I suppose in some ways the most tiresome thing about these flurries is that the R'osity position is "always" "we always had this rule..." followed by ignoring the specific questions about how, given this rule, the following evidence that it didn't exist was accumulated. I'd like to hear the answer to one of IB's questions: If this was always the rule, then how is it that the newly created "review board" has routinely approved stuff that broke it? Hold your breath waiting for an answer that doesn't rewrite some more history. I dare you. One reason I don't go back to read 1984 any more is it isn't necessary. And Tunesy (way back there; I try to ration myself to no more than one visit per Poser site per week--doctor's ordure): I didn't misunderstand you. I assumed, as your reply confirmed, that you did not know that a "warning" is not an email saying "Don't do that any more." It's a tick mark on your "record" as a member, as a PTB explained later. You get one, you get a message supposedly explaining why you got it (usually making little if any sense, and seldom the unwelcome truth), and you better not get another! I would argue that the IP owners would be even more impressed if R'osity would burn the occasional warnee at the stake. Public executions will be in next year, you know. "Warnings" do not appear on your profile. You have no way to see what warnings you have, what they were for, or when they expire. And they are pointless, because, as any number of people can attest (some of them have posted in this thread under new identities), you can get banished instantly, irrevocably, and utterly (the official anathema is "Off with his head!") for unforgiveable offenses like, say, calling someone of great importance a "dufflebag" or looking up his nose. Which I would never do. M