Methais PWNED?!?/1

He's banned, WTF?!??!/1/1/1 Just for goatse????

- Arkans

[Ravenstorm]

I'll take a wild guess and say it's because of the two tattoo threads he made. Pictures of penises, tattoos or otherwise, are pretty clearly against the TOS.

Raven

[Brattt8525]

I just looked and both threads seem to have disappeared.

Two posts up you over the point limit? Something seems a bit wrong here.

- Arkans

[Back]

Huh. But posting pics of beat up chicks is fine? WTF

Or a man with his eye gouged out. Both the tattoos were just sort of funny, I wouldn't even call it it pornography. Can't say I agree with this one.

- Arkans

[Ravenstorm]

Obscene Pictures

Any member who posts an obscene picture is in violation of forum policy and subject to a violation count increase of at least 25 and at most 40. For the purpose of this rule, an obscene picture is any, but not limited to, the following: pornographic, snuff and or gore, and racially, ethnically, sexually, or religiously offensive pictures.

25 points minimum per picture and 50 points is when you get banned.

Raven

I think that is a bit excessive. Two pictures to get banned? I doubt he was even doing it in being disruptive. In the same thread, can I report the dancing cock smiley?

- Arkans

[Back]

Might want to amend that to include links to such pics also.

Might want to look at each case individual case a bit closely when dealing with such a sudden ban.

- Arkans

[Blazing247]

Wait, lemme guess. One of the pictures must've referenced a homosexual. That equals 250 points, duh.

[Back]

Yeah, I didn’t find those tattoos offensive.

[Brattt8525]

Originally posted by Backlash
Yeah, I didn’t find those tattoos offensive.

I didn't either, I always found his humor rather refreshing.

Free Methais!

[Artha]

I would think that, in their cases, it's more an issue of people reading this at work. Penises aren't exactly work friendly.

[Brattt8525]

Originally posted by Artha
I would think that, in their cases, it's more an issue of people reading this at work. Penises aren't exactly work friendly.

Well hell anyone who has read his posts knows that if they are in a place where it might be offensive, don't click on the damned link.

[Back]

What he was doing looking for pics of tattoos of peni is his own business. But its troubling that he may have been banned for posting art.

[Ravenstorm]

If he banned all the minors and instituted an 18 or over policy, he could relax the X-rated rule.

Raven

But the violence rule is okay to fly? Please, that is art. We banning all art that has a penis in it? DON'T POST PICS OF CLASSICAL STATUES!!111

- Arkans

[Ravenstorm]

I didn't find them offensive either. But there's just a small difference between a picture of Michelangelo's David and a picture of a blowjob. Get a grip.

Raven

No, both are penises. Show consistency here.

- Arkans

[Back]

Cow anus tattoos are ok.

That's fucking apeshit. Methais is kind of awesome, those pictures were funny, and how exactly did he cross the line? We're all adults here for the most part. Damn.

[Back]

Ok, does anyone know for certain he was banned for posting those pics before we grab our pitchforks and torches?

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Stanley Burrell
We're all adults here for the most part. Damn.

All adults here? Damn! Coulda fooled me! :lol:

[Drew]

If he posted several pics in one post (or series of posts) it should be treated as one incedence. When someone robs a bank you don't charge them with a count of theft for each dollar.

[hectomaner]

so i'm assuming that if a picture of a human body part gets you 25 points, then the shit posted in this thread (http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=12659) should be 50 AT LEAST...

I'm just saying I personally feel everybody on these forums could at least handle something like that, there's been far worse things posted eesh. Assuming that's what did him in. And if he did so unknowingly in which maximum demerits were handed out before he could fix either one, then it's a bit unfair wouldn't ya say?

Yes, I spoke to him.

- Arkans

[Lomoriond]

My old workplace had a VERY strict internet policy involving explicit content. If either of those pictures showed up on my computer I would have been fired the very next day, even if it is a tattoo.

Adults or no, this isn't the right place for that manner of posting. I'd like to think people shouldn't have to be cut off from the PC while bored at work just because a few people want to post explicit content.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think he should have been banned, but I do think he should have linked the picture and posted specifically that it contains explicit content.

My 2 cents

[Brattt8525]

Originally posted by Arkans
Yes, I spoke to him.

- Arkans

:(

Wait, you're worried about pictures coming over the internet to your computer when you're surfing message boards during company hours? Fucking kidding me, right?

- Arkans

[HarmNone]

The simple fact is, none of you here know all the facts in this case. Unless Kranar, himself, chooses to tell you those facts, none of you are going to know them. TOS is quite specific in cases such as this.

[Scott]

Originally posted by Arkans
Wait, you're worried about pictures coming over the internet to your computer when you're surfing message boards during company hours? Fucking kidding me, right?

- Arkans

My employees can look at message boards during their lunches and breaks. I'd have to fire them if I saw them looking at the tattoos though as pornography is against company policy. So I think he has a valid point.

[Back]

It would be interesting to hear.

Don’t H8t the penis!

“The penis is evil. It shoots the seeds that create new life that spreads the world with the plague of men.” ~ Zardoz

http://www.fantascienza.com/cinema/zardoz/media/maschera.jpg

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Backlash]

Because with everything that's ever been posted here, this can easily be equivocated to lunchbreak at a big-profile work place. :rolleyes:

[Lomoriond]

Originally posted by Arkans
Wait, you're worried about pictures coming over the internet to your computer when you're surfing message boards during company hours? Fucking kidding me, right?

- Arkans

Perhaps you've never worked before? There are such things as... like... breaks.

You see, you can only work for so long before some union bastard requires you to take a break... and if I so choose to cruise the internet during my break time then I am fully entitled to look at whatever tickles my fancy... excepting, of course, explicit content.

Even if I look at these boards OFF the company hours, I STILL can't have that shit on my work computer.

Get a fucking clue.

[Artha]

No, both are penises. Show consistency here.

One is far less likely to get you fired.

Yeah, I've never worked before.

- Arkans

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Backlash
Huh. But posting pics of beat up chicks is fine? WTF

Oddly enough, in spite of all the consternation being voiced here about the picture of the injured girl, I don't recall getting any complaints about it at the time. Said picture has been removed.

Originally posted by HarmNone

Originally posted by Backlash
Huh. But posting pics of beat up chicks is fine? WTF

Oddly enough, in spite of all the consternation being voiced here about the picture of the injured girl, I don't recall getting any complaints about it at the time. Said picture has been removed.

Who reported Methais' post?

[Scott]

They might give you that information......

[HarmNone]

I really hope you're not asking ME that question, Stanley. If you are, I really hope you're not expecting me to answer.

Um. It's just kind of dumb that as you mentioned, no one reported grotesque pictures of ex-girlfriends being beat up, but somehow this pushed the bar and offended someone?!?!
:wtf:

[Sean]

Whats dumb about it? The fact that you don't know how to use the report button if the picture was too groteque for you? Or the fact that people who found Methais picture did?

[Scott]

Originally posted by Stanley Burrell
Um. It's just kind of dumb that as you mentioned, no one reported grotesque pictures of ex-girlfriends being beat up, but somehow this pushed the bar and offended someone?!?!
:wtf:

It doesn't have to be reported to be removed........

Originally posted by Tijay
Whats dumb about it? The fact that you don't know how to use the report button if the picture was too groteque for you? Or the fact that people who found Methais picture did?

Touche.

[Toxicvixen]

So why isn't this considered offensive? :penis: Wouldn't a cartoon penis be considered just as offensive. And if that isn't the case, then can we post Hentai, which is basically the same thing?

[HarmNone]

I've moved this thread to the Rules and Guidelines folder, since that is what is being discussed.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Toxicvixen
So why isn't this considered offensive? :penis: Wouldn't a cartoon penis be considered just as offensive. And if that isn't the case, then can we post Hentai, which is basically the same thing?

If you have a question about whether a particular picture would be acceptable, you are welcome to send a copy to Kranar, and/or to me or peam, for evaluation. That should negate any chance of problems with post content.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by HarmNone]

[HarmNone]

Personally, I think that particular smiley looks more like a malformed, dancing yam than a penis. :shrug:

[Toxicvixen]

But that doesn't change what it is. If I post pictures of some breasts and say I think they look like melons would that be alright? A penis, is a penis, cartoon or otherwise, I just think if we are gonna ban some, why not all? It just seems silly to me. I just seem to be reading it as: Sex Bad, beating Girlfriends good!

[HarmNone]

Excuse me? The "beating girlfriends" picture HAS been removed, as I said previously. Had one of those who claims to have been so traumatized by it had the common sense to report it before, it would have been removed then. We can't see everything.

Also, if you decide to post a picture of "some breasts", said picture will be removed unless they are partially covered by clothing.

[Toxicvixen]

If I don't report, that's my own damn fault. I am sorry to have angered anyone by how I am seeing this being taken care of, it just seems that some offenders get dealt with and others get left alone. It just doesn't seem fair. I guess I should just get more whiny about what I see is offensive.

[Tsa`ah]

I really don't understand why this is even being debated. Everyone should be aware of the TOS, you did after all agree to it when you registered.

He posted a url of some guy pulling his rectum open, a tattoo of a blow job, and a tattoo of a man holding another man's penis. Who cares if it doesn't offend you ... it's not allowed.

A dancing penis is abstract, an artistic display does not depict sexual acts ... and if it does ... it's not acceptable, just as hentai is not acceptable.

People don't get banned on a whim, they actually earn it.

