Worry said:I don't really seeing this being an issue, because in your UserTitle it would say banned if you were. And if someone made their UserTitle banned, you could just open their profile and check.
Lol, who cares? Just look at rep, banned people don't fucking have rep. WHO FUCKING CARES.Flippy said:Take a look at @Hope and @Jamil, Hope is actually banned and his user title doesn't state that he is banned, and Jamil isn't banned.
Trap said:I am banned guise @sarcasm
RIP
It lets you know that people will miss you. -If- you were to get banned one day.Jamil said:It says were online, we have rep, and everyone knows we wouldn't be banned and yet they freak out. SMH
FeaR said:I agree with this @Flippy very annoying when managing bans and looking at online.php.
I'm not really sure why you people keep mentioning the fact the banned people don't have reputation. The strike is to dignify that a member is banned, not their reputation. Mods don't have reputation but they aren't banned. Same goes for @"Philly".Kowai said:Not really an issue, banned people don't have reputation.
Flippy said:@Jamil @Trap and also banned members can be online, I also shouldn't have to check to see if they have rep to tell if they are actually banned or not, the whole point of putting the strike through the banned users name is to tell they're banned.
I thought I had a fly or something on my screen.. turned out to be your sig.FeaR said:I agree with this @Flippy very annoying when managing bans and looking at online.php.
Tattoo said:I thought about this and users can already go on line and generate striked text so it doesn't really matter.
Have to agree with Fear on this one. It is a hassle and really just an annoyance.FeaR said:I agree with this @Flippy very annoying when managing bans and looking at online.php.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?