Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mag's
Rabble Inc. Rabble Alliance
21045
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 22:10:06 -
[301] - Quote
KickAss Tivianne wrote:I am saying Risk wise, it is not a risk. You are risking very little going after a freighter with more logi support. you throw more ships at the freighter (as is often done). You have no penalty for becoming criminal yet again. YOu loose your ship.. ehhh.. not a risk.
I love your bias view point, no matter how illogical it is.
So you wish to concentrate on risk. So how many freighter runs are there in a day? There has to be quite a lot right?
So before we start down this line of thought, how about you provide me with your idea of what that number may be? I'm thinking it's in the thousands, but please tell us your thoughts.
Destination SkillQueue:-
It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 22:23:08 -
[302] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Gank the bumping mach. If there's no risk or penalty for gankers taking out a freighter, then there's equally no risk or penalty for you to gank the bumping ship. Doesn't matter how many catalysts they undock when the freighter isn't being bumped anymore and warps away before they arrive.
There is no risk or penalty for the BUMPER. Penalties for gankers are such that none of them prevents them from being functional in hisec while keeping -10 sec status, hence, for all practical purposes irrelevant. Again, stop turning this topic into a discussion of freighter ganking and keep on the topic of freighter bumping in hisec. In terms of potential ideas - I'd be all for some form of anti-bumping stat change for freighters (increase their mass?) or a module which would allow for active players to get out of bumping situation without requiring webber alt. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16004
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 22:50:10 -
[303] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: There is no risk or penalty for the BUMPER.
Why would there be? It's an explicitly non hostile act.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17209
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 23:07:13 -
[304] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: There is no risk or penalty for the BUMPER. Penalties for gankers are such that none of them prevents them from being functional in hisec while keeping -10 sec status, hence, for all practical purposes irrelevant.
So gank the bumping ship.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 23:18:44 -
[305] - Quote
And again, no way to discuss it with you lot. Let's just play the semantics game all the time, right.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17211
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 23:30:03 -
[306] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:And again, no way to discuss it with you lot. Let's just play the semantics game all the time, right.
Whats to discuss? You refuse to listen to anyone and continually contradict yourself. We have the tools to deal with your issues already, many of them, if you refuse to use them its nobodies fault but your own.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16004
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 23:33:24 -
[307] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:And again, no way to discuss it with you lot.
What discussion is there to be had?
You want us to entertain your dishonest premise as though it were true. You want us to talk as though bumping were somehow "harassment" or "broken" or whatever other flimsy justification you care to use.
And since that is not true, I for one will not entertain that. There is no discussion to be had from a lie.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
887
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 23:43:45 -
[308] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:And again, no way to discuss it with you lot. Let's just play the semantics game all the time, right.
Whats to discuss? You refuse to listen to anyone and continually contradict yourself. We have the tools to deal with your issues already, many of them, if you refuse to use them its nobodies fault but your own. /thread
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
44047
|
Posted - 2016.01.30 23:56:55 -
[309] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:In terms of potential ideas - I'd be all for some form of anti-bumping stat change for freighters (increase their mass? althought that would screw up wh-s so probably no) or a module which would allow for active players to get out of bumping situation without requiring webber alt. Why do freighters deserve special protection that no other ship has?
If someone is going to invest from 1.2B (Freighter) to 7B (Jump Freighter) into just the ship, shouldn't they be prepared to be responsible for its safety?
Why should they have their risk reduced freely, when it can already be reduced easily, but at the same time the risk of bumpers (and gankers) should be increased?
If risk is going to be required for one side, then surely in a balanced system it should be required for the other side also; and all of us should be responsible to manage our own risks?
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:01:32 -
[310] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:And again, no way to discuss it with you lot. Let's just play the semantics game all the time, right.
Whats to discuss? You refuse to listen to anyone and continually contradict yourself. We have the tools to deal with your issues already, many of them, if you refuse to use them its nobodies fault but your own.