If you feel someone is getting away with something … use the report feature. Saying this gets old after a while.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[HarmNone]

Absolutely! Although, I don't see it as getting "whiny". As moderators, we really try to catch everything we can, but we don't always succeed. Some things we just miss. We count on the help of our posters to make sure that those posts that break our TOS are handled as quickly as possible.

If something offends you, report it. If it breaks TOS, we'll take care of it. If it doesn't break TOS, you will be given an explanation as to why it isn't removed. I really don't see anymore that we can do to try to make the boards a fun place for everyone to enjoy.

[Iqxero]

Originally posted by HarmNone
Also, if you decide to post a picture of "some breasts", said picture will be removed unless they are partially covered by clothing.

You didn't answer the original point. They look like melons, not breasts. If your penis is alright because you can say it looks like a yam, why arn't Toxic's breasts alright if she says the look like melons? If they where an abstract or artistic picture with paint on their breasts.

Also, If that offensive girlfriend picture IS against policy, then I'm sure that Tsa'Ah started the motion to have the image removed when he posted at 4:30 board time, roughly an hour after ben posted the image, right? He contacted Kranar, a super mod, or a moderater for the off topic thread and informed them the picture was a violation of poilicy and needed to be removed right?

I mean, Your moderators. Moderate. Saying that "Nobody complained" holds zero water. We shouldn't have to complain about offensive images, because moderaters, if not capable of instantaniously fixing every problem, should be dealing with ones in threads they post in. Yes?

:hump:

uh-oh, sexual act...

[Tsa`ah]

Had I viewed the image, you would be correct. However, you assume I did, therefore you assume too much.

[Toxicvixen]

Assuming a moderator does his job? There's a novel concept.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Iqxero

Originally posted by HarmNone
Also, if you decide to post a picture of "some breasts", said picture will be removed unless they are partially covered by clothing.

You didn't answer the original point. They look like melons, not breasts. If your penis is alright because you can say it looks like a yam, why arn't Toxic's breasts alright if she says the look like melons? If they where an abstract or artistic picture with paint on their breasts.

Also, If that offensive girlfriend picture IS against policy, then I'm sure that Tsa'Ah started the motion to have the image removed when he posted at 4:30 board time, roughly an hour after ben posted the image, right? He contacted Kranar, a super mod, or a moderater for the off topic thread and informed them the picture was a violation of poilicy and needed to be removed right?

I mean, Your moderators. Moderate. Saying that "Nobody complained" holds zero water. We shouldn't have to complain about offensive images, because moderaters, if not capable of instantaniously fixing every problem, should be dealing with ones in threads they post in. Yes?

In the first place, it is NOT "my penis". I don't think I've ever even used that particular smiley because I think it's stupid. However, it is a cartoon, not a photograph. It does not depict a real person, or anything approaching a real person. If it did, it wouldn't be here.

Decisions as to what is allowable and what is not are Kranar's. They are not yours. They are not mine. If I (or any other moderator) have a question about the acceptability of something that is posted, we take it to Kranar for his ruling on it.

As to the whos and whys of the removal of the "offensive girlfriend" picture, I will not speak to that issue as it is not a matter for the public boards. If Kranar finds the picture should not have been removed, you can bet he'll put it back. Who reported it and who removed it is none of your affair.

If we see something that violates TOS, we will remove it. If we do not see it, it is because we are human. If you don't like something you see here, you have the option to report it, or not. Take your choice.

[Iqxero]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Had I viewed the image, you would be correct. However, you assume I did, therefore you assume too much.

Your right, I probably did assume too much. But here's what I assumed

Your a moderator, thus you view the forums, in its entirety, as a member of the staff. Not as a casual reader. If you where viewing the thread, as a casual reader, then you should not be a moderator. If you feel that a slip shod and half ass approach to your "job" is a defense for incompetence, then I suppose you have one. But it still does not make me, or more than likely most of the forums, more comfortable with the capabilities of the staff you are a member, and thus a representative, of.

[Tsa`ah]

Oh here we go with the bull shit again.

If you don't like the moderation, or a specific moderator, by all means ... just say you don't like it.

If you want to infer that someone isn't doing their job, come with proof and be damned sure you have reported it.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Iqxero

Your right, I probably did assume too much. But here's what I assumed

Your a moderator, thus you view the forums, in its entirety, as a member of the staff. Not as a casual reader. If you where viewing the thread, as a casual reader, then you should not be a moderator. If you feel that a slip shod and half ass approach to your "job" is a defense for incompetence, then I suppose you have one. But it still does not make me, or more than likely most of the forums, more comfortable with the capabilities of the staff you are a member, and thus a representative, of.

I don't moderate off-topic and I have reported every violation I have read outside of my folders.

I am not required to nor obligated to read any thread except those in my folder. Also, I am not paid. Also I am not required to be tactful nor am I required to provide any other service than moderating my folders in any manner I wish.

[HarmNone]

There are close to 400 posts per day on these boards. Many days, there are a good deal more than that. Moderators have families, jobs, chores, and any number of other things that need their attention. For myself, I can say that I do my dead-level best to read every post that's posted on these boards. Some days, I succeed. Some days, I don't. We're dealing with human beings, not machines.

[imported_Kranar]

Actually I've been meaning to get rid of that smiley for awhile now.

Thanks for bringing it up.

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Oh here we go with the bull shit again.

If you don't like the moderation, or a specific moderator, by all means ... just say you don't like it.

If you want to infer that someone isn't doing their job, come with proof and be damned sure you have reported it.

I don't like Tijay for fucking pwning me in this thread before. I felt all clever and shit, and he was able to use his m4d l33t architectural skillz and lay the hammer down, exposing my loophole in like a nanosecond.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Kranar
Actually I've been meaning to get rid of that smiley for awhile now.

Thanks for bringing it up.

Yeeehaw! Thanks, Kranar. I hate that thing with a purple passion!:D

[Tsa`ah]

That Tijay ... he's a bastard.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Stanley Burrell

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Oh here we go with the bull shit again.

If you don't like the moderation, or a specific moderator, by all means ... just say you don't like it.

If you want to infer that someone isn't doing their job, come with proof and be damned sure you have reported it.

I don't like Tijay for fucking pwning me in this thread before. I felt all clever and shit, and he was able to use his m4d l33t architectural skillz and lay the hammer down, exposing my loophole in like a nanosecond.

I think what he exposed was more than a loophole, Stanley. ;)

:baa: :(

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Stanley Burrell]

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Toxicvixen
Assuming a moderator does his job? There's a novel concept.

Funny. I thought the whole point of this thread was that we were over-doing our jobs. :thinking:

[Toxicvixen]

I was talking about the image in the other thread. Nevermind, it really just doesn't matter anymore.

[Iqxero]

Since I read what Kranar said about the penis smiley, I cut the top half of this post out. I'll just respond to Tsa'Ah, and Harmnone. I know neither of you could give a half pence about my opinion, but I feel it important to make my point clear.

Harmnone, I am not angry at you, nor in your previous post do I care who reported the images.

The point I'm making about the moderation, is that I feel offended as someone reading the boards that it is put on my shoulders to moderate the images. If I find something offensive, then by all means I will report it. But there should be some non arbitrary rules. If a picture of a penis, naked tattoos, or grotesque physical violence are against policy, I should not have to report it. The moderator of that thread, or any moderator who happens to read it, should report it to the responisble parties to be removed.

If I find a picture of a squirrel in a dress offensive, that should fall on my shoulders to report. A picture of a 22 year old man, bleeding from a broken nose and waving with a broken hand should NOT be something I as a member of the forums have to report.

Also, Harmnone has said that abstract images of a sexual nature are alright. As well as images that did not directly reflect on human anatomy. Does that mean in HER threads it's alright to post those images, but not in for example Adredrins, because he will find them offensive and remove them?




However, it is a cartoon, not a photograph. It does not depict a real person, or anything approaching a real person. If it did, it wouldn't be here.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Toxicvixen
I was talking about the image in the other thread. Nevermind, it really just doesn't matter anymore.

Specifics? "Other" is rather vague.


Originally posted by Toxicvixen
Assuming a moderator does his job? There's a novel concept.

Who is the "he" not doing "his" job? I'm curious how you define "his" job, and how "he" isn't doing it.

[HarmNone]

Wrong. I do care what you have to say. I'll try to answer your questions, and to clarify how things work.

Each moderator is responsible for his/her own thread, as far as how that thread is moderated. Some moderators are more tolerant about certain things than others. That's how the boards are run. However, when it comes to TOS we are all responsible to uphold it. I honestly believe that we all do our best to do so.

Sometimes, a post or a picture will be "on the edge" to one, or more than one, moderator. In those cases, the last say on the issue comes from Kranar. Different people are offended by different things. What might offend me would not, necessarily, offend you, and vice versa. The report button gives each poster the ability to make his/her feelings known with regard to a given post. To me, that's a good feature.

If a post is reported by a poster, it might not be immediately obvious to me why the post is a problem. I might discuss it with the person who reported by U2U. If it's important to the poster, it's important to me, so I'll take the question to Kranar to get his ruling.

Does that make things more clear?

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by HarmNone]

[Toxicvixen]

In response to Tsa'ah:


Originally posted by Toxicvixen
NEVERMIND, it really just doesn't matter anymore.


[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Toxicvixen]

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Iqxero
The point I'm making about the moderation, is that I feel offended as someone reading the boards that it is put on my shoulders to moderate the images. If I find something offensive, then by all means I will report it. But there should be some non arbitrary rules.

These non arbitrary rules are defined in the TOS everyone agrees to upon registration.

