Some Guy

Ahem. I was trying to debate it, but the Mods couldn't be bothered to respond to my posts, prefering in Kotz's case to run off and in HTQ's case to make a wise ass comment and leave. Do you mean they were derailing a thread? OMG BAN PLZ~! Yes there was. I asked for an explantaion and none came beyond he derailed a thread last year, which I don't really think he did and people didn't like his politics and the way he explained them. If the basis for his banning was that he was abrasive and at times mean, then OK, but much of the board, Ill included should be banned. At what point was I bitching? I'm more pissed off about the Mods not answering my questions then Mike getting banned. I ask a question, a whol bunch of people who have nothing to add other then "GET OVER IT!" came in and derailed a thread that I was hopeful would produce some answers as to what goes through the heads of the Mods here. Why would the Mods be pissed off? If they can't handle people scrutinizing their decisions then they shouldn't have the job. I they can't handle things any better than calling the posters putrid piles of shit and closing the thread so that they can feel special because they had the last word then they don't deserve the job. I also find the fact the Ill called previous Mods here, like Zack and APO "useless" and then went on a rampage about the posters here rather detrimental to the their panhandling thread that's pinned above. Why the fuck would I give money to a board where the people who run it, not only don't respect me enough to answer simple questions but then call me a piece of shit for asking?

Guys, like I said. Then go.

Why? If you can't handle all the little bitches PMing you about people picking them like they're in pre-school then step down.

It's funny because you used to bitch when mods wouldn't explain themselves. He didn't know about the incredible stress and presure of the job back then.

That would be ridiculous, not childish. Whatever, it doen't really matter...

What were they? You might be challenging Alf and CWM for most gimmick names.

No, tantrum implies childish behavior. There is no reach at all.

You had ten gimmicks?

OK, the Mike thread was a flip out, this thread was more of a tantrum.

From reading through this thread, it would appear that Flik left on his own power. Ill flipped out, which is nothing new and said that he would ban him when Flik inevitably returns next week.

Wow. I see someone has an exceptionally high - and yet thoroughly incorrect - opinion of his own worth / relevance. How cute, they all talk like their leader too. I guess you weren't even reading that bitchfest of a thread where those complaining kept dropping my name as a co-conspirator/worthless moderator/baby killer/whatever for no reason. I remember the thread. That would be the one where I asked you to respond to me and rather than doing so, you ran off crying like a baby, leaving other people to do a poor job in your stead.

UGS ruled all!

Did Mike ever convince you to change your mind on an issue? I tend to doubt it, wouldn't that make you equally stubborn? Did you ever see the threads where people would keep pasting stuff and citing evidence and Mike would keep moving forward with his POV? I'm sure those threads exist. As for my stubbornness. I'm pretty sure i've admitted that I was wrong sometime. You may have and I'm sure there have been posts with facts or whatever refuting Mike's opinions that he didn't want to accept, just as I;m sure there are plenty that you don't want to. So, it was too hard for people to debate him but you didn't care? OK. Yeah.. I didn't take it seriously. So? So, why are you even posting here if you didn't care? Sure, but much more reasonable than "Bush=Hitler." Yeah, a lot of things are more reasonable than "Bush = Hitler". I don't recall Mike ever bringing any proof to that claim either. Other than being amazed that I missed some ad in Missouri. I think his arguement would be that both groups are extremely racist and evil. What's the problem with that statement? For one, it's not true and not possible. Judges, though a repeal of a law, do not make a new law starting the opposite. Massaschusetts says hello. 4 judges ordered the legislature to legalize gay marriage. That is making law. Even if he was wrong in his post, what would the beef with it be? It's not the least bit offensive.

