Doing things badly.

And doing things differently than you would do them.

They are two very different things.

Get used to it.

In this case they are simply doing things badly sir. It's not just doing things differently than Kai would do.

C'mon, dude. Even your fanboyish self-induced ignorance can't contend with this kind of blatant truth. Look, Konidias agreed. Doesn't that mean you have to as well?

I personally thinks they have enforced them so much that you cant tell other people your oppinion's on the forum.

I don't mean to be mean but why are you acting like a mod?. No offence your hubby is staff (globall) not you so I don't think you have some authority over this.. unless you are a mod for some bizzarr reason i stand mistaken.

We can tell each other our opinions just fine. Always have been able to.

Example: It is my opinion that you need to back off.

Uh, she's a supermod, dude.

Not anymore, get a reality man.

In looking in all the threads on this board....I see lots of opinions, and they are still there
You know, I dont walk in MG's shadow, nothing I do has anything to do with his global job.....

So if I said something like -FOR EXAMPLE!!@#!#!@$- "Emily sucks and needs to get a life" it would be 100% fine because it's my opinion?

Perhaps you should learn to read before you voice your opinion. :rolleyes:
I think that would probably depend on context and the timing of the comment.

O-god. I don't care anymore it's useless these mod positions.

I agree that there is no use as long as they continue to be corrupt.

Haha. <--That's spam ^^
Anyways hrmmm enforce the rules
:rolleyes:

How can they enforce the rules when they don't have a clear understanding of them and why they were written?

Re-write them?

If they re-wrote them they would base it off of what THEY think is best, not what WE think is best.

Yeah I know what it means, It has several meanings.

If you look a little harder, I'm sure you'll find the appropiate one, and it isn't "Mine"

Oh, and no, but I did use JEDI to double check.

There is a difference between inforcing rules and inforcing rules properly.

To you guys talking about avatars, the maxium is 65 x 65 pixels ;O

Anyways, i think that the supermods is closing/deleting/trashcanning too many threads that could have been saved by deleting some posts and giving the posters a warning ;O (and end up banning them anyways, bleh)

No your not dont lie...

I don't have to follow the crowd, I never have before. and i'm not now.

No, that wouldn't be fine. That would be flaming.

Maybe, maybe not. Your point was still moot and useless.

Right :)

But in the event the discussion was not done, and a thread is closed, no one can discuss that topic in a thread with a name related to that topic.

Thats where it gets hard and people would have to spam a diffrent thread or make a simply usless titlename to draw attention to a diffrent post, thus my point.

Jaffer you have been told more than once , she has nothing to do with what I do and if you persist in this course of action you will find yourself in a position to either prove it or be in a lot of hot water over what your saying. I don't take kindly to false accusations or insinuations , if you have proof of something then take it to Stephane, if not then I strongly suggest you knock it off.

I would just like to tell everyone that the two new supermods have banned only one person since they have been hired; it was an account that should not have gotten access to the forums (Admin-Playerworld72 or something)

So yea, there is not corruption with the banning thing or whatever you guys are talking about.

Lyndzey there isn't any corruption going on, you know that, just rule enforcement they aren't used to getting.

Yes, I hope others will soon see that. Apparently they are still in belief that they will be banned by someone who has never banned a person before just because they post one bad thing about them.

Just like on the Game in order to get banned you have to show a patteren of abuse unless you are hacking and these Forums are no different. *shrugs*

...the heck? People aren't allowed to make accusations anymore? Was that in effect when you were tirelessly accusing me of corruption, or does it only apply to you and your wife?

Hahaha. I guess you think it means 'hate', right?

Guess? No, I know it does.

I know your going to attempt to try to tell me it doesn't, but that'll be like telling me 'hate' doesn't mean 'hate'.

Anyway, have you nothing better to do than try and argue?

Your actions may not have been as severe when they accused you, but you have taken action before. And that was your choice, this is theirs.

^_^

I think you should try learning something about the language before you argue about it. Translation isn't as simple as you think - you can't plug a word into a dictionary and expect to be given a perfect analogue. And in your case, the mistake is really quite amusing.

Considering the fact that you are currently arguing with me:

1) I don't think the word 'try' is applicable.
2) You're in no situation to criticise :)

Not quite the same situation. After they had been harassing me for almost a year, I told them to stop raising such issues in threads where they were not relevant. I wouldn't have objected if they discussed them in a thread made specifically for evaluating my performance.

In any case, you're missing the point. I'm not saying that they shouldn't take action. I'm saying that, if the following are true:

1) They consider such accusations unacceptable.
2) They persistently made them in the past.

Then they are corrupt - having different standards for themselves and others.

I didn't put a word in the dictionary, I asked someone that does know about the language, I also asked him again to double check, there isn't any mistake.


And I'm defending myself against some fool that probably isn't anything special offline, so he starts arguments online to make himself feel better, you started the argument, admit it or not.

Either he doesn't know as much as he claims or he wanted to make you look even stupider than normal. Not that I would fault him for that :)

Haha, I love this argument. All I have to do is change a few words around, and:

I'm defending myself against some fool that isn't anything special online, so he assumes that his opponents are inferior offline to make himself feel better.

:)

I merely asked about your name. You were the one that introduced the hostilities.

I don't think your fooling anyone but yourself (And I dont mean the name thing), and if you are, shame on them.

Sorry, but I really can't be bothered continuing with this, find someone else to make you feel good.

It says making a thread about it, not discussing the same or a similar topic.
My problem is not with rule enforcement. That's the entire problem Lyndzey. In some cases rules that should be enforced are not, and in other cases rules that don't apply are being enforced. And in still others threads are being closed that should not be closed. If these activities would simply STOP, then I'd shut up and not say anything else. I'm over the fact that none of them deserve their positions. I don't care about that at all now. My problem is with poor moderation, and if I must I'll sit here for two hours and pull example after example.

Anyway, since I don't quite feel like being banned at this time, I'm gonna stop as far as posting about it. Unixmad seems to be pretty ticked. We'll just have to see if the mods change their ways I guess.

What are you talking about?