The posting of pornographic material is pretty clear


If a picture of a penis, naked tattoos, or grotesque physical violence are against policy, I should not have to report it. The moderator of that thread, or any moderator who happens to read it, should report it to the responisble parties to be removed.

Much like voting, if you don't report, you can't bitch.

You implied that I saw the image when in fact I did not. Had I seen it, yes ... it would have been reported.

We're not logged into and reading the boards 24/7. Things don't happen instantly. If you see that a mod is on and you have knowledge of something that violates the TOS, why not report it? Why not shoot a U2U?

By your logic, if you see a bank robbery in progress ... it's not your responsibility to contact the police, nor can you be bothered to be interviewed or give any information ... but you can complain when the robbers get away.


If I find a picture of a squirrel in a dress offensive, that should fall on my shoulders to report. A picture of a 22 year old man, bleeding from a broken nose and waving with a broken hand should NOT be something I as a member of the forums have to report.

If you don't report, don't complain when it's still up and don't complain when someone gets banned when another didn't because you couldn't be bothered to report.

You don't have to, you are not required to, nor should you feel obligated to. When you want to complain about objectivity and how the board should be moderated ... your concerns don't carry much weight because ... well ... you couldn't be bothered.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Toxicvixen
In response to Tsa'ah:


Originally posted by Toxicvixen
NEVERMIND, it really just doesn't matter anymore.


[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Toxicvixen]

It mattered enough to take a shot at a male moderator.

Does it no longer matter because you made a baseless comment?

If "he" is not doing "his" job. Who is "he" and what job isn't "he" doing? Why do you feel "he" isn't doing "his" job, what examples do you have of "him" not doing "his" job?

[Toxicvixen]

I don't think you understand, when you post in a thread people ASSUME you read through all of it, including pictures. You posted in the offensive thread that was being used as an example, you then told us you didn't see the picture. That was the point I am seeing get made.

By your analogy: The police were at the bank and said well if you see something going wrong, call us. Why should bystanders call the police when they are RIGHT THERE at THAT time watching it go down?

And fine I was talking about you, Tsa'ah.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Toxicvixen
I don't think you understand, when you post in a thread people ASSUME you read through all of it, including pictures. You posted in the offensive thread that was being used as an example, you then told us you didn't see the picture. That was the point I am seeing get made.

By your analogy: The police were at the bank and said well if you see something going wrong, call us. Why should bystanders call the police when they are RIGHT THERE at THAT time watching it go down?

And fine I was talking about you, Tsa'ah.

That is all you have to say.

Instead of implying why "I" did not do my job in a folder that is not mine to moderate, why didn't you ask "if" I reported or "if" I even saw it?

Had you asked you would have received a direct answer. I don't recall if the image was posted or if it was a link to said image. Images, button, and icons haven't been loading without refreshing a few times and I don't care to follow any links posted by Ben unless they are specifically in my folders.

If I missed it I missed it. That isn't indicative of "me" not doing "my" job or any other mod not doing their job.

Making such a comment is indicative of a bandwagon mentality, and from you ... that's surprising.

[peam]

The threads that arise on these boards every few weeks, with the exact same people spouting the exact same dribble, grow old.

The moderation here isn't overbearing, oppressive, or unfair.

If someone reports content that conflicts with the TOS agreement, said report will usually be acted on as soon as possible.

If something obviously in conflict with TOS arises, and goes without being reported, a moderator will amend the conflict as soon as feasible.

If the reported article is subject to question, as far as violation(s) of TOS, a thread usually appears in the council folder to prompt discussion and execute judgement in a manner deemed fit.

As HarmNone mentioned earlier, there is a limited number of moderators that can access the editing tools for ever folder. We aren't compensated, thus we can not be expected to maintain a 24-hour guard, and that is not going to change.

If this isn't suitable, we all know of the alternative. I'll shake your hand on the way out.

[Toxicvixen]

Very nice Tsa'ah. Now I see why people so highly respect your moderation skills. Thank you for putting it all into prospective. I completely disagree with you, but I don't want to be kept up all night trying to defend my opinions when they are mine to have. I tried to drop this once before and now I will try again, so please try to accept it this time.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Toxicvixen
Very nice Tsa'ah. Now I see why people so highly respect your moderation skills. Thank you for putting it all into prospective. I completely disagree with you, but I don't want to be kept up all night trying to defend my opinions when they are mine to have. I tried to drop this once before and now I will try again, so please try to accept it this time.

Again, had you inquired you would have received an answer. You suggested I wasn't doing a job that wasn't mine to do and assumed I saw a violation and over looked it.

Anyone who is familiar with Ben and myself would know that Ben is the least likely to fly under my radar.

The comment was indicative of the bandwagon mentality. Tsa`ah isn't doing his job, Tsa`ah is biased, Tsa`ah, Tsa`ah this and Tsa`ah that. Yet when specifics are asked for ... no one bothers.

You're fucked if you do, you're fucked if you don't. I should be used to it by now. You just threw me for a loop because I would not expect that line of bull shit from you.

[HarmNone]

Poopy's posts have been removed. I'll be removing those that answer or refer to them.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by HarmNone]

[Nieninque]

OK...I missed all this so didnt see any of the photos and only now heard of Methais being banned. A few things spring to mind for me though.

First off: It does seem harsh that he was banned for two or three pictures that seem a little inappropriate, but given his history, were posted out of a genuine wish to share/discuss than to cause trouble.

Secondly: People post much worse things here and do not suffer the same consequences. I didnt see Ben's picture, but from all accounts, it was a pretty sick thing to be posting. Ben is consistently offensive i n the things he posts and, when Bob is banned for saying the word "Nigga" (as stupid as he was for using it) Ben is allowed to start threads about the Tsunami entitled "God sent me a tidal wave as a present" or something like that. He is allowed to post shit like "I hate blacks" which is far more sinister than Bob's childish use of gang-language. Yet he is still here.

Shit, if there are going to be hardline rules about what can or cant be posted, please please please deal with the real stuff first...I'm a damn sight more offended by some racist fuck and his sick views, than I am about a beligerent 14 year old or a man with a penis tattoo obsession.

[HarmNone]

So am I, Nieninque. However, I cannot moderate these boards according to my own preference. The deciding factor is TOS, and Kranar is the one who decides how that is to be interpreted. He makes the rules, we uphold them...or try to do our best to uphold them.

Again, if something offends you, please report it. If I get enough feedback from posters, I'll take it to Kranar. That's a promise.

[Tsa`ah]

You fail to point out that Ben is edited and the violation is recorded.

Bob was banned for multiple infractions, not one instance.

You also fail to note that Methias has posted such images in the past and they have been removed.

Logic, if you have any, should tell you ... this was removed because it violates some rule ... I better not do it again ... REPEATEDLY.

[Sean]

Originally posted by Nieninque

Secondly: People post much worse things here and do not suffer the same consequences. I didnt see Ben's picture, but from all accounts, it was a pretty sick thing to be posting. Ben is consistently offensive i n the things he posts and, when Bob is banned for saying the word "Nigga" (as stupid as he was for using it) Ben is allowed to start threads about the Tsunami entitled "God sent me a tidal wave as a present" or something like that. He is allowed to post shit like "I hate blacks" which is far more sinister than Bob's childish use of gang-language. Yet he is still here.

This is a pretty poor example on a few accounts. Bob wasn't banned for saying 'nigga' or using gang-language. The context and what he said was actually different than what your presenting. Also Ben's thread title about the Tsunami was quickly edited by MissX I believe.

On top of that as much as you or I may dislike it Ben does have the right to have an opinion, and that opinion is that he hates or dislikes people who aren't of the same ethnicity as himself. Expressing that opinion isn't against the ToS and I"m not really sure how in anyway you could amend the ToS to do so without opening a can of worms. Where do you draw the line? But in the case of Methais the ToS is very clear about what is allowed and what isn't allowed. Okay so it was two or three pictures .. well how many pictures does he have to post before you think he should have been banned?

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Tijay]

[HarmNone]

It should also be noted that Methais has posted the goatse picture in the past. The picture was removed then, and Methais was informed not to post things like that, including that particular link. It's not like he didn't know it wasn't acceptable. He did know.

[Kainen]

Exactly what don't people understand about following the rules??? And why do some find a need to say things like "well he was cool.. so what if it broke TOS" or "that wasn't so bad.. this other thing was so much worse". If you do something against the TOS, expect to get in trouble.. simple concept.

[Nieninque]

Originally posted by HarmNone
So am I, Nieninque. However, I cannot moderate these boards according to my own preference. The deciding factor is TOS, and Kranar is the one who decides how that is to be interpreted. He makes the rules, we uphold them...or try to do our best to uphold them.

Again, if something offends you, please report it. If I get enough feedback from posters, I'll take it to Kranar. That's a promise.

As you know, I do. I just think there are things that are being dealt with differntly and IMHO they are prioritised arse-about-face.

I dont expect anything to change. I dont even expect people to agree per say. I wanted to state my opinion on the subject, which I have done.

I dont have any complaints about the mods.

I know Miss X edited the post very shortly after that wanker posted it, but he is still here.


the TOS say:

Any member who posts content that is discriminatory against any ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation is in violation of forum policy and is subject to a violation count increase of at least 1 and at most 3.

and,

Any member who posts an obscene picture is in violation of forum policy and subject to a violation count increase of at least 25 and at most 40. For the purpose of this rule, an obscene picture is any, but not limited to, the following: pornographic, snuff and or gore, and racially, ethnically, sexually, or religiously offensive pictures.