Actually it is you refusing to accept that, for some, going down the criminal route to prevent getting criminally killed in hisec makes no sense the same way that keeping from warping away just by magic of spaceship submarine collisions makes no sense. If you can't step away from your position, you can never understand what I'm talking about but that's fine. The future will tell which of us was right. |
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:08:39 -
[311] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:In terms of potential ideas - I'd be all for some form of anti-bumping stat change for freighters (increase their mass? althought that would screw up wh-s so probably no) or a module which would allow for active players to get out of bumping situation without requiring webber alt. Why do freighters deserve special protection that no other ship has? If someone is going to invest from 1.2B (Freighter) to 7B (Jump Freighter) into just the ship, shouldn't they be prepared to be responsible for its safety? Why should they have their risk reduced freely, when it can already be reduced easily, but at the same time the risk of bumpers (and gankers) should be increased? If risk is going to be required for one side, then surely in a balanced system it should be required for the other side also; and all of us should be responsible to manage our own risks?
Because removal of bumping, get ready for this revelation, would not remove the ability to gank those ships in any shape or form. I know, that's a hard concept to grasp.
Other reason is in the fact that bumping (w/o ganking the bumper) contains no risk or penalty for the bumper whatsoever and the only consequence is on a char which is (in vast majority of cases) a disposable alt in a noob ship which (quite often and that has been reported) gets recycled after a while. Hell you don't even need to use a paying account for that, just put eve on a VM or a laptop and use trial accounts. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
44047
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:15:36 -
[312] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Because removal of bumping, get ready for this revelation, would not remove the ability to gank those ships in any shape or form. I know, that's a hard concept to grasp. So if it will have no effect, why bother to remove it?
The reason is because you know it will have an effect and that is what this really wants. To think I don't grasp this is pretty insulting and not needed in this conversation.
The act of bumping a Freighter >150km off gate is used by gankers because sentry guns @167DPS each (and 4-6 guns per gate) will immediately engage, so the freighter is bumped away from the gate in order to eliminate the sentry guns from the equation.
That seems a perfectly reasonable action on the side of the gankers. It's the same thing any of us would do in that situation; and it is a consideration in lowsec pvp all the time; so gankers aren't unique in that regard.
As a Freighter and Jump Freighter pilot, I don't deserve special treatment to not be bumped. If I can't take care of my own safety, then I deserve to die and if gankers are able to manage their risks, just as anyone does, then good luck to them.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16006
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:19:27 -
[313] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Because removal of bumping, get ready for this revelation, would not remove the ability to gank those ships in any shape or form.
Then why change anything?
Oh, because you're intending it as a nerf to ganking despite your claims otherwise. That's why.
Quote: Other reason is in the fact that bumping (w/o ganking the bumper) contains no risk or penalty for the bumper whatsoever
Of course, because it's not hostile. Just like I have to do if I want a non hostile dead, you have to gank him if you want to bring risk into his gameplay.
Speaking of which, I think NPCs should camp gates and make it functionally impossible for unescorted freighters to get through, because otherwise freighters have no risk or penalty whatsoever.
If your argument is good for the goose, then it's good for the gander too, huh?
Quote: and the only consequence is on a char which is (in vast majority of cases) a disposable alt in a noob ship which (quite often and that has been reported) gets recycled after a while.
Remember when you got all butthurt when I pointed you that you frequently accuse lots of people of perma ban offenses without proof?
So now you're not only doubly a liar, you're also a hypocrite.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:26:50 -
[314] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Because removal of bumping, get ready for this revelation, would not remove the ability to gank those ships in any shape or form. I know, that's a hard concept to grasp. So if it will have no effect, why bother to remove it? The reason is because you know it will have an effect and that is what this really wants. To think I don't grasp this is pretty insulting and not needed in this conversation. The act of bumping a Freighter >150km off gate is used by gankers because sentry guns @167DPS each will immediately engage, so the freighter is bumped away from the gate in order to eliminate the sentry guns from the equation. That seems a perfectly reasonable action on the side of the gankers. It's the same thing any of us would do in that situation; and it is a consideration in lowsec pvp all the time; so gankers aren't unique in that regard. As a Freighter and Jump Freighter pilot, I don't deserve special treatment to not be bumped. If I can't take care of my own safety, then I deserve to die and if gankers are able to manage their risks, just as anyone does, then good luck to them.
Where did I say that it would have no effect. I said that it would not remove the ability to gank. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16006
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:29:55 -
[315] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: Where did I say that it would have no effect. I said that it would not remove the ability to gank.
Just like increasing Concord response times did not remove the ability to gank. Or making them invincible, or making them jam, or any of the other endless parade of nerfs to content in highsec for the last decade.
"just one more nerf"
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:32:51 -
[316] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: and the only consequence is on a char which is (in vast majority of cases) a disposable alt in a noob ship which (quite often and that has been reported) gets recycled after a while.
