hmm
Umm hmm.
ATMB–where the wild folks hang out.
Now that is freaky.
yeah
I’m at a loss for…um…
Ah.
eh!?!
Yup!
Did you realize that the last few people who posted an empty header got banned?
Because TubaDiva thought it was “abuse” and “hacking”.
Funny, huh?
Uh, this isn’t empty. I could click the underscore just fine.
Underpants.
This is an untrue statement.
Yes, we do not like empty subject lines, they sometimes play havoc with the indexing, but, one, this subject is not empty, two, we’ve never banned someone simply for posting empty subject lines, and three, it is in no means “hacking,” or even “cracking.”
Do not spread your untruths here. We do have a rule against that. From the registration agreement, “You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false …”
Funny, huh?
You know, UncleBeer, I sort of recall people being banned for that.
There’s been a couple of “empty thread titles” at Fathom for some time, and when that was mentioned here before, as a justification, the I could swear the word hacking appeared.
I don’t know how to search for the thread tho, since it has no words in the title to search on. Also, I think the one where people had a contest for “emptiest” post was removed. And empty posts still get a scolding.
So I’m guessing it would be hard to say now whether either aftermarketeer’s post or yours was knowingly false. I’d be inclined to say you both were reporting things as you recalled them.
Or, one could actually look for evidence and confirm whether or not anyone was actually banned for doing such.
For example,
Note that the OP was not banned, Uncle Beer said that no characters messed with the index, and closed the thread due to lack of purpose.
Please, next time you want to ruminate on how someone was banned for some reason or another, produce some damned evidence, 'kay? Lest you look like fools.
Then you’d be mistaken.
In addition to the message boards, which apparently you are at a loss for a method of searching, I have over 15,000 e-mails archived. None of them provide any evidence that a poster was banned solely for posting threads titled with only spaces.
I submit that the records available to me are far more complete than the records available to you. Thus, I conclude your statement is in error. I am, however, willing to be convinced that I am wrong. You simply have to provide credible evidence for your version of events and I’ll gladly retract my remarks and make a full apology.
15 000 emails??? Someone’s popular. I have 121. One is from myself - it was a school assignment I sent to my home… 
Yeah, I thought bans were usually the results of mods wanting to stroke their own egos, not for title-less posts.
And I’m goddamned proud of that thread, too!
Moderator’s Notes:
Criticism of moderator actions belong the Pit. Your remarks are inappropriate for for this forum. You have been warned. You’ll not receive another.
While we’re here, may I ask;
If Royal Sampler had suffixed that comment with a and/or a 
and/or the words ‘(only joking)’, would it still have been out of place?