Which is way off. Maximum of three for hatred in text. Maximum of 40 for penis pictures? Something isnt quite right there, and considering the thing that the majority of posters here have in common is a text-based game, you would think people have a better idea of how powerful words can be. :shrug:

I'm done. I just think things are wrong.

[Ilvane]

We created guidelines and all of you have read them. Now that we are enforcing them...well, you know.

I personally was a bit disgusted by the tattoo pictures. I couldn't tell what it was until I clicked on it. However, I just closed it and didn't report. So yeah, maybe I'm guilty of not saying anything too.:lol:

Some people cross that line over and over again lately, and it has to stop.

The TOS was created for a reason, to make people realize that things have crossed the line. Regardless of if Methais gets unbanned, or banned...sometimes the punishment is warranted.

-A

[Back]

Discussions on what freedom of speech means and what is considered art or obscenity are a neccessity. Excercises like these help us understand that there does need to be some kind of moral compass and it is even a responsibility for each and every one of us to understand and help shape it.

Censorship, freedom of speech and suppresion of artistic or intellectual freedom is a hot topic with me. Always has been, and even moreso at this point in time. Also, that our current culture encourages violence yet supresses sex.

My initial comparison was not so much of a criticism of anyone in specific as much as it was a rhetorical question. The response to my comparison was correct, however. When I see a pic posted that actually does sicken me, I should remember the values I’ve adopted and hit the report button next time.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by peam

If someone reports content that conflicts with the TOS agreement, said report will usually be acted on as soon as possible.


No offense, but I reported a post that was clearly off topic to you, and you did nothing about it. I had to take it to Kranar to get it taken care of. So yes, there is a double standard in alot of cases, and I think that's what everyone has complained about.

As far as Methais goes, no one had a problem with the goatse link in his sig for the past months, but all the sudden he gets points for posting it in a thread?

Someone should have made him take the link out of his sig months ago, rather than getting all uppity about him posting it a few days ago.

Get a clue, it's been in his sig for months.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Ilvane
We created guidelines and all of you have read them. Now that we are enforcing them...well, you know.


-A

Enforcing them selectively, anyway.

[Kainen]

Freedom of speech is NOT an issue here. So any "art" VS obscene arguement isn't really valid here. This board isn't the US, it's a message board ran by staff.. who are, in effect, the ruling body of this place. They are the ones who get to say what is and what is not allowed. THEY made the rules, and no one can say crap about how fair it is or is not. Having said that.. I don't see how the rules aren't fair. Seems to me someone already mentioned that things were getting out of hand and that they were finally doing something about it. Maybe it was just time to put the smack down and Methias happened to be that last straw. Bottom line is that he broke the rules.

[Kainen]

[i]Originally posted by Mistomeer]
As far as Methais goes, no one had a problem with the goatse link in his sig for the past months, but all the sudden he gets points for posting it in a thread?

Someone should have made him take the link out of his sig months ago, rather than getting all uppity about him posting it a few days ago.

Get a clue, it's been in his sig for months.

How do you know that no one had a problem with it? Just because no one posted a thread on how much they hated it? Or that no one posted in a thread where he posted saying whether or not they had a problem with it? Stuff goes on that we don't see.

[Mistomeer]

I know because he didn't get in trouble for it until he posted it in a thread. I know because his post where he posted the link, a few days ago, was pulled, but his sig has been that way for months, unchanged.

[DeV]

Three strikes rule brought down the man. Damn. :bye:

See you soon, Methais.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

It never fails to amaze me how people react when yanked in on rules they knew. We have a policy here at work, that if you act in a fashion such as to avoid your job (sitting on not ready, hanging up on customers repeatedly), we fire you.

Guess how many of these idiots cry (literally) when they get fired for it, saying they didn't know it was against the rules. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for it, as a police officer once told me :)

Rules are rules people. As much as you like Methais and dislike Ben, it was Methais that broke them. Who's fault is that?

:unfair:

[Bobmuhthol]

<<But there's just a small difference between a picture of Michelangelo's David and a picture of a blowjob.>>

rofl I think I saw the gallery you're talking about. I was like, "TATTOOED PENIS?!?!?!?!?!?!" But it was hot anyway.

<3 thehun.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Bob was banned for multiple infractions, not one instance.>>

Leave me the fuck out of this.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Harmnone
TOS is quite specific in cases such as this(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

So I guess as long as you find something amusing, TOS doesn't mean much, eh Harmnone?
Originally posted by Tsa`ah
bandwagon mentalityWhere there's smoke there's fire.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
[quote]Originally posted by Harmnone
TOS is quite specific in cases such as this(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

So I guess as long as you find something amusing, TOS doesn't mean much, eh Harmnone?[quote]

Please, Latrinsorm, do elaborate.

[Latrinsorm]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=12622

Thread initially started in General Gemstone, otherwise I wouldn't have read it. Reading stuff in Complaints is just asking to be pissed off.

02/09/05, 03:07 PM
Tsa`ah posts

03:17 PM
I post, indicating which part of TOS this is violating.

04:56 PM
Harmnone posts. The content of the post suggests that Harmnone has read the first post.

05:09
Tsa`ah posts.

05:09
Harmnone posts. The content of the post CLEARLY indicates that Harmnone has read or skimmed every post in the thread.
Umm, who defended her, please? I can't seem to find that....2 more posts each from Harmnone and Tsa`ah

02/10/05, 04:53 AM
Harmnone posts:
it certainly wouldn't be the first time a fake log had been used to denigrate someone.Harmnone posts 2 times more. Last post, 02/11/05, 05:28 AM

Elaborated.

[Bobmuhthol]

I could very easily argue against Latrinsorm, but I'm more inclined to do this:

FUCKING PWNED!!!!!!!!!11111111111111

[HarmNone]

I'm not really getting your point, Latrinsorm. I don't know which thread you're talking about.

[Artha]

He's talking about the one with the Dessedemona cybersex.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<I'm not really getting your point, Latrinsorm. I don't know which thread you're talking about.>>

The link that he posted preceding his elaboration too much to handle?

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=12622

Thread initially started in General Gemstone, otherwise I wouldn't have read it. Reading stuff in Complaints is just asking to be pissed off.

02/09/05, 03:07 PM
Tsa`ah posts

03:17 PM
I post, indicating which part of TOS this is violating.

04:56 PM
Harmnone posts. The content of the post suggests that Harmnone has read the first post.

05:09
Tsa`ah posts.

05:09
Harmnone posts. The content of the post CLEARLY indicates that Harmnone has read or skimmed every post in the thread.
Umm, who defended her, please? I can't seem to find that....2 more posts each from Harmnone and Tsa`ah

02/10/05, 04:53 AM
Harmnone posts:
it certainly wouldn't be the first time a fake log had been used to denigrate someone.Harmnone posts 2 times more. Last post, 02/11/05, 05:28 AM

Elaborated.

I don't see where anyone's privacy was invaded by that log. In the first place, I don't believe it's a log. I believe it's a fabrication. In the second place, for the vast majority of the log, the two individuals were at a table, speaking openly (not whispering). Last I remember, tables are not considered private, so the two involved didn't seem concerned with their privacy. If you make it public, it's public, not private. The privacy issue, therefore, becomes moot.

Edited to add, I didn't find it amusing, at all. In fact, I posted to that effect, saying that I thought the posting of the log was base, to begin with. Personally, I found the whole thing stupid. :shrug:

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by HarmNone]

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
<<I'm not really getting your point, Latrinsorm. I don't know which thread you're talking about.>>

The link that he posted preceding his elaboration too much to handle?

Missed it, Bob. Thanks.

[Tsa`ah]

No, he's simply suggesting that the original post was in violation of the TOS. Hence his reply to my post "I found some: (d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable."

To him perhaps. The original post was not invasive of one's privacy. Since it is a log that doesn't mention a name and hasn't been proved libal a rule hasn't been broken. The text may be obscene to some but no report has been made by anyone. It's not personally threatening, tortuous, ethnically, or racially objectionable.

Lat is trying to make a point yet all the while ignoring the report button.

If you don't use it, if don't you step up and say it's offensive and why ... when a mod doesn't have a problem with it ... you close the door of debate for yourself.

So I can see the point he's attempting to make ... he chose not to make it until now.

If you can't be bothered to report, I can't be bothered to hear you bitch or even debate about it.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[HarmNone]

Apparently, since the bolded portion of Latrinsorm's post emphasized the privacy issue, that's what had him upset, not obscenity. Problem is, nobody's privacy was violated by anyone other than the two participants. Even if someone guessed who was involved, if the log is true (which I doubt), the actions taken were not taken privately.

My view of what is obscene is not the same as someone else's might be. Neither is Latrinsorm's. It's a sticky wicket, and one that is bound to cause problems, at times. Some will be offended, others will not. :shrug:

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
Where there's smoke there's fire.

Or someone smoking crack; cooking up more BS.

Which one do you think I'll go with?

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by HarmNone
Apparently, since the bolded portion of Latrinsorm's post emphasized the privacy issue, that's what had him upset, not obscenity. Problem is, nobody's privacy was violated by anyone other than the two participants. Even if someone guessed who was involved, if the log is true (which I doubt), the actions taken were not taken privately.

My view of what is obscene is not the same as someone else's might be. Neither is Latrinsorm's. It's a sticky wicket, and one that is bound to cause problems, at times. Some will be offended, others will not. :shrug:

But considering that the log, fake or not, included something along the lines of, please do not post this, it was obviously not intended to be posted here. Also, her name was posted in that same thread, regardless of the original post, which is an invasion of privacy as she did not do that publicly. Tables may not be considered "private" in terms of GS, but again, we're not talking about how GS views them. Getting posted here is certianly more public than GS, as it stays until removed, for all to see. So even if it was done in the middle of TSC, less people would have seen it, and it would have been more private than if posted here.