So ? Doesn't stop 'the Mod in question' from reading the posts Mike made, not just in CE but in other forums too. I didn't see this post until now and I will respond to posts as I see them, so if I'm asking questions that have been answered then I apologize in advance. I'm sure you've read plenty of his posts. Have you ever warned him publically or privately? I don't doubt that if someone was annoyed enough about any specific things the Mod posted, that they would have complained to someone. As far as I know, nobody complained. If you see future posts that are 'warn worthing', feel free to complain about them. I'd rather just reply to the post than whine to a Mod or whine to a Mod about a Mod, which would get me nowhere anyway. I've see you repeatedly post about what a piece of shit Kevin Nash is and I see it as no different than Mike saying that Moore is one, especially in a topic about Moore, such as the Farenheit 9/11 thread. Was he ever warned? NY Untoucable I'll let the bolding and italizing show the contradiction in your post. GO reread my post, I read the thread and pointed to the posts that instigated what little flaming there was and it was not Mike. Just be honest, you wanted a big circle jerk about the film and when Mike came along it fucked up the happy-go-lucky Bush bashing thread you wanted. Mike went on to make several posts about the facts of the movie. You seem to forget that and want to invent a situation that never happened. If there were several threads about 9/11 in CE already why wasn't the one in the Movie Folder closed? It was certainly redundant and was bound to spark a debate, the very nature of Moore's film spurs debate. And none of the other people who posted in the Movie Folder thread made their opinion known in CE? You act as though the facts behind a suposed documentary are an after thought. You wantd a circle jerk, Mike showed up, and now oyu want to cry about it. Yup, comparing someone to Hitler is a sure way to maintain a peaceful thread. Ebert defended The Reagans and defended Moore's movie, both were left wing hatchet jobs. Someone else brought up Ebert, Mike gave an example of Ebert's bias and then called him a fucking moron. I see nothing wrong with that. Not having seen the movie doesn't mean that he can't comment on it. He obviously read up on it. Would his argument have been stronger had he seen the movie? Sure. Is it invalid because he didn't? No. Uhm... Mike made one post and then someone posted Ebert's defense of the facts of the film, thus turning the thread into a political debate. I'd repeat the "circle jerk" line but I think you get my point. It was perfectly OK for anybody not named MikeSC to make to make a post defending the movie but it's not for Mike to decry it? Hypocracy and horseshit. Sass Maybe you'll answer the question: Was he ever warned? Jobber That's a perfectly valid position to take on the issue. One can be ambivilant to the result but want to know why people think that certain people should be allowed to do certain things. Did he ever get an answer? PK So let Mike and that one other person have their fun and post in another thread. It's not that hard. If a thread being too long or difficult for you or anybody else to get into then pick another thread. No one said you had to even read it, well I suppose you do because your a Mod but that's your job. Banning someone who makes post by post rebuttals because you don't want to read them is pretty stupid. PK, I know you didn't ban him. You guys were afraid of Mike tearing you a new one? That's kind of sad. Kotz So in other words, "let's ban him to dumb down the folder because we can't keep up with him." As far as the Moore thread, I made my points already. Gee, I can't imagine why someone would be upset over the Mods running Marney out of here by editing her posts and generally fucking with her. No one has ever done that before, nope, never. Show me a majority of posters who wanted him gone. Poor baby. It seems that you don't like Mike more because he hurt your feelings than anything else he's done. So, Mike gets impuned for actuallt researching his posts, typing well, and having a good vobaculary. Yup, BAN PLZ~! Rob Did Mike ever convince you to change your mind on an issue? I tend to doubt it, wouldn't that make you equally stubborn? So, it was too hard for people to debate him but you didn't care? OK. Sure, but much more reasonable than "Bush=Hitler." What's the problem with that statement? Brian How long ago?

I saw this live so I'll vote for it. My seats sucked (I was almost behind the Titan Tron in the last row of the balcony at the Fleetcenter) but it was a cool finish. I still have the Road Dogg shirt I bought that night somewhere.

Because they nearly went bankrupt a few years ago. They need all they can get. Nobody buy comics anymore. Despite the massive success of the X-Men and Spider-Man movies is has meant little to the comic book sales. Partially true. The movies and merchandise sales have definitely helped Marvel's bottom line, but people still buy comics. They just don't go apeshit over every single new comic that comes out like they did in the 90s. Both companies shot their wads in the 90s. DC killed Superman and crippled Batman and Marvel had Magneto take out the adamantium (sp?) from Wolverine (did he ever get it back?). I collected from about 92-95 and lost interest, but my uncle who has been collecting since the 60s has dropped a lot of titles that he had every (or nearly every) issue of including X-Men and Batman. I'll take his word for it when he tells me that the comics are now poorly written and far, far fewer people buy them than ten years ago. Except that Star Wars started out as a movie and Star Trek as a TV show and they spawned comic books and novels that only the true die hards read. Comics started as comics and spawned movies (usually loosely) based on them. The logic, while faulty because it requires an imagination and reading to read comics and only requires the ability to sit still for 2 hours to watch a movie is that people will see the movie, love it and then buy the book. Sort of like how WWE uses it's TV to sell PPVs. The problem is that people, by and large just aren't interested in comics. The way I started collecting was a fluke. I started hearing about Superman dying on the news and then an issue of Guy Gardner, of all things caught my eye at Osco Drug. I bought it, read it, and was hooked. A few years later the love wore off as the price skyrocketed, although I still enjoy the movies and TV shows. I think it would actually be good for kids to read comic books. As I said it requires reading and imagination which are two things that kids are sorely lacking now.

