Pretty straight forward. If any of you have had warn before you will understand where im coming from. After waiting for 30 days you finally request to have the warn removed and then for no reason, you get a rejected pm. Theres not a single reason given why it was rejected just that i should read the rules again and wait out another 30 days. I hae had warn rejected in the past when i literally took a month break from jsp no posting at all in ~40 days. Currently as im trying to go back to 10% i have had my warn rejected two times. The first i can understand because i had gotten a suspension for calling someone a retard but the second really doesnt make sense. Its just irritating.

TLDR, I would like a valid reasoning if a warn removal is rejected.

They don't give a shit, it does not effect them, that's why it was denied.
Also because you have to be on jsp, not away from it for the 30 days.

if you want to know why your warn was rejected you can pm a sm for more information, however the reasons will almost always fall under reasoning: you didn't demonstrate improved behavior, meaning one of two things, you didn't maintain an active presence on the forum (i.e; actively posting), this is required in order for us to determine whether you have demonstrated improvement or not. or you were posting actively but you violated the rules again, demonstrating no improvement.




quite the opposite, less warns the better. what advantage do we have to see you with warn? if anything it's more work. id much rather see everyone follow the rules and play nice.