I think Lainstrom is missing the bigger picture by arguing that aspect of the policy, when it's clearly in violation of that line of the ToS as a whole:
"(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable. "

What was posted could be considered an invasion of privacy if authentic, sexually objectionable authentic or not, and if not true libelous or tortuous.

TOS is violated daily, but it's subject to the Mods as whether or not it's ever removed, and if the poster is ever punished. Add it up to human error, favortism, or whatever you want, but it's just the way it is.

[HarmNone]

Nope. It's not subject to the mods. It's subject to Kranar's decision. I, very often, agree with some of the things being said here. However, I do not make the rules, nor do any of the other mods.

As to the log, Kranar has stated his stance on this in the past. If an individual makes public something that is later posted here, it cannot be considered private after the fact. The log took place at a table in GS, not in a locked room and not in whispers. Whether or not the person asked that the log not be posted is irrelevant. If the person didn't want such things being seen, they should not have made it possible for them to be seen.

Additionally, no names were used in the log. The name of the person involved was thoughtfully produced by our posters. :)

I, personally, did not like the log being posted. I found its posting to be dispicable. However, it isn't my call, nor is it yours.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by HarmNone]

[Tsa`ah]

You're thinking privacy in terms of character privacy. TOS refers to the privacy of an individual. Personal information, an image not publicly available ... so on and so forth.

Had the event taken place behind a latched door or private home ... it would still be a stretch to bring up privacy.

[Mistomeer]

But you also said you thought it was fake, which makes it libelous, and can considered sexually objectionable true or not ;)

We can all disagree on what we think is private, but you're right, it comes down to what Kranar thinks. I think that privacy is based on expectation of privacy, and she clearly had that expectation, if the log is geniune.

[Tsa`ah]

If one has expectations of privacy, one should not engage in cyber relations with people they don't know nor should they engage in said relations where privacy is not protected.

[imported_Kranar]

The TOS is the foundation of how the forums are to work. The roles of Moderators, Super Moderators, and Administrators are outlined and some core rules are stated in a rather general manner.

Because of this all forum violations are listed in a precise manner here:

http://forum.gsplayers.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=79

While keeping things about this case general, because I do not publically discuss the terms of any members ban, pictures were posted which violated this specific rule:



Any member who posts an obscene picture is in violation of forum policy and subject to a violation count increase of at least 25 and at most 40. For the purpose of this rule, an obscene picture is any, but not limited to, the following: pornographic, snuff and or gore, and racially, ethnically, sexually, or religiously offensive pictures.


As is ALWAYS the case, when such a violation occurs, a very specific warning message is sent to the user informing them of the violation. The template for this message can be found here:

http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=10558

That message will contain the post in violation and the exact and specific rule that was broken.

This is the procedure that was and will continue to be followed for all forum violations, and any member is free to continue reporting forum violations to staff.

[HarmNone]

Heh. I said I think the log is fake, Mistomeer. What I think does not libel make. I may be wrong.

Even if the log is real, people need to learn that their expectations are not always going to be met. Personally, I would never have gotten myself into such a situation because I have more sense than that. Even if I was going to cyber in GS, it would not have been done at a table, and it would not have been done with someone I didn't even know. Some responsibility must lie with the individual involved.

In short, if you don't want it posted you'd best be sure that you know the person well enough to ensure it's not posted. If you do it, and it's posted, welp.....you messed up. I don't have to like it to recognize it.

[Sean]

How can you invade someones privacy without mentioning who they are?

[HarmNone]

Heh. That question has been asked, Tijay, but it has yet to be answered by those bringing up the privacy issue. :D

Even if the character name was mentioned, it's a character in a freaking game. Now, if the player's name is mentioned, privacy does, indeed, become an issue. In this log, NO name was mentioned.

Obscene, perhaps. That would depend on the person reading it. For the purposes of this board, that decision would fall to Kranar, ultimately.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Tijay
How can you invade someones privacy without mentioning who they are?

Because of the details posted, it was evident exactly who that was.

It would be just like me saying, Yeah, so I was talking to this person, not going to name names, but he's a moderator at the PC, he's African-American, has long hair, and visited Europe not so long ago....

Not very anonymous, is it?

A famale, dark-elf bard, that was hunting the Rift at the time, and is often OOC...I knew the second I read that exactly who it was, as did many others.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
If you can't be bothered to report, I can't be bothered to hear you bitch or even debate about it.I have to report TOS violations now? Why would I have you go to your u2u box, and back to the thread, when it's that much easier to just read the thread, which you were already doing?
TOS refers to the privacy of an individual. Personal information, an image not publicly available ... so on and so forth. If that's what Kranar has said, fine. I disagree with it, and suggest a more even-handed policy, but fine.
Originally posted by Tijay
How can you invade someones privacy without mentioning who they are?The poster specifically stated that there were enough clues to discern who the unnamed person was. Lo and behold, a number of people could. How far can a person go without saying the actual name? Could they say that the name rhymes with another word? Could they provide the inventory of the mystery character?

I'm struggling mightily to figure out how AOL/AIM screen names are protected but character names aren't.

The tables not being public thing is balderdash. It's just as easy, if not easier, to hide in a latched room as it is to espy someone at a table.

Finally, I care this much about obscenity: ---><---

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Kranar
The TOS is the foundation of how the forums are to work. The roles of Moderators, Super Moderators, and Administrators are outlined and some core rules are stated in a rather general manner.

Because of this all forum violations are listed in a precise manner here:

http://forum.gsplayers.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=79

While keeping things about this case general, because I do not publically discuss the terms of any members ban, pictures were posted which violated this specific rule:



Any member who posts an obscene picture is in violation of forum policy and subject to a violation count increase of at least 25 and at most 40. For the purpose of this rule, an obscene picture is any, but not limited to, the following: pornographic, snuff and or gore, and racially, ethnically, sexually, or religiously offensive pictures.


As is ALWAYS the case, when such a violation occurs, a very specific warning message is sent to the user informing them of the violation. The template for this message can be found here:

http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=10558

That message will contain the post in violation and the exact and specific rule that was broken.

This is the procedure that was and will continue to be followed for all forum violations, and any member is free to continue reporting forum violations to staff.

According to that, Methais didn't ever break the rule. He never posted any pictures, he posted links. You might want to change that to include posting links to obscene materials as well as pictures.

[Latrinsorm]

The picture of the woman was thumbnailed.

edit: also, I've been informed that Silvergate rooms cannot be hidden in. So it's far easier to hide in SOME latched rooms than it is to walk in on tables.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Latrinsorm]

[Mistomeer]

But he started getting in trouble for posting the goatse link...

[Scott]

According to that, Methais didn't ever break the rule. He never posted any pictures, he posted links. You might want to change that to include posting links to obscene materials as well as pictures.


(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

[Bobmuhthol]

Originally posted by Scott

(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

Sure, he broke ToS, but a hyperlink doesn't break the posting pictures rule, and his demerit points would therefore not be high enough to induce a ban.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
I have to report TOS violations now? Why would I have you go to your u2u box, and back to the thread, when it's that much easier to just read the thread, which you were already doing?

Now you're making it overly complicated. One only needs to click the "report post" link on the offensive thread. This has been stated in the past. You really don't even have to type anything once the U2U pops up. Just press send. Practice.

Yes, if you feel something violates the TOS, report it. If you don't and then chose to take part in a bitch fest thread about other things you feel are in violation ... your argument isn't taken all that seriously because you couldn't be bothered to report.


Finally, I care this much about obscenity: ---><---

Then why expend the energy?

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Mistomeer
According to that, Methais didn't ever break the rule. He never posted any pictures, he posted links. You might want to change that to include posting links to obscene materials as well as pictures.

Now you're arguing semantics and you know that's bull shit.

Linking is no different than uploading the image.

It is a violation.

[imported_Kranar]

I'm at a loss as to the purpose of this thread right now.

Methais was banned for posting pornography.

If anyone else decides to post more than 2 pornographic pictures, then they too will be banned.

For future reference, a picture depicting several male ejaculations, a picture showing oral sex, and a picture showing a man opening his anus wide up are all considered by me to be pornographic or obscene. I'm sorry if you consider that precious art and a form of priceless and deep expression; I do not.

The procedure for handling this violation was followed, and so the ban remains.

As far as privacy goes, your fictional dwarven character or halfling has no privacy on the Players' Corner. If that poor dwarf gets caught doing the hanky panky with a giantman in Silvergate Inn, that poor dwarf has little grounds taking the issue up with me or any other staff member.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
Sure, he broke ToS, but a hyperlink doesn't break the posting pictures rule, and his demerit points would therefore not be high enough to induce a ban.

Yes it does, again symantics and bull shit arguments.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol

Originally posted by Scott

(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

Sure, he broke ToS, but a hyperlink doesn't break the posting pictures rule, and his demerit points would therefore not be high enough to induce a ban.

Holy Shit.
I agree with Tsa`ah.
/sarcasm

Yeah, that was my point, the picture rule is 25 to 40 points, and more than that, a link in and of itself isn't offensive.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Mistomeer]

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Kranar
I'm at a loss as to the purpose of this thread right now.

Methais was banned for posting pornography.

If anyone else decides to post more than 2 pornographic pictures, then they too will be banned.

For future reference, a picture depicting several male ejaculations, a picture showing oral sex, and a picture showing a man opening his anus wide up are all considered by me to be pornographic or obscene. I'm sorry if you consider that precious art and a form of priceless and deep expression; I do not.