Remember when you got all butthurt when I pointed you that you frequently accuse lots of people of perma ban offenses without proof? So now you're not only doubly a liar, you're also a hypocrite.
As said previously, some of the people in AG have identified recycled ganker alts and reported them to CCP. Whose alts they were exactly, I have no idea nor do I claim to know, but ganker aggro alts they were because we saw them used in freighter ganks (and they were on km's). I think there even was a thread somewhere on forums where some of the names of chars were linked. What is a lie in my sentence, I don't know. What I do know is that you like calling people liers while you do lie for a fact (e.g. about me saying that death threats are ok). Also, I know I had you blocked back in the day for a reason, and you've reminded me to turn the hide posts option back on. Cheers. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16008
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:36:59 -
[317] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: As said previously, some of the people in AG have identified recycled ganker alts and reported them to CCP.
Yeah, if you people told me the sun would come up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty just to double check. I don't believe a thing you angsty, hateful carebears say.
Oh, and hiding my posts just makes it look like I hit the mark.
Bullseye.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
44049
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:37:10 -
[318] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Where did I say that it would have no effect. I said that it would not remove the ability to gank. Ok, sure.
Then why provide that as a response to the actual question I asked, which was:
Why do freighters deserve special protection that no other ship has? (and a couple of others, related to same that question)
So I take it your answer is that they deserve special treatment because ganking will still be possible (which makes no sense as a response); even though the post I asked the question about was about bumping, not ganking (since earlier it was claimed that this is not about ganking, so left that out of the issue).
So why do I as a Freighter pilot deserve special treatment to escape bumping, when I already have all the tools I need to prevent it from occuring in the first place. Why shouldn't I be responsible to manage the risks I face?
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4484
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:46:51 -
[319] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:In terms of potential ideas - I'd be all for some form of anti-bumping stat change for freighters (increase their mass? althought that would screw up wh-s so probably no) or a module which would allow for active players to get out of bumping situation without requiring webber alt. Why do freighters deserve special protection that no other ship has? If someone is going to invest from 1.2B (Freighter) to 7B (Jump Freighter) into just the ship, shouldn't they be prepared to be responsible for its safety? Why should they have their risk reduced freely, when it can already be reduced easily, but at the same time the risk of bumpers (and gankers) should be increased? If risk is going to be required for one side, then surely in a balanced system it should be required for the other side also; and all of us should be responsible to manage our own risks? Because removal of bumping, get ready for this revelation, would not remove the ability to gank those ships in any shape or form. I know, that's a hard concept to grasp.
Sure it would. People are not always online. So you get a juicy target and you start bumping and pinging for people to log on. You get a scan of the ship to see what the tank is, etc. and depending on the result you might have to keep pinging to get people in place.
Removing bumping would allow ships that are overloaded and not using all methods to reduce their risk would be less likely to be ganked.
Further, we all know that people who get ganked while autopiloting with 12 billion ISK worth of cargo would almost surely whine and complain on the forums about how unfair it is to gank a ship autopiloting with 12 billion worth of ISK.
In short, I consider you to be less than honest and a completely incompetent player who wants to enable other incompetent players.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4485
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:49:43 -
[320] - Quote
In my opinion....
I think CONCORD response times should be increased for 0.5 and 0.6 systems. For 0.5 make it 25 seconds and for 0.6 make it 20 seconds.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 00:56:52 -
[321] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: As said previously, some of the people in AG have identified recycled ganker alts and reported them to CCP.
Yeah, if you people told me the sun would come up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty just to double check. I don't believe a thing you angsty, hateful carebears say. Oh, and hiding my posts just makes it look like I hit the mark. Bullseye.
Whoops, I didn't block your posts. So, just to prove you, once again, wrong - one example which has been reported: https://zkillboard.com/character/95727954/ (-5.2 according to Eve Who). So, by now you've been proven to be:
a) liar b) denying facts (link above) c) prejudiced towards folks who don't subscribe to your worldview d) who knows what else
In a perfect world right about now you'd stop spewing your angsty and hateful retoric, but I doubt that will happen. Do carry on. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16010
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:01:50 -
[322] - Quote
Ah yes, because linking a random guy in Doomheim is proof of anything. (well, besides that anti ganking has admitted to mass reporting to try and get people banned)
Blow this more off topic, please. Oh, and please project some more accusations at me while you do it. In particular, the one about being prejudiced against anything you don't agree with gave me a good laugh.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
44052
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:01:51 -
[323] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: As said previously, some of the people in AG have identified recycled ganker alts and reported them to CCP.
