RiGGA banned??

No. There is no rule against it.

No. There is no rule against it.

[GRizzEAT]

i got Infracted adn recieved a Spam Can for uploadin 8 tracks. sooooo,


but banned?? Uhm, Not Classick Really.

[GRizzEAT]

i got Infracted adn recieved a Spam Can for uploadin 8 tracks. sooooo,


but banned?? Uhm, Not Classick Really.

[RhetoriK]

................

[RhetoriK]

................

[Just C]

Oh, so I guess it's okay for a member to abuse his exclusive privilege by uploading half a mix tape, therefor knocking other people who put time, hard work and effort into their music before they even get a chance to be heard?

He was asked twice politely to take down 3 of the 5 tracks hogging half of the track list to which he refused.

Again grow a brain and some COMMON SENSE.

People don't (and rightly so) appreciate people flooding the track list knocking them off the list when THEY have the common courtesy and decency to show their fellow track makers the same respect they hope to receive in return by not being selfish enough to spam the track section.

Again, grow a brain. This is why I am Head Audio Moderator and you aren't.

I'm merely setting an example that you cannot flood the track section and get away with it, therefor looking after the respectful track makers who have FOR YEARS abided by this un written rule.

I politely asked him twice.

He refused both times, then decided to go on the offensive, daring me to do something and take action.

And IF ANY OF YOU do the same. You will end up in the same position RiGGA now finds himself in.

Trust me. I'm not going to be fucked with on this 'rule' People don't appreciate being spammed of the list. They COMPLAIN. So it is my job as HAM to stop this from being a common occurrence where the track list becomes an all out free for all for spammers causing other users to take their music elsewhere because they can't even get a look in.

Again. Grow a brain.

Thank you.

---------- Post added at 10:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 AM ----------

Originally Posted by FUEL

Still wrongly banned in my eyes. Banned for "spamming" when all he done was upload tracks. I don't think its right, thats just my opinion.

I mean you want the track list to come back to life, and when a member uploads a few tracks, he gets banned for it? lol

Ya can bet if Sixx Shott/Stotty Pimpin or any other "respected" track maker done it, Not A Single Word would of been said about it. But you have your reasons...

A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

---------- Post added at 10:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------

Originally Posted by FUEL

Still wrongly banned in my eyes. Banned for "spamming" when all he done was upload tracks. I don't think its right, thats just my opinion.

I mean you want the track list to come back to life, and when a member uploads a few tracks, he gets banned for it? lol

Ya can bet if Sixx Shott/Stotty Pimpin or any other "respected" track maker done it, Not A Single Word would of been said about it. But you have your reasons...

A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

---------- Post added at 10:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:21 AM ----------

Originally Posted by GRizzEAT

i got Infracted adn recieved a Spam Can for uploadin 8 tracks. sooooo,


but banned?? Uhm, Not Classick Really.

And this guy hasn't spammed since because he knows if he does he will end up banned. If he doesn't take the majority of them down when asked.

2 tracks a time.

You upload more than that you get slept on.

This rule benefits Everyone.

It would have benefited RiGGA too if he would have took most of them down.

[Just C]

Oh, so I guess it's okay for a member to abuse his exclusive privilege by uploading half a mix tape, therefor knocking other people who put time, hard work and effort into their music before they even get a chance to be heard?

He was asked twice politely to take down 3 of the 5 tracks hogging half of the track list to which he refused.

Again grow a brain and some COMMON SENSE.

People don't (and rightly so) appreciate people flooding the track list knocking them off the list when THEY have the common courtesy and decency to show their fellow track makers the same respect they hope to receive in return by not being selfish enough to spam the track section.

Again, grow a brain. This is why I am Head Audio Moderator and you aren't.

I'm merely setting an example that you cannot flood the track section and get away with it, therefor looking after the respectful track makers who have FOR YEARS abided by this un written rule.

I politely asked him twice.

He refused both times, then decided to go on the offensive, daring me to do something and take action.

And IF ANY OF YOU do the same. You will end up in the same position RiGGA now finds himself in.

Trust me. I'm not going to be fucked with on this 'rule' People don't appreciate being spammed of the list. They COMPLAIN. So it is my job as HAM to stop this from being a common occurrence where the track list becomes an all out free for all for spammers causing other users to take their music elsewhere because they can't even get a look in.

Again. Grow a brain.

Thank you.