The procedure for handling this violation was followed, and so the ban remains.


Surely you can see the difference between posting a link to offensive material and posting the actual picture?

I think the ToS should reflect the difference.
I mean, according to what you're saying, him posting the link to goatse is the same as him posting the goatse pic in the middle of a thread. If that's the case, then I could post that pic in the middle of a thread randomly, and take 40 points and move on.

[Edited on 2-12-2005 by Mistomeer]

[Scott]

He still posted 2 pornographic pictures (which were not links) which in the end gets him banned. Then the link to goatse..... which regardless of whether it falls in the picture rule will still add time onto the end of his ban. So I guess I don't see what the arguement is about, because all 3 things broke TOS and put him over the demerit mark that gets you banned. What are you argueing?

[Mistomeer]

In Kranar's post, he refers to the goatse pic as if it breaks the picture rule, which is doesn't, at least not as the rule is currently written.

I don't think links to offensive material is the same as posting an offensive picture. I just think ToS should reflect the difference of the two and all this started initially with Methais posting the goatse link.

[Scott]

Originally posted by Mistomeer
In Kranar's post, he refers to the goatse pic as if it breaks the picture rule, which is doesn't, at least not as the rule is currently written.

I don't think links to offensive material is the same as posting an offensive picture. I just think ToS should reflect the difference of the two and all this started initially with Methais posting the goatse link.

Oh ok. Sorry about that. I didn't understand where you were heading with it. I thought you were trying to say that he because he only linked to goatse, he shouldn't be banned. My mistake.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Now you're arguing semantics and you know that's bull shit.>>

<<Yes it does, again symantics and bull shit arguments.>>

Which one is it, semantics or symantics?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Who gives a rats ass?

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Then why expend the energy?Because I care this much about sensible rules: <---------------------->
Originally posted by Kranar
As far as privacy goes, your fictional dwarven character or halfling has no privacy on the Players' Corner. If that poor dwarf gets caught doing the hanky panky with a giantman in Silvergate Inn, that poor dwarf has little grounds taking the issue up with me or any other staff member.Which leaves me with one nagging question: Why are AIM names sacred?

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol

Originally posted by Scott

(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

Sure, he broke ToS, but a hyperlink doesn't break the posting pictures rule, and his demerit points would therefore not be high enough to induce a ban.

Obviously, Kranar is of the opinion that it does, and they were. It's his opinion that counts, eh?

[Bobmuhthol]

His opinion means shit. He's going against his own rules if he says a hyperlink is a posted picture.

As such, the pictures were posted, not hyperlinked. I didn't say he hyperlinked them, I just made Scott even more wrong than he was in the first place by going further and saying Methais wouldn't be banned if his example were correct.

[Tsa`ah]

Again Bob, you're wrong.

[HarmNone]

Since Kranar is the Administrator of these boards, Bob, he makes the rules and he interprets them as he sees fit to do so. You DO NOT make the rules, nor do you interpret them. Therefore, Kranar's opinion is golden and your opinion is shit. That's my last comment on the subject. Word.

[Snapp]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
Sure, he broke ToS, but a hyperlink doesn't break the posting pictures rule, and his demerit points would therefore not be high enough to induce a ban.
How do you know they wouldn't be high enough? Did you keep a running tally on his demerit points? I've seen more than a couple posts of his that had to be edited due to content.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<How do you know they wouldn't be high enough? Did you keep a running tally on his demerit points?>>

No, I didn't. I assumed 0. If you want, I can assume 35.

He still wouldn't be banned. Unless you can prove to me that he had over 35 demerit points a week ago, you have no defense.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Since Kranar is the Administrator of these boards, Bob, he makes the rules and he interprets them as he sees fit to do so.>>

There's a large difference between interpretation and doing whatever the fuck you please when it goes against your own rules.

<<You DO NOT make the rules, nor do you interpret them. Therefore, Kranar's opinion is golden and your opinion is shit. That's my last comment on the subject. Word.>>

I'm neither making nor interpreting them. Kranar's opinion is not golden. It enforces whatever he pleases. But to see a link and call it a picture is not correct. I didn't say he can't do what he wants, he simply wouldn't be right to.

[Tsa`ah]

Bob ... you're argument is bull shit.

Also ... where the hell do you get 35 points?

http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=10548

[Bobmuhthol]

NOTE THAT I AM NOT DEBATING WHETHER OR NOT POSTING A PICTURE WOULD GET HIM BANNED. HE DID AND WAS.

In fact, I take back the 35. It could be 49. There's nothing saying you can't link to objectionable content while I thought there was. I also thought it awarded about 5 demerit points. http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=10547 though, specifically mentions discriminatory content. My mistake. No demerit points should be given at all.

[Edited on 2-13-2005 by Bobmuhthol]

[Tsa`ah]

Again, your argument is bull shit.

[Edited on 2-13-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[HarmNone]

> I didn't say he can't do what he wants, he simply wouldn't be right to.<

He might not be right according to you, Bob, but YOU don't make the rules, and you don't decide what's right or wrong on these boards. Kranar does. Again, that's my last word on this subject. If you have a problem, take it up with the Man Who Run The Boards.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<He might not be right according to you, Bob, but YOU don't make the rules>>

The rule says post a picture.

If he posted a link, he did not post a picture.

How the fuck can you argue that a link is an image file?

[Tsa`ah]

Because you're using a straw arguemnt, which is typical.

[Bobmuhthol]

I'm using the argument that a link is not a picture. Please, if you want to disprove it, go ahead. Don't complain about my tactics and act like you're right. Back it the fuck up, NOT SUPER mod.

[Brattt8525]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Because you're using a straw arguemnt, which is typical.

Call it what you will, he is right technically.

[Snapp]

Must we have this same, multi-page, bull shit drama everytime someone gets banned? He broke the rules. Big fucking deal. He'll be back I'm sure.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<He'll be back I'm sure.>>

From what I've gathered, it won't be for another 200 days, minimum, not accounting for specific details. I'd say about 350 as a rough estimate. At that point, why would he?


edit:
<<everytime someone gets banned?>>

should read


everytime someone gets banned without proper justification?

Not to say he didn't violate the rules, but nobody complained when a lot of other people were banned.

[Edited on 2-13-2005 by Bobmuhthol]

[Tsa`ah]

Technicality would state that a bullet killed a person and not the one who pulled the trigger.

Doesn't fly does it ... neither does this.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Technicality would state that a bullet killed a person and not the one who pulled the trigger.>>

I didn't realize a link not being a picture was a matter of technicality. How about this one? The goatse link being in his sig for months. Technically, you're [non-specific] retarded to "not notice it until now" and suddenly punch him in the face with 25 to 40 additional demerits because it was in one of his posts. But it happened anyway, didn't it?

[Tsa`ah]

With consideration that the quote did not pertain to your post ... whatever.

There wasn't a link, only an incomplete URL in the sig. That has been discussed previously and was not without notice, Kranar's call not mine.

The two pictures he did post would have put him at maximum with or without the aformentioned url in a post.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<The two pictures he did post would have put him at maximum with or without the aformentioned url in a post.>>

Correct, but it makes a difference of 50 to 80 days.

<<There wasn't a link, only an incomplete URL in the sig.>>

fuckinghypocrite.com

SEMANTICS SEMANTICS

[imported_Kranar]

<< Which leaves me with one nagging question: Why are AIM names sacred? >>

Sacred to whom?

I don't understand.

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Because you're using a straw arguemnt, which is typical.

I've tried to explain computers to you once, but you never responded, a link is not the same a posting a picutre.

The ToS clearly states posting a picture. If you, and the rest of the staff feels that it is merely semantics, then that would mean injecting a tubgirl pic in the middle of a thread would only get me 40 points and wouldn't get me banned...When Kranar signs off on as much, you can expect a random tubgirl pic in the middle of a thread from me. However, I think doing as much would get me banned immediately as it is vastly different from merely posting a link.

Edited to add:
A link requires user interaction to view. That's the main difference. Everyone who opens a page of the thread is not subject to viewing the contents of a link as they are if a picture is posted. That is the key difference and the reason I think the two should be differentiated in the ToS.

[Edited on 2-13-2005 by Mistomeer]

[Edited on 2-13-2005 by Mistomeer]

[Latrinsorm]

I recall at least one instance where a poster was forbidden from displaying an AIM log with another person's screen name unedited. Am I misremembering things?

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
I recall at least one instance where a poster was forbidden from displaying an AIM log with another person's screen name unedited. Am I misremembering things?

No, you're not, Latrinsorm. However, that was quite a while ago...long before the new TOS went into effect.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Mistomeer
I've tried to explain computers to you once, but you never responded, a link is not the same a posting a picutre.

The ToS clearly states posting a picture.

You obviously don't comprehend very well, if at all.

The ToS is very specific in this instance ... please review until you understand.

(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

In case you do not understand, let me put it in words you may comprehend. Posting porn on the PC will get you a paid vacation to banned camp.


If you, and the rest of the staff feels that it is merely semantics, then that would mean injecting a tubgirl pic in the middle of a thread would only get me 40 points and wouldn't get me banned...

You can test it.

The bull shit argument that has arisen at this point is with the violation and assessment of demerits. This is what you apparently can't grasp, aside from not knowing what you agreed to upon registration.

http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=10548

This is what you folks are trying to dance around. This is an addition to the ToS. A clarification of what will get you demerits. You can argue "link" all you wish, but that is what I call bull shit semantics.


