it wasn't an outright ban for George. Only direct linking. Evspra did NOT delete any current George threads, and was still okay TALKING ABOUT GEORGE. Just not DIRECT LINKS to the telegram.
that's why I'm pissed about all this leading to Evspra's leave. People attacked him saying DON'T BAN FREE SPEECH REEEE ... I think Evspra made a mistake in WORDING when he made a 'ban'.... had he simply stated 'direct linking to george is no longer allowed due to suspicious actions' I doubt this would have gotten this far.
It was a bold choice of words, and people took it to the extreme when it really wasn't all that big a deal. -_-
it wasn't an outright ban for George. Only direct linking. Evspra did NOT delete any current George threads, and was still okay TALKING ABOUT GEORGE. Just not DIRECT LINKS to the telegram.
that's why I'm pissed about all this leading to Evspra's leave. People attacked him saying DON'T BAN FREE SPEECH REEEE ... I think Evspra made a mistake in WORDING when he made a 'ban'.... had he simply stated 'direct linking to george is no longer allowed due to suspicious actions' I doubt this would have gotten this far.
It was a bold choice of words, and people took it to the extreme when it really wasn't all that big a deal. -_-
Same thing with Ragnarok and his "n-word" ban.
The sentiment behind it was fine, but a ban suggests zero consideration for intent.