[quote=HeySeuss]
I can't think of a scenario where anyone has ever posted a biology textbook picture of genitalia before, but we're warning once. We're not going down the road of warning people for every item on the list once, because that's a waste of our time.As to the 'bigoted remark' thing, I think you guys need to read the standards more carefully. Advocacy of violence and repression against a group or calling them epithets is a long way from having a low opinion of them.The last guy to get banned for advocating racial violence was posting pictures of genocide and saying it was a good thing. If you're going around saying, "Gay people should be killed" or "Christians should be executed for their beliefs" then yes, goodbye. Not liking homosexuals, Christians, communists or hippies? Well, I'd personally avoid giving so much attention to the things I dislike that much. If you deal with a person from the aforementioned groups, stick to poking holes in what they say.
[/quote]

I understand that and just trying to bring up some scenarios for stupid things though the bigoted remark one was probably a bad one. In truth, what I'm asking is that, if someone breaks the rules once, is that once forever and then once they mess up again it's an instant ban or would members receive another warning if they messed up with minor things once in every blue moon?( A few months to a year later per say)

EDIT: I remember there being a slight issue once where there was an OT discussion about biology and one of the pictures that came up was such as a discussion starter... The OP poster was given an okay but apparently members didn't like it so he was asked to take it down and warned to not post it again.... Similar to the "Artistic nudes being okay" rule that was stated by Contra.