When Kranar signs off on as much, you can expect a random tubgirl pic in the middle of a thread from me. However, I think doing as much would get me banned immediately as it is vastly different from merely posting a link.

Again you can test it all you wish. It is after all within you ability to do. I wouldn't expect less from you.

You can cry "but it was a link!" all you want. The end consequence will be the same.


Edited to add:
A link requires user interaction to view. That's the main difference. Everyone who opens a page of the thread is not subject to viewing the contents of a link as they are if a picture is posted. That is the key difference and the reason I think the two should be differentiated in the ToS.

You would think that, but there is no logical argument for links being "at your own risk". That's bull shit and you know it. We have more than our fair share of immature members who have pulled the "click me" stunt in the past. No one should have to worry about following a link from this forum.

You are free to think what you wish, but the ToS is very specific and not likely to change because a select few think it should be different.

[HarmNone]

It won't change because a select few are looking for a reason to get their panties in a bunch, either. :)

[Ilvane]

--upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.--

Seems pretty clear to me.

Just because you liked Methais, doesn't mean the rules don't apply to him.

End of story.

-A

[Mistomeer]

Of course, that's not the section of the TOS that Kranar quoted when referring to the two thumbnails or the goatse link.

I'm not saying that he didn't break the rules, I'm just saying that posting a link is not the same as posting a picture and that the rule that refers to picture should either be changed to include links to obscene pictures or another rule should be added to the demerit system.

[TheRoseLady]

Originally posted by peam
The threads that arise on these boards every few weeks, with the exact same people spouting the exact same dribble, grow old.

The moderation here isn't overbearing, oppressive, or unfair.

If someone reports content that conflicts with the TOS agreement, said report will usually be acted on as soon as possible.

If something obviously in conflict with TOS arises, and goes without being reported, a moderator will amend the conflict as soon as feasible.

If the reported article is subject to question, as far as violation(s) of TOS, a thread usually appears in the council folder to prompt discussion and execute judgement in a manner deemed fit.

As HarmNone mentioned earlier, there is a limited number of moderators that can access the editing tools for ever folder. We aren't compensated, thus we can not be expected to maintain a 24-hour guard, and that is not going to change.

If this isn't suitable, we all know of the alternative. I'll shake your hand on the way out.

Thank you Peam for getting this point across in a manner that is clear, concise and not condescending.

[Kainen]

Bottom line right here...

The Administrator may, at his or her sole discretion and at any time, discontinue any and/or all services, with or without notice. You agree that any termination of your access to the Players’ Corner under any provision of these Terms of Service may be affected without prior notice, and you acknowledge and agree that the Administrator may immediately remove all Content or terminate access to the Players’ Corner. Finally, you agree that the Players’ Corner and its Staff shall not be liable to you or any third-party for any termination of your access to the Players’ Corner and its services.

[fiendwish]

Just because you liked Methais, doesn't mean the rules don't apply to him.

If someone else liked him...eh, maybe :grouphug:

Bad, Methais! Bad! Seven pages discussing your lack of merit!

Actually, it's high time he got busted good for that obscene picture of the gaping hole, if for nothing else. I've carefully avoided that nastiness ever since Calael crashed my computer with it several years ago.

You can say shit, fuck, have dancing penises, and humping smileys here, Methais. Isn't that good enough? Must you always push the envelope? Overdue this spanking is, I say.

now THIS is funny (http://www.livejournal.com/users/xeens/)

[Brattt8525]

What the hell does Xeni and your conversations in that link have to do with this? :wtf:

[Slingblade]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
There wasn't a link, only an incomplete URL in the sig. That has been discussed previously and was not without notice, Kranar's call not mine.

Correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying someone could simply put insertdisgustingimagehere.com in a post and it would be allowed because not having the www part at the front makes it a non clickable link?

If not then please clarify.

[Edited on 2-13-2005 by Slingblade]

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying someone could simply put insertdisgustingimagehere.com in a post and it would be allowed because not having the www part at the front makes it a non clickable link?>>

I'd assume so, because apparently "thehun" isn't a violation, but if I linked to it it certainly would be.

But me saying a link is not an image file.. yeah that's just semantics and has no weight.

[Mistomeer]

lol..the argument that a link and an image file is semantics is like saying someone arguing that the difference between a dog and an elephant is merely semantics.

[HarmNone]

Again, I'd like to suggest that if you have questions, or suggestions, it might be more productive for you to U2U Kranar with them.

[Slingblade]

Originally posted by HarmNone
Again, I'd like to suggest that if you have questions, or suggestions, it might be more productive for you to U2U Kranar with them.

Don't you think it would be much better for these questions to be answered out in the open so that everyone knows?

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Mistomeer
lol..the argument that a link and an image file is semantics is like saying someone arguing that the difference between a dog and an elephant is merely semantics.

No this isn't an argument about what is what. This is your (and Bob's) argument about dancing around the ToS using semantics.

If you're too dim understand the sign on the wall prohibiting porn ... you're too dim to be allowed access to the internet.

It's pretty clear to everyone else. Perhaps now you can log on another screen name and back yourself up.

[Slingblade]

And how about a link vs. an "incomplete URL"?

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Perhaps now you can log on another screen name and back yourself up.>>

I'm sorry, are you the mod of this thread? Did you check IPs?

You may want to try and notice that nobody has done that.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Slingblade

Originally posted by HarmNone
Again, I'd like to suggest that if you have questions, or suggestions, it might be more productive for you to U2U Kranar with them.

Don't you think it would be much better for these questions to be answered out in the open so that everyone knows?

What I think is really quite irrelevant.

I suggested a U2U in order to offer people a way to get an answer to their questions. Kranar doesn't always have time to read all the threads and respond.

My suggestion was strictly an effort to help.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Slingblade
And how about a link vs. an "incomplete URL"?

You already quoted me on that, Kranar's call ... not mine.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
<<Perhaps now you can log on another screen name and back yourself up.>>

I'm sorry, are you the mod of this thread? Did you check IPs?

You may want to try and notice that nobody has done that.

I'm sorry Bob ... was I quoting you when I posted that?

Really fast to respond for some reason.

I completely agree with Bobmuhthol.

<<I'm sorry Bob ... was I quoting you when I posted that?

Really fast to respond for some reason.>>

I'm sorry Tsa`ah, are you the mod or not?

Did Bobmuhthol say he didn't, or did he say nobody did?

And may I inquire as to how someone responding to a post shortly after its posted is any different than replying after an hour or more? I guess people aren't allowed to read posts unless a certain amount of time has passed now.

[Tsa`ah]

Thanks for proving what you need to resort to when you don't have a leg to stand on Mistomeer.

[Bobmuhthol]

hahahahahaha

You don't know who made it because YOU AREN'T THE FUCKING MOD.

So the next time you try that bullshit, don't lie about it, eh?

I can't believe how fucking dumb you really are.

[Tsa`ah]

Bob ... understand what my abilities of a mod are.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Bob ... understand what my abilities of a mod are.>>

I understand that you can't back yourself up and are 100% wrong. And that as NOT THIS FOLDER'S MOD, you can't prove a damn thing, so you just make it up.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Tsa`ahisafuckingidiot
I completely agree with Bobmuhthol.

Of course you do.

[Tsa`ah]

My bad ... saw the area and assumed someone else. My apologies.

Good to know what you will resort to Bob. It's not surprising.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Good to know what you will resort to Bob. It's not surprising.>>

What I resorted to proved my point entirely and made you look like a complete jackass.

[Tsa`ah]

Bob ... you have no clue.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<My bad ... saw the area and assumed someone else. My apologies.>>

Oh my f'ing God I sincerely hope this isn't referring to an IP lookup or I will just fucking die laughing.

[Bobmuhthol]

Tsa`ah is sending me threatening U2Us involving my IP address. hpel.

[Tsa`ah]

It has nothing to do with an area lookup since the IP in question refers to the state of origin. I saw a similar marker and made an assumption without comparison ... my bad as I said.

[Bobmuhthol]

(20:20:52) Rachel Pwnz: Question
(20:21:11) Rachel Pwnz: Can you see anyone's IP?
(20:21:22) NotARetard: If they post in <mod's folder>.
(20:21:26) Rachel Pwnz: So..
(20:21:31) Rachel Pwnz: If Tsa`ah is not the mod of a folder
(20:21:33) Rachel Pwnz: he can't see my IP
(20:21:37) Rachel Pwnz: If I never post in his folder
(20:21:39) NotARetard: Right
(20:21:57) NotARetard: He was/is a super-mod though, they can see anyone's
(20:22:06) NotARetard: was.
(20:22:08) Rachel Pwnz: But he's not a super mod now.
(20:22:09) Rachel Pwnz: So he can't.
(20:22:13) NotARetard: yeah
(20:22:17) Rachel Pwnz: He sent me a U2U all, "THE NEW USER HAS YOUR IP!!!"
(20:22:22) Rachel Pwnz: I knew it was total bullshit
(20:22:24) Rachel Pwnz: Just checking.
(20:22:27) NotARetard: yep

[Tsa`ah]

I can post the U2U if you wish.

There was nothing threatening about it, just offering proof that you don't know what you're talking about.

It was nothing more than showing your IP and the IP of your newly created harassment account.

[Bobmuhthol]

You can go ahead and take that one joking post seriously, or you can try to defend yourself.

Apparently you've chosen the wrong option if you want to claim to be right.

[Tsa`ah]

Believe what you wish Bob.

[Bobmuhthol]

I'll even save you the trouble.

