zlacker

>>tonmoy+(OP)
The world of internet would be a _much_ better place if everyone at least have read this. I tried my best to adhere to these rules in any social network.

>>ateng+c9
It is unfortunate that the rules are so vague/up for interpretation, and when you break them, it isn't explained to you that you broke them. The rule just gets cited and there you go.

>>roflye+8B
I've found that dang is very open to discussion about these sorts of things. He's only an email away, and usually responds quickly.

>>kelnos+iY
I've found the complete opposite: it took years to even get a dismissive response, and longer to get him to actually bother looking into what I wrote. Depends whether you pass his initial guess at whether you have a real issue or are trolling him, apparently.

>>lazyas+tm1
I'd be interested in what took years—can you explain? My worst case in terms of responding to emails is a few months—which is terrible, but happens when (a) the inbox is backed up and (b) the request requires more than a little time.

It doesn't really depend on whether I think someone's trolling, because the response is usually much the same in either case and anyhow genuine trolling (i.e. totally bad-faith action to provoke or waste time) is relatively rare.

>>dang+EP1
I misremembered: you replied to the initial email and then stopped responding because (you explained much later in another conversation) my continued angry questions appeared to match the profile of a type of angry time-sink user.