to the mods and anyone else. members of the community have talked and we would like to reinstate the Whaaambulance thread.
in a nut shell it was a thread,
edit : The Banhammer thread (back in the B.net days) went through a “double-down” period where people could dispute their bans but would have the length doubled if the mod discovered they were lying and the ban was justified. this includes quitting, betraying, afking.
It was very entertaining to have that all play out publicly.
Some of the excuses/sob-stories were amazingly bad.
the Whaambulance thread was where mods posted angry PMs they recieved from people they had banned. (which posting complaints with the names private is not hard to do either so it is not against forum rules)
to get this either thread back and running again it would take a lot of support from anyone that agrees 98% of said ban claims are accurate and are not false. how many times have we seen someone complain about being banned over 1 quit and you look and they quit every other game. so this does have its benefits to the forums as well, less spam from ppl that were banned, and the ones who are banned get a chance to actually have their claim looked at to see if it was a true and valid claim, which then could move to 343 and get any flaws with the banhammer fixed. we also will eventually get less ppl complaining about their bans if they just look at their record themselves and see they should stop DNFing
anyone that wants to add anything please feel free to as im sure i missed some points
From what I remember it was also a thread where the moderators of b.net would post all the threatening PMS they received for everyone to read. But this was years ago.
Actually, the Whaambulance thread was where mods posted angry PMs they recieved from people they had banned.
The Banhammer thread (back in the B.net days) went through a “double-down” period where people could dispute their bans but would have the length doubled if the mod discovered they were lying and the ban was justified.
It was very entertaining to have that all play out publicly.
Some of the excuses/sob-stories were amazingly bad.
I definitely support the return of either of those threads.
> 2533944968925384;5:
> > 2533274825044752;3:
> > Some of the excuses/sob-stories were amazingly bad.
>
>
> Or amazingly good depending on the creative juices and entertainment value.
> 2533944968925384;5:
> > 2533274825044752;3:
> > Some of the excuses/sob-stories were amazingly bad.
>
>
> Or amazingly good depending on the creative juices and entertainment value.
Without a doubt the most entertaining message thread I’ve ever read. It was months of sob stories like “my baby brother played on my account while I wasn’t looking” or “my dog was wagging his tail next to my modem and he knocked the ethernet cable out of it” or “I was playing with my friend who is dying of cancer and I didn’t want him to lose too badly so close to the end of his life” etc… And then the mod or whoever would look up the game history and post all the DNF’s towards the end of losing matches or entire firefight sessions without a single kill proving the ban was justified and extending said ban. The rage you’d see from theses banned kids was so gratifying.
And of course afterward you’d head over to the “Whaaambulance” thread where the mods would post all the threatning PM’s they received.
Good times.
This is a bad idea that would only serve to sour relations between moderators and posters.
Plus you don’t give the defendant complete access to the evidence. It would be like complaining about police brutality to the officers who executed that brutality. You need a neutral third party, the Jury would have to consist of posters and not mods.
> 2533274819302824;15:
> This is a bad idea that would only serve to sour relations between moderators and posters.
>
> Plus you don’t give the defendant complete access to the evidence. It would be like complaining about police brutality to the officers who executed that brutality. You need a neutral third party, the Jury would have to consist of posters and not mods.
> 2533274881086487;12:
> the double down part of the thread is what interest me. see how many ppl think they can get away with lying about why they were banned
That truly was the most incredible part of it all. People would come up with these complicated excuses and deliver them in a very heartfelt manner. But the mod would only need a few minutes to determine it was a lie because it was THAT obvious from their service record. The sheer stupidity of some of these people doubling down when they never stood a chance. They just had no understanding of what a service record is or that, if they needed to, the mods had the tools to dig deeper and see exactly what happened.
Also, it was a TON of people doing it. One after another. It became a big problem for me because I would read the thread at work and get hardly anything done.
> 2533274819302824;15:
> This is a bad idea that would only serve to sour relations between moderators and posters.
>
> Plus you don’t give the defendant complete access to the evidence. It would be like complaining about police brutality to the officers who executed that brutality. You need a neutral third party, the Jury would have to consist of posters and not mods.