Subject: Ya?
From: Tsa`ah
To: Bobmuhthol
Sent: 2-13-2005 at 08:15 PM
Message: Your new account.

This user had an ip of 66.189.94.56 - cpe-66-189-94-56.ma.charter.com

Your normal shitcock account.

This user had an ip of 66.189.94.56 - cpe-66-189-94-56.ma.charter.com


Subject: Re: Ya?
From: Bobmuhthol
To: Tsa`ah
Sent: 2-13-2005 at 08:17 PM
Message: quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your new account.

This user had an ip of 66.189.94.56 - cpe-66-189-94-56.ma.charter.com

Your normal shitcock account.

This user had an ip of 66.189.94.56 - cpe-66-189-94-56.ma.charter.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So obviously it was Mistomeer.

[end of my U2U, beginning of post.]

As well as this, I don't understand how you can expect your "ability as a mod" to be worshipped when a mod with just as much authority as you agrees that you're a liar.

Edited to clarify what my U2U was.

[Edited on 2-14-2005 by Bobmuhthol]

[Tsa`ah]

Perhaps you have comprehension issues as well.


Originally posted by Tsa`ah
It has nothing to do with an area lookup since the IP in question refers to the state of origin. I saw a similar marker and made an assumption without comparison ... my bad as I said.

[Bobmuhthol]

But there's no way for you to know the IP of account Tsa`ahisafuckingidiot. Stop being so fucking dumb.

[Tsa`ah]

I would say two things.

1. You are either putting words in a mod's mouth.
2. Or a mod is having conversations about things they are not supposed to.

Again, you (and the mod in question) do not know what I'm able to do and not do. You're just making an assumption as I did. And we know assumptions are bad without comparison.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Again, you (and the mod in question) do not know what I'm able to do and not do.>>

So I guess you have more privileges than your fellow mods, because no one else would be able to do what you supposedly did (p.s. you're a liar and do not know the IP of account Tsa`ahisafuckingidiot). The mod knows what he's talking about, just like I do.

[Tsa`ah]

Apparently not.

Hi, Tsa`ah! Here I am again.

If you can send a U2U to Bobmuhthol including the IP address to this account, I will gladly accept my defeat.

And yes, this is still Bobmuhthol.

[Tsa`ah]

Perhaps you will now shut the fuck up kid.

[Bobmuhthol]

I'm sorry, you were incorrect.

[Tsa`ah]

No ... I wasn't.

[Bobmuhthol]

Prove it. :)

[Tsa`ah]

Want me to post the IP and have a mod post what it reads from your post?

[Bobmuhthol]

But you are a mod, and you have amazing ability as a mod. You can just post it yourself.

And for the record, it's 66.189.94.56.

[Tsa`ah]

That is your IP, not the IP of the last post you made from the harassment account.

Do you wish me to post that one?

Why not post the U2U?

[Soulpieced]

:weirdthread:

No matter how many times I post, it's always going to be 66.189.94.56.

[Tsa`ah]

No, it's not.

[Bobmuhthol]

Subject:
From: Tsa`ah
To: Bobmuhthol
Sent: 2-13-2005 at 08:48 PM
Message: This user had an ip of 202.175.234.162 - 202.175.234.162

Unfortunately, that's not my IP :)

Man...

...Did I eat some purple pills again?

[Mistomeer]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

No this isn't an argument about what is what. This is your (and Bob's) argument about dancing around the ToS using semantics.

I don't know how to explain it. It can't be a simpler concept. A link is not a picture.
This is dumb to argue about. I was never asking for Methais to be set free, I merely mentioned that according to the picture rule, the goatse link is not in violation and that the rules should be changed to include links if that's going to be the way the policy is enforced.



If you're too dim understand the sign on the wall prohibiting porn ... you're too dim to be allowed access to the internet.

Ah, a personal insult. But it does little to explain how two things, that are different in definition are really just a matter of semantics. Link != picture.
Here is how you link things in html:
<a href="url">Link Text </a>
That doesn't even remotely resemble a picture.


It's pretty clear to everyone else. Perhaps now you can log on another screen name and back yourself up.
When I first started posting here, I had a different screen name. I used that for about a month, before creating the Mistomeer account. Since then, I have never posted under another account, much less used another account to back myself up.

[Bobmuhthol]

Would you like to continue making up IPs?

[Kainen]

Read the last paragraph of the TOS. According to the TOS that you agreed to, they can ban you anytime for anything they like. SO.. all these arguements against someone getting banned are silly, considering that when you sign up for PC you agree that they can do just that, ban you anytime for anything they like. Not that the admin does that. Because, in my opinion, they are awefully damn tolerant.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Read the last paragraph of the TOS. According to the TOS that you agreed to, they can ban you anytime for anything they like.>>

Cool. We have the right to voice our opinion of it.

And my opinion of you is that you should STFU.

[Kainen]

Well.. since I am the one who has the option of whether or not to listen to your opinion.. I choose.. NOT. :D

[Slingblade]

It's a little late to not listen to something you already heard.

[Diamondback]

Originally posted by Slingblade
It's a little late to not listen to something you already heard.

Why is there always someone ready to get into more semantics games? They really are just so tired.

You know or at least should know that what was meant was that the advice was not going to be accepted.

[Slingblade]

THANKS!!

[Bobmuhthol]

lmao

Diamondback, you should probably learn the meaning of the word semantics before you start sucking Tsa`ah's dick and copying his favorite word.

[Diamondback]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
lmao

Diamondback, you should probably learn the meaning of the word semantics before you start sucking Tsa`ah's dick and copying his favorite word.

Bob, have no worries.

Your advice about what I should and should not do will be given exactly the credence it deserves.

[Bobmuhthol]

Is it because you suck dicks?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I think Bobby is regressing :(

[Diamondback]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
Is it because you suck dicks?

It has more to do with your being a clever yet very immature young boy.

[Kainen]

Originally posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage
I think Bobby is regressing :(

regressing? His posts are pretty much the same thing.

[Bobmuhthol]

When Tsa`ah backed out, there was no longer a point to this thread's existence.

Not my fault Diamondback wraps his lips around penises.

[Brattt8525]

Originally posted by Kainen

Originally posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage
I think Bobby is regressing :(

regressing? His posts are pretty much the same thing.

I actually have to say since Bob has been back he has been posting with much more tact. Now that all goes out the window when he feels the need to prove something beyond just saying your wrong. We all know he is very anal about spelling and if he is right he will fight/insult people.

Other then that I give Bob two thumbs up for the most part on being civil up until now.

[Kainen]

Being civil? You consider him telling people to STFU or "you suck so and so's dick" and let's not forget "your fucking stupid", in every other post civil? You have an interesting idea of civil.. I have to say that.

[Edited on 2-14-2005 by Kainen]

[The Korean]

I think when she said now, that she meant up until this little fiasco.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Kainen
SO.. all these arguements against someone getting banned are sillyI was arguing for a thread to be deleted. But because I took a cab instead of the subway, it doesn't count.
Being civil? You consider him telling people to STFU or "you suck so and so's dick" and let's not forget "your fucking stupid, in every other post civil?You really should research such outlandish claims. :)

[Kainen]

Really? You might want to read more of his posts.. the majority aren't much differant than these.

[Artha]

I don't see why you're whining about it, considering you go out of your way to provoke him.

[GSTamral]

yea, never provoke a stupid dog, especially a stupid dog that can't even do geometry. always leads to stupid results.

[Kainen]

While I don't consider the way I am posting whining about it.. it's simple.. I got tired of him being a jackass when replying to anything I posted. BUT, GSTamral is right.. and I should just quit provoking him, after all it won't change things. Though it does give me a giggle now and then.

[Brattt8525]

Originally posted by The Korean
I think when she said now, that she meant up until this little fiasco.

Exactly.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Kainen
You might want to read more of his posts.. the majority aren't much differant than these. Number of Bobmuhthol posts with "fucking stupid." ......... 10
Number of posts with STFU ........ 19
Number of posts with STFU actually spelled out ...... 17

Bobmuhthol does not have 4211 posts telling someone to fellate someone else. :)

Originally posted by Latrinsorm

Originally posted by Kainen
You might want to read more of his posts.. the majority aren't much differant than these. Number of Bobmuhthol posts with "fucking stupid." ......... 10
Number of posts with STFU ........ 19
Number of posts with STFU actually spelled out ...... 17

Bobmuhthol does not have 4211 posts telling someone to fellate someone else. :)

He doesn't swear that much as I shall prove:

Number of Bobmuhthol posts with "fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck" ...... 1

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Mistomeer
I don't know how to explain it. It can't be a simpler concept. A link is not a picture.
This is dumb to argue about. I was never asking for Methais to be set free, I merely mentioned that according to the picture rule, the goatse link is not in violation and that the rules should be changed to include links if that's going to be the way the policy is enforced.

There isn't a need to change the rules, ToS has it covered ... apparently you need to read that portion again.

(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

Tell me what part of that do you not understand? Is the terminology not clear to you?


Ah, a personal insult. But it does little to explain how two things, that are different in definition are really just a matter of semantics. Link != picture.
Here is how you link things in html:
<a href="url">Link Text </a>
That doesn't even remotely resemble a picture.

You still don't get it.

(d) upload, post, hyperlink, or otherwise transmit Content that is invasive of one's privacy, libelous, obscene, personally threatening, tortuous, or ethnically, racially, or sexually objectionable.

Sink in yet?


When I first started posting here, I had a different screen name. I used that for about a month, before creating the Mistomeer account. Since then, I have never posted under another account, much less used another account to back myself up.

Let me respond with ... sure.