So far you've been asked 3 times to explain to us what your post actually was, and have not done so. If the moderators knew what you'd posted, they'd be able to explain to you whether it really did contravene a forum rule or not, and everyone would be happy.

Or, to use your own terms - Answering this question from the first post: Would definitely have avoided this whole situation. I maintain that there is no way we can discuss whether a reasonable person would mistake your post for spam, unless you tell people what the post was in the first place.

yeah man don't FUCK with us MAN just TELL THE TRUTH. i swear on my children's graves so help me jah i will destroy you if you try to stop everyone from being happy!

Every forum has a different standard. They all come to a general agreement to what the perspective of the ruling is, and run the forum accordingly. That's how policies are established. It's not whether the perspective is wrong or right, but it doesn't mean they can't be open to it if you present a good reason. That's a big reason why mods have to be open to PMs.

Spam is subjective, it's junk. So it's decided what constitutes its relevancy.

If you're attm, or previously were, I know what you're talking about, and you were warned at least twice about putting links for advertising in your sig. The fact that you a) didn't understand or b) didn't agree that this WAS advertising is irrelevant, as it was pointed out to you. Judge Dredd once warned that ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it, but you were told what the law was and went back to breaking it (putting in the advertising again. Twice.)

You then complained that you didn't realise what we regarded as "advertising" or "promotion", or what was or wasn't allowed. I then posted the relevant part of the rules where it clearly shows and delineates what that is. I think that was my only contribution to the thread, along with a rather incredulous comment to the effect that I couldn't see how you could be confused by very clear rules. If that was seen as rude, I apologise but really I fail to see how anyone could take it as such.

All of this is meaningless of course if you were not attm in a previous life (with an avatar of some guy with headphones on, I think drumming?), but I think you were.

That being the case, it wasn't just one infraction, it was several, and they would have come across as deliberate and perhaps arrogant, like putting back in something you had been told to leave out after it had been taken out. Sort of like someone saying "put that down you're not supposed to have that" and you taking it up again. A second time they say it and a second time you pick it up. See how the person telling you to put it down would quickly get annoyed and fed up, having better things to do?

Rules are there for a reason. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with them, that doesn't change them, allow you to break them or decide to interpret them in a way that allows you to circumvent them. And as you said yourself, had YOU PM'd a mod instead of making a thread, this probably could have been sorted out. You could have taken a proactive stance instead of a reactive one, and then putting all the responsibility for your situation on the shoulders of the mods for not talking to you personally in private. Nothing was stopping you making the first move. It's unfair to blame the lawmakers just because you don't like the laws, and what's sauce for the goose, may the force be with you and the road rise before you etc.

No, this member is not attm.

Well follow our rules and you won't get banned, it's not rocket science.

He just had a different interpretation of the rules than 99% of other people here do.

Well he can fuck off. *drunk*

I can understand your feeling offended at being called a spammer when your deleted thread, from your description of it, was simply a question about your own music that you hoped someone would answer and was not an attempt to promote your music:

I recommend that you post your question (if you still wish to) in the songwriting section down in the Artists Corner (which is really a horizontal band, but, oh well ;)) if you didn't before, midnight_spree. I think your question would be more likely to receive helpful feedback there, because I'm guessing that people who are interested in song structure/composition issues and genre technicalities are more likely to look at that section. They will probably be able to tell when a question is an honest request for help or feedback rather than just a way to broadcast the musician's songs. (I like it when musicians are here to share their songs, but I may be in the minority. :))

I've also noticed the tendency of some people at MusicBanter to assume right away that newcomers are wrong or bad. I do feel in general this forum repels quite a few musicians and others who might have enjoyed their stay if they had felt more welcomed. I wish moderators would consistently take an "innocent until proven guilty" stance toward members with respect to the rule against joining just to promote their own music or someone else's...and even if the person is "guilty," still treat her or him respectfully.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Moderators, this thread and Vanilla's post before mine remind me that I want to raise a concern with all of you, which is that some of the rules are not enforced consistently or even followed consistently by moderators themselves, such as our site's first rule:

• While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, personal attacks, trolling, purposeless inflammatory posts or members deliberately provoking another member into committing any of these acts.

It often seems to me that the main job of moderators here is to delete posts that contain advertisements, and I can imagine that is a big job. I see the clean-up in action and do appreciate it. Using MusicBanter to banter about music in a substantive way would be much harder if the posts of people who join only to advertise or promote weren't cleaned up. So, thank you, Mods, for that.

Yet I feel the occasional nasty comments by moderators and some members are much more harmful to the community than "spam" is. When I see moderators are breaking one rule while telling people to follow another, I no longer trust any of the moderators because I don't trust them to police each other.

For example, Vanilla, I wish you wouldn't tell midnight-spree that he can **** off. If you really *are* drunk when you are posting, then I think it would be better if you wait until you aren't, because I feel you are violating the first rule of MusicBanter by being intentionally rude and hurtful: "We will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, personal attacks, trolling, purposeless inflammatory posts."

Midnight_spree's feedback is actually a good thing because it shows she or he has hope that the concern will be listened to and has not given up hope that the moderators will be fair and decent.

I'm sorry but tl;dr.