Makes sense.. It won't apply much to complaints, but it seems reasonable to do, sinceif you were to make a complaint and forget to post it for months, why file it? Everyone changes over time. It's best not to bring up something that happened before for a person in any case (it is considered rude in any case). Anyways, I'll stop rambling, if you think it's rambling.

+1

 

Yeah, it would be hard for someone, let's say if they went inactive and then a loan complaint that should of been filed when they were active is made. Now since they went inactive they have no money/way to make money to pay it off. Then they get banned when they might of been able to pay it off when it was actually due

 

I agree with a time limit for chat/conduct offenses.
I don't for scamming/breach of contract offenses.

 

Correct me if i'm wrong but i thought we already had this?

 

We don't.

 

There would need to be a way to print the server's time. Double-screenshots for a date stamp only do your computer time and date, so people can easily fake those dates.

Anything older than three months is far enough back that someone could have changed their attitude and actions (excluding frauds and scams). More than that and I'd toss the evidence and count it as null/void.

Also, as a general thing anyway, there should always be timestamps to keep things running smoothly, done professionally, and to avoid false accusations and punishments. TBH, screenshots + videos without timestamps to prove how recent they are is almost equivalent to faking evidence.

+1

 

Pretty sure there is a rule for this,
And there was a thread back in January 2015 regarding to this in the mod area as a complaint was denied back then because the screenshots were too old.
Not sure if it was ever added to the official rules by @Dewsy92 though,
I can link you to the complaint if needed.

 

If this is the complaint that I think you're talking about, it wasn't denied because of the screenshots being too old. It was denied because there wasn't enough evidence, and the staff member who handled it worded the response in a way that could be read to mean that it was simply due to how old it was, when that wasn't the case.

 

oh i thought:

Thought that meant that the complaint was too old, my bad.
I was almost certain there was a topic brought up in the mod section about it though.
But if not.

+1