Conquer Club

But there's so much flaming and only one nightstrike, poor fellow. Give him a chance to get to these threads...

xelabale wrote:But there's so much flaming and only one nightstrike, poor fellow. Give him a chance to get to these threads...

True, but not true; if you look around, some threads are closed by mods other than strike.

Besides, if they actually acted on C&A's other than, "use foelist" or "stop reading the thread, then," they might not have to go through each thread... they could rely on C&A's telling them which threads need a looksee.

Too funny, we got two hypocrites, Woodruff and KLOBBER. These two boys are anti-FLAMERS, who FLAMED each other, until Night Strike had to close a thread down.

I guess the administrators had to protect poor KLOBBER from being eaten up alive by the extraordinary Chef, Woodruff.

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Too funny, we got two hypocrites, Woodruff and KLOBBER. These two boys are anti-FLAMERS, who FLAMED each other, until Night Strike had to close a thread down.

I guess the administrators had to protect poor KLOBBER from being eaten up alive by the extraordinary Chef, Woodruff.

I don't believe closing the thread was the answer to stop flaming; therefore, I don't believe the thread was closed over the flaming - it just made for a good excuse. Nope, the answer is to discipline flaming but allow others to discuss as they want. If I remember correctly, the thread in question was a poll hoping to bring back Flame Wars. Admin don't want to hear that, and probably doesn't like the evidence it gave that closing flame wars won't stop flaming... I believe that's why the thread was closed. Regardless, those flames weren't nearly as offensive as others you can glance around and see.

Btw, Stoneham, using the term "hypocrite" against others is insulting, thus a flame - whether you believe it's a VALID insult or not.

So I can't be insulting even if it's true? For example, if you smelled, would it be insulting to tell you?

What if your mama really is a hoe? What if I've actually got a very small penis? What if you really are a hypocrite?

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Too funny, we got two hypocrites, Woodruff and KLOBBER. These two boys are anti-FLAMERS, who FLAMED each other, until Night Strike had to close a thread down.

You can believe that if you like, however I did not receive any warning for flaming (or anything else from that thread), so your statement is not accurate. Night Strike's statement said there were anti-KLOBBER statements, but they were not mine. And if you read that thread, it's pretty clear whose they are (again, not mine).

stahrgazer wrote:

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Too funny, we got two hypocrites, Woodruff and KLOBBER. These two boys are anti-FLAMERS, who FLAMED each other, until Night Strike had to close a thread down.

Btw, Stoneham, using the term "hypocrite" against others is insulting, thus a flame - whether you believe it's a VALID insult or not.

See, this is why some sort of common sense has to be in play. Insulting someone in a very minor way is not a flame (by definition). Every insult is not a flame, otherwise the words would be interchangeable (which they are not). A flame is an egregious insult, intended to bring about "blazing combustion".

Just a thought, (before this thing gets locked), its not neccesary all the time to quote these quotes on top of each other. Some times there is two pages of quotes so that someone can type a 1 line response. If your post right after the person, maybe just type your one line.

Georgerx7di wrote:Just a thought, (before this thing gets locked), its not neccesary all the time to quote these quotes on top of each other. Some times there is two pages of quotes so that someone can type a 1 line response. If your post right after the person, maybe just type your one line.

Sorry. I like context! <laughing>

Seriously though...I've found that it does sometimes help to avoid misunderstandings, and it only requires someone to use the scrollbar...they don't have to re-read everything if they don't want to.

Woodruff wrote:

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Too funny, we got two hypocrites, Woodruff and KLOBBER. These two boys are anti-FLAMERS, who FLAMED each other, until Night Strike had to close a thread down.

stahrgazer wrote:Btw, Stoneham, using the term "hypocrite" against others is insulting, thus a flame - whether you believe it's a VALID insult or not.

See, this is why some sort of common sense has to be in play. Insulting someone in a very minor way is not a flame (by definition). Every insult is not a flame, otherwise the words would be interchangeable (which they are not). A flame is an egregious insult, intended to bring about "blazing combustion".

Good point, Woodruff; only, I read the thread and saw nothing any worse than that sort of mild insult; thus, if those were flames by Stoney's def. then what he said was also flame

korda1 wrote:A recomendation to make the gamming more respectfull. Only in a few days in playing here I have seen and read very inapropiate laguaje. There should be a code of conduct and insulting a player should be observed at least.

Penalties should apply, temporary suspension or banning for over spamming.

I have played other online games, and I think this is one addition that could improve here.

Thanx, P

You suck.

Woodruff wrote:

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Too funny, we got two hypocrites, Woodruff and KLOBBER. These two boys are anti-FLAMERS, who FLAMED each other, until Night Strike had to close a thread down.

You can believe that if you like, however I did not receive any warning for flaming (or anything else from that thread), so your statement is not accurate. Night Strike's statement said there were anti-KLOBBER statements, but they were not mine. And if you read that thread, it's pretty clear whose they are (again, not mine).

