chopchop
ho ther is rude her is blackhawk
and you to try to make shit whit my dyselxlia its a handicap
not a stupiterti lik ther things sum drop in tt
so rely go out and get a life
hop a shit load will neg rep you to for that
rules ar for all in pe
and all now it
so we cant bent any her there don't bent them for me or others there haw lost big amounts in there tt
so why shut there bet it this time
so my point is good for like i say before not all in her is rich and can haw 30k usd
sum there loss 100 ped can be all there owns and be hard as hell to
HduchC
you rely dont now what dyselxia is i can se
spell chek wont help me ther for i cant se what is rong and right ther
i can only spell the way ther words sounds for me when i say them
so rely think befor you writt
if you can yous spell chek you dont got dyslexia what so ever
so rely its you ther is lasy ther
however, it is also wrong. just because EF choses to be flexible about a rule, as with many examples presenting for other real live rules, doesnt mean that MA has to be. its their desicion how strictly to enforce the rules, and if they chose to break them in an inconsistant manner they have to be willing to face the reaction to that.
...........................................
typically irl we recognise this issue by devolving case by case application of rules to judges, but then the rules have flexibility built in - they explicitly acknowledge scope for compassion and circumstance. To date, since vu9, MA has exercised a zero tolerance policy, something with many parallels irl too.
its their desicion how strictly to enforce the rules, and if they chose to break them in an inconsistant manner they have to be willing to face the reaction to that.
nop ther case is not difrent from others ther haw ben ther just not post on EF
so you cant rely say that
when i think of it when i cleant up all my attach bps long time a go i tt a lot L bps becures meny of ther isent wort enything and
i bet i lost lik 100k peds that day so
lik i say befor i lost 3 oa-102 and 2 ma-103
and i tt a shit load of L bpes to and i njow i lost a loot of oa-104 bps and so in L and other of ther good ones i diten think much of it was just pist off my storangs say it haw rangs ther limit and only showt lik haf of what i had ned to relog meny time for it
and yes sad histori bud tru i lost majore ther
bud i calt ma and told them i had mad a failer ther and i now ther isent return right on sum lik that
bud askt enyway bud ther cuten do it becures of ther rules and i say ok my loos ther and i ned to lev from ther rols and the loos
i now i will never do that agin for sur
I do not agree with the inconsistent nature of their action when they choose to return the item. This thread being proof of that. Was there ever another item TTed that caused so much reaction? This situation is clearly different from all previous situations, and seriously may require a different course of action because of it.
nop ther case is not difrent from others ther haw ben ther just not post on EF
so you cant rely say that
has anyone been returned any item TT'd since vu9? while there are suggestions there have been, theres no proof, no one has named examples or stepped forward. meanwhile we have a very similar case, Casey, where a very valuable item was tt and not returned.
people seem fixated on the high value, my contention is that such issues should be decided independently of such matters. people talk of community and society, for me one of the bedrocks of these is that all are treated equal in respects of the law (rules) irrespective of wealth and position. With this issue, MA decide whether the community will be ruled by one law or differing dependant on status.
unless, that is, they recognise the failing of the existing policy, impementing a new one, returning this and all items logged with support since vu9. The best solution all round, i thnk you'll agree.
Edit... Which it appears is precisly the decision made according to Bertha.