Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26250712-20161002003929/@comment-11987506-20161002125958

My opinion here is not a vote and should not be interpreted as one.

I personally oppose excessive spamming, but I am neutral on spamfests. It's sometimes pretty confusing, and also ironic. When you finally notice that spamfests are just a short-term period of people spamming, excessively, it gets even more confusing. How can I oppose excessive spamming, but be neutral on spamfests, which are literally the exact same thing?

Well, as most of you know, we can simply resume the whole spamming changes in a single word: drama. If we decide to ban spamming, drama. If we decide to allow spamming, drama. We need to reach a common ground that makes the pro-spammers, the ones who support spamming, the neutrals, and the anti-spammers, the ones who oppose spamming, happy. We had some drama about these decisions several months ago, but after that, we basically weren't arguing about spam, nor saying it should be banned. In fact, this issue was only highlighted again by "Sir Nkechinyer", who has a strong anti-spamming taste.

It should work like this, for an example:
 * Excessive spamming continues to be banned, except on spamfests.
 * Spamfests are allowed, as long as they don't exceed roughly 5 minutes.
 * I would also prefer spamfests to be held on -spammersunite- instead of here, if half or more users agree with it.

tl;dr I agree with Keranique and Darren, to an extent. :P