I don't want to sounds like a dick but if you get a phone book and look under "Video Stores" and make a few phone calles you'll most likely beable to find them (non-chain stores are more likely to still have old tapes than Blockbuster, but they're worth a try as well). That's how I amassed most of my tape collection. Two VCRs and a fair amount of leg work, will usually get the job done. The only tapes i seek ot now are ones that I've searched for and could not find anywhere. By "anywhere" I mean within 15 miles of my house.

What were they? Besides all of them being failed gimmicks? BTW Tommy, you missed his brief stint as Dennis Knight in Southern Justice and Naked Mideon.

OK, I stand corrected. He would have fit in quite well with the lockerroom now that I think of it.

OK, then respond.

Notices that Kotz decided to no sell my posts rather than attempting to refute them and that the Mod who banned him has made only one post in this thread that said nothing.

Yeah, but they tend to announce matches than book the angle. The problem is that they and WWE do too many PPV. Most guys won't have a reasdy made angle coming off every PPV, so if they had two months to book feuds things would make more sense. Thing(s) TNA does right: The X Division beign heavily featured on Impact. Other than the X Division they have nothing going for them.

The Farenheit 9/11 Thread Mike's first post in the thread: This is what he was responding to: Mike's post was clearly in relation to the movie. Skip ahead: Mike responding to two post of Rober Ebert's feelings on the film: Pointing out that Ebert is a hypocrite and calling him, not a poster a "fucking moron" saw this get posted by Zsasz: Which would be the flame thrown in thread. What's Mike's response you ask? Maybe a vicisous and invective flame? Let's see... Which was imediately followed by this post from Renegade: Mike then called him a "dolt," an insult for severe that I'm sure poor Renegade didn't sleep for weeks because he was so upset. Yup, Mike single-handely turned that thread into a flame war. EDIT: Unless it was this thread about the movie, in which case my point is proven by Mike's first post: Farenheit 9/11 trailer, now available...

I think the sheer idiocy of tolerating the whole "Islam is nothing more than a death cult." thing is pretty bad, on par with that guy who posted all the good things Hitler did and was swiftly axed. I'll agree that that shit is over the line and an incorrect overgeneralization. Was he ever warned about it?

I've not seen the thread, but Moore's movie was political film, full of lies and when discussing a film one usually talks about the content. What evidence? Give one example that is not politically debatable? Hell, give me one example of anytime you've admitted to being wrong in the CE folder. Was he ever warned? I would presume not, because he's been doing the same thing since this place started. The only thing that's changed is the politcial affiliation of the mods. If he was warned, never changed, and was never punished then who's fault is that? I would argue both Mike and the Mods. Read: You disagreed with him politically and couldn't beat him in a deabte, because you are by and large ingorant of politics. Tyler and Jobber make quality posts in CE, you, not so much. Was Mike overbearing? Yes. Was he offensive? Not really. Was he wrong factually on most anything he said? No. I know who banned him and I can't see a single reason why. They would make nearly identical posts in the TNA folder, usually with Mike posting first and the Mod in question never posted in CE that I saw. The Mod, who I like and who's wrestling knoweldge I respect has made "warn worthing" posts in the past. I can understand Anglesault's banning and holding up the ban. He was obnoxious in just about every way. Mike posted in two folders for the most part, CE where there is (or at least was a disclaimer) and TNA, where only 4 people post. You've cited one thread that had to been about a year ago. Give me a good reason why he was banned?