You're just illogical. Now really Woodruff, you were getting very "childish" [the word you love using against other posters] with your battle of wits against KLOBBER.

Now stop being such a hypocrite with your relentless stale replies to everyone. A true Vulcan would never be like you.

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Too funny, we got two hypocrites, Woodruff and KLOBBER. These two boys are anti-FLAMERS, who FLAMED each other, until Night Strike had to close a thread down.

You can believe that if you like, however I did not receive any warning for flaming (or anything else from that thread), so your statement is not accurate. Night Strike's statement said there were anti-KLOBBER statements, but they were not mine. And if you read that thread, it's pretty clear whose they are (again, not mine).

You're just illogical. Now really Woodruff, you were getting very "childish" [the word you love using against other posters] with your battle of wits against KLOBBER.

Now stop being such a hypocrite with your relentless stale replies to everyone. A true Vulcan would never be like you.

Then I suppose it's a good thing that I'm not a true Vulcan, nor have ever professed to want to be one.

And it's not illogical nor hypocritical to state that I did not receive a warning for flaming or anything else from that thread, nor is it illogical nor hypocritical to state that your statement was inaccurate (which it was).

You seem to have some sort of personal problem with me. I suggest you work on that problem.

Woody happens to be right in this case.

That thread was locked for flames against me, but I don't think that it was anything that Woody said. I also received no warning for flaming in that thread. On the contrary, I was the victim there.

BTW, Woody, how's Jim doing?

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:I guess the administrators had to protect poor KLOBBER from being eaten up alive by the extraordinary Chef, Woodruff.

I take offense at that comment -- Woody is a COOK, not a chef!

KLOBBER wrote:

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:I guess the administrators had to protect poor KLOBBER from being eaten up alive by the extraordinary Chef, Woodruff.

I take offense at that comment -- Woody is a COOK, not a chef!

Private.

So he is! My mistake. In any case, he was never a chef -- that term would have implied some authority over other cooks.

Hey, Woody -- congratulations on finally making it out of the kitchen! If you feel you need any pointers to improve your score even more, just follow my link, below. The information there is very appropriate for you, I think.

KLOBBER wrote:So he is! My mistake. In any case, he was never a chef -- that term would have implied some authority over other cooks.

Hey, Woody -- congratulations on finally making it out of the kitchen! If you feel you need any pointers to improve your score even more, just follow my link, below. The information there is very appropriate for you, I think.

Hey Woodruff, try taking KLOBBER's help. He really does care for his fellow ANTI-FLAMING-FLAMER!

I have just received confirmation that I am to enlisted as a Moderator

My First move will be to allow everyone else to be a moderator, thus making all things equal.

We will all collectively then have the power to deem what is, and what isn't a flame.

With these new powers we shall thus eventually reduce our ability to speak in a normal manner

Leading to the demise of all the forums, and all the people that reside within them.

Our amazing new powers will include the banning option, which will in turn lead to a banning frenzy, of which only one member will emerge triumphant. That person will then be deemed an uber mortal and will have to be content with only conversing with their self.

If you would like to be a moderator, please PM night strike now with a list of your demands

I see you finally achieved rem sleep

chaosfactor wrote:I have just received confirmation that I am to enlisted as a Moderator

My First move will be to allow everyone else to be a moderator, thus making all things equal.

We will all collectively then have the power to deem what is, and what isn't a flame.

With these new powers we shall thus eventually reduce our ability to speak in a normal manner

Leading to the demise of all the forums, and all the people that reside within them.

Our amazing new powers will include the banning option, which will in turn lead to a banning frenzy, of which only one member will emerge triumphant. That person will then be deemed an uber mortal and will have to be content with only conversing with their self.

If you would like to be a moderator, please PM night strike now with a list of your demands

This is a pretty good post, except for the following abysmal grammar: "...That person...conversing with their self...."

What school you went?

KLOBBER wrote:

chaosfactor wrote:I have just received confirmation that I am to enlisted as a Moderator

My First move will be to allow everyone else to be a moderator, thus making all things equal.

We will all collectively then have the power to deem what is, and what isn't a flame.

With these new powers we shall thus eventually reduce our ability to speak in a normal manner

Leading to the demise of all the forums, and all the people that reside within them.

Our amazing new powers will include the banning option, which will in turn lead to a banning frenzy, of which only one member will emerge triumphant. That person will then be deemed an uber mortal and will have to be content with only conversing with their self.

If you would like to be a moderator, please PM night strike now with a list of your demands

This is a pretty good post, except for the following abysmal grammar: "...That person...conversing with their self...."

What school you went?

I saw this topic, and noted that the latest post was by you. Your post is nothing short of irony, given the name of this topic. You should take your childish hole-picking into real life, where, without a doubt, you would get what's coming to you.

You little e-thug!

i say insult away, if a player sucks let him know why as colorfully as you can, and i think you guys really should lighten up on woodruff, hes doing the best he can with the limited resources at his disposal, some people still ride the short bus

And...scene.


--Andy