---------- Post added at 10:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 AM ----------

Originally Posted by FUEL

Still wrongly banned in my eyes. Banned for "spamming" when all he done was upload tracks. I don't think its right, thats just my opinion.

I mean you want the track list to come back to life, and when a member uploads a few tracks, he gets banned for it? lol

Ya can bet if Sixx Shott/Stotty Pimpin or any other "respected" track maker done it, Not A Single Word would of been said about it. But you have your reasons...

A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

---------- Post added at 10:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------

Originally Posted by FUEL

Still wrongly banned in my eyes. Banned for "spamming" when all he done was upload tracks. I don't think its right, thats just my opinion.

I mean you want the track list to come back to life, and when a member uploads a few tracks, he gets banned for it? lol

Ya can bet if Sixx Shott/Stotty Pimpin or any other "respected" track maker done it, Not A Single Word would of been said about it. But you have your reasons...

A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

---------- Post added at 10:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:21 AM ----------

Originally Posted by GRizzEAT

i got Infracted adn recieved a Spam Can for uploadin 8 tracks. sooooo,


but banned?? Uhm, Not Classick Really.

And this guy hasn't spammed since because he knows if he does he will end up banned. If he doesn't take the majority of them down when asked.

2 tracks a time.

You upload more than that you get slept on.

This rule benefits Everyone.

It would have benefited RiGGA too if he would have took most of them down.

[Lizman]

Originally Posted by Just C

Oh, so I guess it's okay for a member to abuse his exclusive privilege by uploading half a mix tape, therefor knocking other people who put time, hard work and effort into their music before they even get a chance to be heard?

He was asked twice politely to take down 3 of the 5 tracks hogging half of the track list to which he refused.

Again grow a brain and some COMMON SENSE.

People don't (and rightly so) appreciate people flooding the track list knocking them off the list when THEY have the common courtesy and decency to show their fellow track makers the same respect they hope to receive in return by not being selfish enough to spam the track section.

Again, grow a brain. This is why I am Head Audio Moderator and you aren't.

I'm merely setting an example that you cannot flood the track section and get away with it, therefor looking after the respectful track makers who have FOR YEARS abided by this un written rule.

I politely asked him twice.

He refused both times, then decided to go on the offensive, daring me to do something and take action.

And IF ANY OF YOU do the same. You will end up in the same position RiGGA now finds himself in.

Trust me. I'm not going to be fucked with on this 'rule' People don't appreciate being spammed of the list. They COMPLAIN. So it is my job as HAM to stop this from being a common occurrence where the track list becomes an all out free for all for spammers causing other users to take their music elsewhere because they can't even get a look in.

Again. Grow a brain.

Thank you.

---------- Post added at 10:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 AM ----------



A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

---------- Post added at 10:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------



A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

You Didn't Warn Him That The Consequence Would Be Banning
Argument Annoyed

[Lizman]

Originally Posted by Just C

Oh, so I guess it's okay for a member to abuse his exclusive privilege by uploading half a mix tape, therefor knocking other people who put time, hard work and effort into their music before they even get a chance to be heard?

He was asked twice politely to take down 3 of the 5 tracks hogging half of the track list to which he refused.

Again grow a brain and some COMMON SENSE.

People don't (and rightly so) appreciate people flooding the track list knocking them off the list when THEY have the common courtesy and decency to show their fellow track makers the same respect they hope to receive in return by not being selfish enough to spam the track section.

Again, grow a brain. This is why I am Head Audio Moderator and you aren't.

I'm merely setting an example that you cannot flood the track section and get away with it, therefor looking after the respectful track makers who have FOR YEARS abided by this un written rule.

I politely asked him twice.

He refused both times, then decided to go on the offensive, daring me to do something and take action.

And IF ANY OF YOU do the same. You will end up in the same position RiGGA now finds himself in.

Trust me. I'm not going to be fucked with on this 'rule' People don't appreciate being spammed of the list. They COMPLAIN. So it is my job as HAM to stop this from being a common occurrence where the track list becomes an all out free for all for spammers causing other users to take their music elsewhere because they can't even get a look in.

Again. Grow a brain.

Thank you.

---------- Post added at 10:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 AM ----------



A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

---------- Post added at 10:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------



A) it doesn't bring it 'to life' everytime people upload mass amount of tracks they get SLEPT ON. all it does is knock others under them off.

B) No Sixx and Stot do not do this. I don't even like Stot but atleast he doesn't spam the track section. Even @Ticket will second that.

