Forum:Huge problems on the IRC: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 158: | Line 158: | ||
We cannot simply tighten our hold on the rules by making it super strict, because that is no fun, and it doesn't work. If the notion to just delete the IRC still holds, I oppose it. That is a quick and cowardly way to solve the situation. If simply tightening a bit of security, such as appointing trusted ops, doesn't work, then please, let us find a way to solve this situation without totally jumping the gun and ruining all of our fun, the reason why most of us come to the IRC in the first place.}} | We cannot simply tighten our hold on the rules by making it super strict, because that is no fun, and it doesn't work. If the notion to just delete the IRC still holds, I oppose it. That is a quick and cowardly way to solve the situation. If simply tightening a bit of security, such as appointing trusted ops, doesn't work, then please, let us find a way to solve this situation without totally jumping the gun and ruining all of our fun, the reason why most of us come to the IRC in the first place.}} | ||
{{Blixna waka|text=Quite frankly, I completely agree with Adola. Banhammer is used a bit lightly currently, and if necessary to get the point across, should be shown prominently as example. Just meh thoughts on the subject...}} | |||