[you2]

That is not the cause because if CloudFlare was the issue ALL users including myself couldn't enter the forum ...

This should not be true since cloudflare should have many data centers and the one that reaches the server would depend on the location of the client making the request. I do not know cloudfare topolgy but the cdn i have details about has many thousands of different ip blocks and even more ips in total.
-
if you are banning by ip then one cloudflare or one block of cloudflare server(s) would be blocked but not all cloudflare servers.

That is correct but even so complete world regions would be blocked.
FWIW - the user IP is forwarded by Cloudflare (I'm using that actually for geo-targeted ads) but that's done in a custom HTTP header.
In theory, I could just bypass Cloudflare for the forum but they are actually encrypting the forum traffic (https).

Not sure; if single ips are being banned and if cloud-fare has a large number of small regions - anyway I think it would take analysis of who is being banned (ip) and why. I'm in northeast usa when the ban occurred but I did not lookup the actual ip or region of the ip (no clue how accurate cloudfare mapping is with regards to client-ip to data center). 
-
Anyway it is what it is but i suspect this explains why random people are being banned.

[davidmanze]

Last week I was in the south west of France and regularly got the "you've been banned" as well as having to sign in several times a day!!

Now I'm back in the south, less bans, but I'm still having to sign in sometimes a couple of times a day even though the box to remain signed in is checked.......

........all other sites work fine...........no doubt there's a problem. Just had to sign in again to write this!

[Brightcolours]

AHA! So it was dave all along, trying to push those Adidasses!

[JJ_SO]

Must be him. I tried to make some bucks with Nike...

[davidmanze]

AHA! So it was dave all along, trying to push those Adidasses!

 Sorry Brightcolours........rather like sex....I can't abide covering my body in rubberised paraphernalia!

     However , I have a rather sensual pair of leather Jesus creepers up for grabs if you want to PM me......LOL!

[Klaus]

I had a look at the logs ... see attachment

So for David, JoJu and Toni - there were auto-detected incidents. ;-)
Seems as if the system thought that you misbehaved.

I reckon one rule is - never respond to a spam message directly.

[JJ_SO]

I had a look at the logs ... see attachment

So for David, JoJu and Toni - there were auto-detected incidents. ;-)
Seems as if the system thought that you misbehaved.

I reckon one rule is - never respond to a spam message directly.

I'd really like to know why my reaction on Miro's quoting a petapixel article (which was basically no spam, IMO) led to a "soft delete"?

[Brightcolours]

Maybe it was just replying to Miro that was the offence? ;-)

[you2]

I had a look at the logs ... see attachment

So for David, JoJu and Toni - there were auto-detected incidents. ;-)
Seems as if the system thought that you misbehaved.

I reckon one rule is - never respond to a spam message directly.

Interesting it doesn't show myself.

[Rover]

I started getting the same kind of stuff ("Sorry, but you are banned..." etc) too. Now since I'm posting this, I can access the forum again, but for a second I did think that maybe the equivalence police has nabbed me at last.