You Didn't Warn Him That The Consequence Would Be Banning
Argument Annoyed

[Óðinn]

@Just C How very mature of you....

He is wrongly banned. Spamming is NOT using the exclusive side of the site that he is PAYING for. there are 1000's of other mediums/avenues of approach for track makers to get there tracks heard. No one even checks the track side. They ALL PM & IM for there tracks to be heard.

RiGGA like ALL other track makers, just wanted some opinions on his tracks.

As for the Sixx/Stotty thing, what i meant by that was if they done what RiGGA did. You wouldn't of even cared.

[Óðinn]

@Just C How very mature of you....

He is wrongly banned. Spamming is NOT using the exclusive side of the site that he is PAYING for. there are 1000's of other mediums/avenues of approach for track makers to get there tracks heard. No one even checks the track side. They ALL PM & IM for there tracks to be heard.

RiGGA like ALL other track makers, just wanted some opinions on his tracks.

As for the Sixx/Stotty thing, what i meant by that was if they done what RiGGA did. You wouldn't of even cared.

[Just C]

Originally Posted by _Lizman_

You Didn't Warn Him That The Consequence Would Be Banning
Argument Annoyed

So? I asked him Twice.

Then he DARED me to take action before I had a chance.

First 2 times I asked him on the level as a man, please take them down.

By the third time when I came back to warn him that he would be banned.

(3 strikes)

He dared me to do something before I had chance to warn him of a ban.

So it was pointless warning him when he already dared me to do something so AS A RESULT he knew being banned was a possibility.

[Just C]

Originally Posted by _Lizman_

You Didn't Warn Him That The Consequence Would Be Banning
Argument Annoyed

So? I asked him Twice.

Then he DARED me to take action before I had a chance.

First 2 times I asked him on the level as a man, please take them down.

By the third time when I came back to warn him that he would be banned.

(3 strikes)

He dared me to do something before I had chance to warn him of a ban.

So it was pointless warning him when he already dared me to do something so AS A RESULT he knew being banned was a possibility.

[Óðinn]

its w/e man. You handled it with the up most of importance.

Im done.

[Óðinn]

its w/e man. You handled it with the up most of importance.

Im done.

[AfterThought]

@Just C We aint attacking you at all.
I'm just stating an opinion, & I wasn't aware of the fact you warned him, I guess that changes alot. How long is he banned for anyway?

[AfterThought]

@Just C We aint attacking you at all.
I'm just stating an opinion, & I wasn't aware of the fact you warned him, I guess that changes alot. How long is he banned for anyway?

[Lizman]

Originally Posted by Just C

So? I asked him Twice.

Then he DARED me to take action before I had a chance.

First 2 times I asked him on the level as a man, please take them down.

By the third time when I came back to warn him that he would be banned.

(3 strikes)

He dared me to do something before I had chance to warn him of a ban.

So it was pointless warning him when he already dared me to do something so AS A RESULT he knew being banned was a possibility.

Thats Not True
You SAID That It Was Your LAST Time Saying It To Him On The 2nd Warning. So You Wouldn't Have Come Back Another Time To Warn Him Or Anything. On Top Of That, He Said I Dare You To Do Smtn To My Account Or Smtn; That Doesn't Necessitate A Ban. It Could Mean Name Changes And Other User Modifications.
I Did Tell You That It Wasn't Against The Rules To Do That. A Curious Feeling, Seeing The Majority On Your Own Side For Once. A Curious Feeling Indeed.

[Lizman]

Originally Posted by Just C

So? I asked him Twice.

Then he DARED me to take action before I had a chance.

First 2 times I asked him on the level as a man, please take them down.

By the third time when I came back to warn him that he would be banned.

(3 strikes)

He dared me to do something before I had chance to warn him of a ban.

So it was pointless warning him when he already dared me to do something so AS A RESULT he knew being banned was a possibility.

Thats Not True
You SAID That It Was Your LAST Time Saying It To Him On The 2nd Warning. So You Wouldn't Have Come Back Another Time To Warn Him Or Anything. On Top Of That, He Said I Dare You To Do Smtn To My Account Or Smtn; That Doesn't Necessitate A Ban. It Could Mean Name Changes And Other User Modifications.
I Did Tell You That It Wasn't Against The Rules To Do That. A Curious Feeling, Seeing The Majority On Your Own Side For Once. A Curious Feeling Indeed.