Originally Posted by mattathayde
i see the point but i have a bit of an issue with that a vendor saying their negative opinion is extremely bad but if it was from a member there would be no reprimand.
we want the vendors to be truthful with us and when they give what they feel is a truthful point (be is a bit over the top) we get pissed.
again sams house sams rules but since this thread was left opened and we have been allowed to discuss this that i what i am trying to do.
it seems at this point we have 2 sides, the people that are totally pissed and never want to talk to john again, and those of us that get that he violated rules but dont see what went down as this horrible transgression
Matt you like to debate and that is obvious. Others are feeding into this and becoming irritated etc. There is no debate going to occur on this matter.
Its a simple policy that we are all aware of: Three strikes. John was already on his 2nd strike after numerous pardons etc. The Social Smoke issue is part of the 3rd strike but did not completely cause the 3rd strike. There were other issues as Sambooka addressed on the first page.
Its a done deal, whether some members like it or not, when you are participating on this forum, you are expected to abide by the rules. No exceptions. Even Moderators have rules and guidelines we must follow.
Rule are Rules plain and simple. We all know this from our parents, teachers and employers. Rules must be followed or expect consequenses.