rec.autos.simulators

I was curious. No matter what, though I'll never consider RSC's public
warning system as justified. As stated before, it's not needed, as
no other forum does this.

Very few of the hits on this site include forums that attach
public warnings. Most of the sites that had warning systems
mention that moderators send emails or private mails to the
accused person. Of the few forums that appear to optionally
apply public warning tags, all of those include this fact in
their new member agreements.

RSC does not include anything regarding their public warning
system.

Under general rules and not attached to any specific rule: "If you refuse to
comply with our requests on this matter, we reserve the right to warn/ban a
member in the normal process."  It just so happens that the normal process
includes a public warning.  If someone such as yourself is so concerened
about the system, you should've inquired as to what the normal process is.
Instead, you prefer to whine about some system that you've known exists for
quite some time.  It's not like you hadn't been warned with a public warning
before....

    Thanks for the relevent info.

    Key word - blatant.

    Mind you, I still wonder what the circumstances were. If the site took
it down as soon as made aware of it then what ***y right does an ISP have
to delete the entire site? Maybe the ISP's attitude is that's the price RSC
pay for being so large and thus hard to manage?

    No one at RSC has explained the reasons for the use of this public
warning caper yet. We're waiting!

Has anyone even bothered to try to find someone who would answer this yet or
would everyone just prefer to *** about it?  If you had a question on the
store policy at Bed Bath & Beyond, wouldn't you ask the store
owners/managers about it instead of the customers at Sears next door???  I
highly doubt everyone at RSC reads RAS.  Of those that do, I'm sure that
even fewer respond.  If anyone really cared what the answer was instead of
just wanting to *** about it, it's not very hard to figure out where to
ask the question....

Well you're responding to this thread, and you're a RSC moderator, why can't
you find out and respond here?

If anyone needs more, they'll need to ask someone other than me.
Personally, I've never been able to figure out what's so bad about having a
warning attached to an avatar.  I've received a yellow before and never
thought twice about the visibility of it.

If your warning system was covered under existing rules, then why did
Mbrio demand that I mail in a written letter stating I would agree to
the public warning system? No such letter would have been required if the
existing rules at the time I joined RSC covered this.

In the case of the forums that optional post warnings, this is clearly
stated in their rules, unlike RSC's "normal process".

Just because I tolerated it before doens't mean I think it's right.
Sort of like the shool kid bully asking why is the kid the bully
is stealing lunch money from is complaining now when the victim
didn't complain before. It doesn't make it right.

And this isn't whining, you have still yet to answer the original
question. What is the purpose of a public warning system if not
to punish, in otherwords, cause harm to a victim of RSC's
undocumented publick warning system?

RSC's public warning system is just wrong. There's no need for it,
and it's just a mean for RSC moderators to abuse and harass
the victims of it's warning system.

Have you? You're a RSC moderator. As a representative of RSC, I would
think you would do the proper thing and respond here. You've had several
posts here in multiple threads, but still haven't answered the question.

I can't ask myself because I refused to agrree to an additional set of
rules made just for me to permit the abuse and harra***t from RSC,
and was banned by Mbrio for refusing to this new set of rules.

Well according to that thread, a RSC moderator stated that members were
ignoring private emails (although this doesn't make sense, if you get
enough warnings, you get banned), so they use the public warning system,
(apparently they think this is more of a deterrent, which confirms
my belief that it's simply a vindicitive punishment, that violates
RSC's own rules about abuse and harrassment).

Private warnings work just fine on every other forum I visit, so why
is it that RSC needs a public warning system? I don't think it's the
members with the problem, it's the moderators.

Regarding the google search previously mentioned, find one other racing
game oriented site that has a public warning system.

Yes, responded to the thread you posted in GPL section and started a
new thread in the rules section. Now I find my account isn't working, and
it appears that the threads were deleted. So it appears this is the only
place to ask about this, since RSC is apparently too ashamed to discuss
this in public. I didn't even receive an email from RSC explainging why
my account isn't working.

    No one at RSC has explained the reasons for the use of this public
warning caper yet. We're waiting!