury deliberations?


Yes.

_________________
Caution...You are entering the NO SPIN ZONE.


Last edited by Lurker on Tue 27 Jan , 2009 5:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 1:21 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 10:42 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Body in Calgary, Alberta, Soul in Toronto
Quote:
There was no one act of wrongdoing so my understanding is that there would be several threads or posts to look at to determine if a rule or rules had been broken. Is there more we need to consider on the guilt phase or do we need to call that part done?


If the Jury has decided that the offense was not committed or that no additional penalties should be imposed, any suspended posting rights will be restored to the member within twenty-four hours.

_________________
Caution...You are entering the NO SPIN ZONE.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 2:22 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed 16 Mar , 2005 10:42 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Body in Calgary, Alberta, Soul in Toronto
I find that the words "stern enough" is "leading" the jury to a particular punishment. Please re-write. Thank you.

_________________
Caution...You are entering the NO SPIN ZONE.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 3:15 am 
Kill the headlights and put it in neutral
User avatar

Joined: Tue 09 Aug , 2005 2:27 am
Posts: 5407
Just checking in to confirm my existence and participation. :) Will make a more thorough post tomorrow.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 9:05 am 
of Vinyamar
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 4:39 pm
Posts: 7849
Location: Ireland
Also here to participate.

_________________
Image
These are my friends, see how they glisten...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 27 Jan , 2009 10:41 am 
Far out
User avatar

Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:11 pm
Posts: 1295
Location: State of Confusion
Added two pending members (Alatar, REL) and sent vison an invite. I also changed the membership type to "open", that way you guys can join more easily without me having to approve you. Should have done that right from the beginning, sorry. And if someone joins that doesn't belong there, we'll notice. ;) As soon as everyone is on board, we can go back to restrictive membership.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group