Guest Flyboy Posted January 17, 2004 Report Posted January 17, 2004 Guys, guys. It's "I/we COULDN'T care less...". Carry on.
Guest ABOBO Posted January 17, 2004 Report Posted January 17, 2004 It's Dames! UH OH. ABOBO GO NOW FAST.
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Posted January 17, 2004 Report Posted January 17, 2004 my brain has turned to mush....its oozing out my ears, You're all on fucking drugs. Drugs bad ...right, ABOBOBO?
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Posted January 17, 2004 Report Posted January 17, 2004 Drugs sometimes beneficial. Fuck, not in this case. I feel bad for Dames. Having to babysit all y'all. This is beyond mockery, you're all going insane.
BX Posted January 17, 2004 Report Posted January 17, 2004 If only I had the constant companionship of this website to guide me like a beacon. I should stay on TSM 24/7 like the Bankster. Then I would find clarity and stability. Yea Verily.
Sass Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 I've read enough. Both Johnson and CWM have overreacted in this whole affair and what I see is each side grasping at straws by trying to make the other look bad. But what sets the two of you apart is that you, Johnson, managed to make snide remarks about CWM's problems with alcohol in more than one thread and did not keep your opinions contained in one thread but rather brought them over into several threads which CWM pointed out in another thread and that is trolling. You were warned to stop stirring up trouble at TSM by the mods here before Johnson when Dames allowed you back into the board after the misunderstanding with Banky's account went down. You broke your compromise to not stir up trouble by bringing up CWM's alcoholism more than once in both the Hardcore Discussion and General Chat folders. Starting this thread in the hopes of getting Mr.Rant and FrigidSoul banned was a mistake as I see nothing ban worthy with what either person said since it is clear that both posters were making their comments in jest, not in a serious manner that would pose a thread to your well being. Again, you were grasping at straws with the topic of this thread and instead of seeing both Mr.Rant and FrigidSoul banned, you have managed to bring yourself into the spotlight with this thread and put yourself into question as to whether or not you should be banned yourself. Your argument has no legs to stand on, albeit Mr.Rant and FrigidSoul's comments were not made the best of taste. The comments made by you to CWM about his problems with alcohol are what I find more damning than Mr.Rant and FrigidSoul talking about a Grateful dead t-shirt or FrigidSoul talking about taking a piss on your grave when you are in no way or shape in the way of harm from either poster. In your defense Johnson, CWM should have ignored your comments. But it was clear you were just trying to get a rise out of him because otherwise you would have never brought up his alcoholism in the first place in your posts. I admit that it seemed like CWM has been on something of a witch hunt for you and I did not find it to be in his best interest. But you did yourself no favors Johnson by bringing up CWM's alcoholism in more than one of your posts as well as requesting the ban of two posters who did nothing, in my mind, that would constitute such an action. Initially when I saw this thread, I was not crazy about issuing a banning to either party involved in this thread because I did not see much of an offense that would warrant such an action. But after seeing the comments made by you to CWM in more than one thread about his problems with alcoholism and just general sniping of him in those threads you are, effective immediately, banned from TSM. To CWM, my parting words to you are to not let someone like Johnson get under your skin so easily next time and to let them dig their own graves instead of giving them more ammo to use against you.
Edwin MacPhisto Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 When did the whole "death threats bannable/taking internet message boards really seriously" thing make its way into the rules? It seems like such a random thing to prohibit since any big-time nuisance would fall under trolling anyway.
Lil' Bitch Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 I'd gladly sacrifice myself to get rid of Johnson. That was a heroic offer, but I don't want to see that happen. EDIT: Oh Johnson got banned anyway.
HarleyQuinn Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 Sass = Impartial Justice...next to Dames. Beware Dames, Sass is coming for ya Edited for clarity
Sass Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 When did the whole "death threats bannable/taking internet message boards really seriously" thing make its way into the rules? It seems like such a random thing to prohibit since any big-time nuisance would fall under trolling anyway. I wish I had an answer for you but the "death" rule came into play before I became a mod so perhaps Dames or someone else would have an answer for you.
treble Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 Fuck this. You just sucked half the fun out of this board.
Guest Salacious Crumb Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 When did the whole "death threats bannable/taking internet message boards really seriously" thing make its way into the rules? It seems like such a random thing to prohibit since any big-time nuisance would fall under trolling anyway. TheGame's banning I think was the first time the rule came into play.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 I'm quite upset this didn't end in the banning of Rant.
Damaramu Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 When did the whole "death threats bannable/taking internet message boards really seriously" thing make its way into the rules? It seems like such a random thing to prohibit since any big-time nuisance would fall under trolling anyway. It was an unwritten rule for a while. Then Sakura wished death on me and Dr.Tom banned her. She complained to Dames that she didn't understand the rule so he let her back in and then clearly put it in the rules so that nobody can ever use that excuse again. That's how it became official.
Highland Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 I actually objected to Game's reasons for being banned until I read Sass' posts on how he (Game) was like on other boards.
Guest Danny Dubya v 2.0 Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 It's way too easy to offend people these days. When we're all wished death on in person, noone gives a shit. "I WISH YOU'D FUCKING DIE YOU ASSHOLE!"... ... ... oh, they're just mad and it means nothing. They'll get over themselves soon. Not on a message board. Oh not ever.
Guest cobainwasmurdered Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 The reason death threats is a bannable offense isn't because it upsets people it's because if something were to happen to the recipent of the death threat, Dames could concievably get in trouble.
Guest HungryJack Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 And people are pussies. Don't forget that. The fact that anyone would be frightened of someone on a messageboard is ridiculous.
MrRant Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 I'm quite upset this didn't end in the banning of Rant. You love me.
Papacita Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 The reason death threats is a bannable offense isn't because it upsets people it's because if something were to happen to the recipent of the death threat, Dames could concievably get in trouble. I don't know about that. Of the people that were banned for wishing death on another person, I doubt any of them could've been interpreted as credible threats to the recipient, and even if the threats were credible, unless Dames or one of the mods reported the threat to authorities, I can't see how simply banning the person in question would make him any less liable if the poster did make good on his threat. I'd think the rule has more to do with keeping posters from ruining other posters' enjoyment of the board than any kind of safety issue, and you probably could chalk that up to people being a little too sensitive.
Guest cobainwasmurdered Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 there's that too. but just cause we don't think something is credible doesn't mean it isn't. no one thought Game2705 would stalk Loss but he did. we don't know what people will and will not do.
Papacita Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 Game stalked Loss??? If you don't mind me asking, what was that all about? I see where you're coming from, but short of reporting every single threat to the police (which isn't really the most practical thing to do, since a lot of what people say on here is bullshit), there's really not much Dames can do. Whether he's banned or not, he'll make good on the threat if he wants to, and I really don't see how Dames could be held responsible either way, because it's too hard to predict how people are gonna act.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 You people take your message boarding seriously.
Guest Krazy Karter Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 The reason death threats is a bannable offense isn't because it upsets people it's because if something were to happen to the recipent of the death threat, Dames could concievably get in trouble. That's a new one.
Papacita Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 You people take your message boarding seriously. *Threatens Squirtle* You know I'm just playing!
Golgo 13 Posted January 18, 2004 Report Posted January 18, 2004 Game stalked Loss??? If you don't mind me asking, what was that all about? It's all explained here.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now