And my reply...
To: webwizard Unread
Subject:
re: NZDating use
Hello!
Yup, you have hit the nail on the head in many places there.
a) yes, others were mentioning sites. Yes, I thought it would be okay to do so as well. (how do you know none of those people own the sites they mentioned?) You'll note that rotten.com was also mentioned...and left up there. Is NZD quite cool with being a referrer to a site that deals with pictures of children being deep-fried and eaten, but not with
NZB?
b) Yes, I am somewhat bitter towards one member of the NZD admin staff, the one everybody refers to as 'the An*l webby'. This is not you, I believe we call you 'the good/reasonable webby'.
This site has far too many people whose sole purpose of being here is to cause distress and problems for others, and nothing is done about them bar the occasional slap on the wrist. There is one member who bosts about having 250+ profiles, and nothing is done about this either. I am well aware of the ease of finding out if people are using dual accounts from the same IP address, and this makes me wonder exactly why you allow him to stay here.
While these types of people are allowed to freely go about their little twisted agendas, pretty much innocent people are given the massive smackdown for their breaches.
Effectively, the rules are not applied in any fair or reasonable manner.
Yes, I realise you have your massive loophole of 'NZD may remove an account for any reason whatsoever', but to allow people to post the URLs of sites like rotten, and banning me for mentioning a messageboard site (that I happen to admin) does kinda suck. Hell, just letting rotten.com remain on that thread kinda sucks.
So yeah. The problem lies with The An*l Webby, his manner of speaking to people and the perceived unfair way the rules are presented, and the fact that troublemakers, the ones who start rumours and make direct personal attacks, are allowed free reign, while people who point out security holes and mention their own sites get banned.