This is a free bulletin board run by a publishing house, mods are empowered by the owners to keep the place under control. So, the same people who give you the privilege of using this board also give mods the privilege of banning people from the board. Most of the time they agree with the mod's actions, occasionally they overturn them, those are your checks and balances.
I think it's funny how I got more than 10 downvotes and didn't get banned. It's obviously because the mods know I'm onto something. Think this through a bit more and get back to me when you have something to share.
I think it's funny how I got more than 10 downvotes and didn't get banned. It's obviously because the mods know I'm onto something. Think this through a bit more and get back to me when you have something to share.
I have thought it out. I have given all considerations, significant analytical and precise methodical contemplation, and shockingly I can only draw one conclusion:
You want 2+2 to implement a voting system for banning people? You realize that there is no limit to how many accounts you can create on the site right? So there is nothing stopping 1 person creating enough accounts to be able to auto-ban anyone? What they should do is monetize it and let people pay to temp ban posters, with each each temp ban costing more than the previous one.
You want 2+2 to implement a voting system for banning people? You realize that there is no limit to how many accounts you can create on the site right? So there is nothing stopping 1 person creating enough accounts to be able to auto-ban anyone? What they should do is monetize it and let people pay to temp ban posters, with each each temp ban costing more than the previous one.