probably cuz the definition of „active” is a lie; BUTT most importantly, the procedures for reporting abuse r retarded (and there r other issues). @enneract: r the abuse-reporting procedures on Der Bunker better ?
u're both WRONG. band-aid solutions apparently work in these days — exactly as displayed by the attractive force of Der Bunker —, and long-term solutions r needed S00N(TM)(R)(C).
i hereby announce my entry into remind u that i am also a (valued ?) member of the Bunker community. i shall be appreciated and listened to: desala shall be grabbed by the pussy.
WRONG (u could be operating a server on behalf of a different owner, such as: u're payed to protect the server). also „if u're the server's owner, then u have legal responsibility for the game server” would be correct in the sense that „if someone gets abused in connection with the server, and legal authorities fail to apprehend the true abusers, then it's possible that the weight will be partially offloaded on u”, but is practically misleading. because most ppl, especially after seeing what's going on on GrangerHub, associate the singuar term „server owner” with some sort of DICKtator that fucks over anyone who fails to follow some absurd protocol by even the slightest bit.
also note that paying a puny 1–2 $/month (or, 4 if buying from congested country, or 20 if u suck @ cash management) is very small compared to the cost of real admin work, if the latter were to be measured. this means that it's faggy for „server owners” to follow a „here, i own ur ass; take it or leave it” mentality. what @enneract is probably saying, is that he opens appropriate, meritocratic access, to the forum and the game server, with this in mind.
technology is better. for example, @enneract has an anti-desala system.