No that's fair, I was just saying that's probably what they were referring to. I think the banner message that was at the top of the site before the ultima part did say something about talking about or recommending outside sources or conducting any kind of talks or purchases of unverified outsider sources. I'm not 100% on that but I think I remember reading that. But you're absolutely right, it should be in black and white and be on the main page of rules. You gotta specify when it comes to subjective rules like that.

For one, I would have the integrity to uniformly enforce rules. I’m not contesting his right to have rules and enforce them. Where I draw issue is the clear delineation of accountability between users and sources. A source breaks the rules repeatedly and they aren’t banned. A user breaks the rules once and they’re nuked. Why do you think that is, Press? Because the sources are income for BFG. Don’t you see how that may be an issue when we are looking at the integrity of the site? I think this is a point you are either willfully ignoring or too blind to see.

I understand where you are coming from with the perspective of “they did this to themselves”. I’ll protect their privacy, but I have spoken directly with one of the banned individuals and they are adamant they have not sent any invites or recommendations in PM since the incident you are referring to. So before you blindly accept the narrative being pushed, I encourage you to think deeper on it.

For myself, if speaking up on these issues means I’m not long for this site then so be it. Since I’ve joined here I’ve seen two exit scams, shitloads of bunk gear, review manipulation, and all kinds of other issues. I test gear and leave an honest review on it and am told I’m over reacting for it being 11% under dosed. Another review I leave on a promo wasn’t 5/5 stars, but was honest, and the src DM me to pressure me to change it. I left it as it was because it was honest and that’s what it’s supposed to be to help others here. But how many users do you think would change the review because they want more free promo gear? The point I’m making is that this site is sold as a safe haven where the community polices the sources, but it is fundamentally flawed by the money that flows behind the scenes allowing sources to cheat, manipulate, and get away with just about anything. They are protected from the top while the users are chewed up and spit out.

I get that you’ve been here a long time and you want to retain that, so you toe the line. But if you can’t see the inherent flaws with the structure here, and how they are currently manifesting, then I got nothing else for you buddy.

And to say I won’t find anywhere else like here? You’re right but not in the way you think you are. So much info here is outdated, the attitudes hostile and dismissive, and minds closed to new ways of doing things. As a matter of fact, there is a steroid forum out there that is night and day refreshing compared to here, and it’s where I spend most of my time nowadays. If you think this is the holy grail of communities, then, honestly, I feel sorry for you, Press.

Thanks for the reply. It might be worth @BFG spelling this rule out more. It would help keep the site safe from what you described above and users from unknowingly doing something that they shouldn’t.

Facts. Same reason sources don’t get banned for breaking the rules even when they do it knowingly. This wave, in particular, we have a group of guys who genuinely had no clue they were breaking any rules. Immediate ban no leniency.

Then you have sources like @keytech giving free gear if you leave a perfect review, or back when he got caught making multiple accounts to fluff his reviews. He KNEW these were against the rules and did it consciously, but where’s his ban.

Or how about when @MR.PQR doxxed a member. You think he didn’t know you can’t do that? And was he banned? Of course not. What if one of us doxxed someone, you think there’d be any coming back from that? Fuck no, we’d be banned.

So why the discrepancy? Because the sources line @BFG ‘s pockets. Ban them and it hits his bottom line so we can’t have that. Users are a dime a dozen and don’t pay him anything. Sources give him those sweet sweet checks so of course they won’t be held to the same standard.