There wasn't a warning, nor did I engage the mod, read the the original post. Or is THAT hard to understand?
And even if there had been a warning...the main purpose of this post is that should mods have the power to mute people who haven't broken any rules of engagement but who simply don't like what someone else has said?
Ok, lets see what you wrote earlier....
Thanks for replying, all, it was truly meant to be a frustrated one-off but I got another warning for something witty but equally unobjectionable 10 minutes ago and objected to it (of course) so now it's a 60 minute thing and here we are again.
Mods were given mod privilege to HELP the game. Right?
Why mute ppl/ drive ppl off just because they are accurate and wittier than you (the mod) except to chest thump and say "Seeee! I own you!"?
While maybe vaguely aware that that attitude hurts the game big picture but never mind, it's dying anyway, let me get my thrills while I can.
Opinions?
So you made a comment that I would guess WAS questionable to the MOD, for what ever reason as we dont know the comment or context.
Then you complained after getting the warning... instant mute.... 60 minutes because you have shown that you dont listen (habitual)
Yup I can read, and you lied in the top quoted post here.
This isn't the good old days. Numbers are dwindling, HT seems distant, and nothing will be done--to mods especially--unless something catastrophic happens. Let's see how long unlimited-bombs-Icarus sticks around, for example: probably a dozen reports to HT ~20 hours ago, yet he continues to thrive on day two.
Population is down in Montana, I guess we should take that murder law off the books

Just because the numbers are down doesnt mean the rest of the players should run willy nilly over the other players breaking rules just because they might cancel their subscription.
If you feel this is really unfair or you were singled out call Hitech. He has answered his phone every time I called with a question, Im sure he would be happy to hear from you.