Yeah, if you people told me the sun would come up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty just to double check. I don't believe a thing you angsty, hateful carebears say. Oh, and hiding my posts just makes it look like I hit the mark. Bullseye. Whoops, I didn't block your posts. So, just to prove you, once again, wrong - one example which has been reported: https://zkillboard.com/character/95727954/ (-5.2 according to Eve Who). So, by now you've been proven to be: a) liar b) denying facts (link above) c) prejudiced towards folks who don't subscribe to your worldview d) who knows what else In a perfect world right about now you'd stop spewing your angsty and hateful retoric, but I doubt that will happen. Do carry on. An Ibis is a gank ship?
The Providence whore kill seems to have been a war target of Faylee at the time as she was not CONCORDed..
What ganks did that alt do exactly?
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17218
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:03:59 -
[324] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Actually it is you refusing to accept that, for some, going down the criminal route to prevent getting criminally killed in hisec makes no sense the same way that keeping from warping away just by magic of spaceship submarine collisions makes no sense. If you can't step away from your position, you can never understand what I'm talking about but that's fine. The future will tell which of us was right.
So don't gank and use one of the other ways to avoid or fight your way out of this situation.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4486
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:04:22 -
[325] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: As said previously, some of the people in AG have identified recycled ganker alts and reported them to CCP.
Yeah, if you people told me the sun would come up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty just to double check. I don't believe a thing you angsty, hateful carebears say. Oh, and hiding my posts just makes it look like I hit the mark. Bullseye. Whoops, I didn't block your posts.
Do you routinely block those who disagree with you? If so that speaks volumes to your intellectual honesty...which IMO, is so low right now anybody considers you even remotely believable...well except maybe the incompetent and foolish.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:06:40 -
[326] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ah yes, because linking a random guy in Doomheim is proof of anything. (well, besides that anti ganking has admitted to mass reporting to try and get people banned)
Blow this more off topic, please. Oh, and please project some more accusations at me while you do it. In particular, the one about being prejudiced against anything you don't agree with gave me a good laugh.
Maybe you don't know how to use killboards, so I'll help you with it - that random guy has a freighter kill on board and was clearly used as an aggro alt (y'know as in 'disposable aggro alt') and then recycled. Just as I said.
As for prejudices, let me quote you:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:If you people told me the sun would come up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty just to double check. I don't believe a thing you angsty, hateful carebears say |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16012
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:08:46 -
[327] - Quote
So, our anti ganker friend there has just proven themselves to:
Be a liar.
Make up things when they have no facts.
Knowingly and deliberately abuse the petition system and encourage others to do the same.
Prejudiced towards anything that goes against the skewed, wrong, carebear vision of this game.
And who knows what else. Did I miss anything, guys?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4490
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:17:04 -
[328] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ah yes, because linking a random guy in Doomheim is proof of anything. (well, besides that anti ganking has admitted to mass reporting to try and get people banned)
Blow this more off topic, please. Oh, and please project some more accusations at me while you do it. In particular, the one about being prejudiced against anything you don't agree with gave me a good laugh. Maybe you don't know how to use killboards, so I'll help you with it - that random guy has a freighter kill on board and was clearly used as an aggro alt (y'know as in 'disposable aggro alt') and then recycled. Just as I said. As for prejudices, let me quote you: Kaarous Aldurald wrote:If you people told me the sun would come up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty just to double check. I don't believe a thing you angsty, hateful carebears say And yes, If I see someone trying to game the system by using mechanics which have been ruled as exploits, I report them. Every responsible citizen of New Eden should do the same.
That linked kill is not a gank. It looks like somebody did a suicide agro to keep the target scannable and vulnerable long enough for somebody who could kill the freighter legitimately (i.e. a war target) to arrive and kill said freighter.
Looks to me like a case of working as intended.
So Rhamnousia Nosferatu it looks like you are indeed intellectually bankrupt.
Go ahead and block me and anyone else, IDC your opinion is literally worthless.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
16018
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:20:30 -
[329] - Quote
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: As for prejudices, let me quote you:
And I'll say it again.
The anti ganking community are the most hateful, angsty, miserable bunch of miscreants I have ever laid eyes on. I have known at least a dozen of you to make repeated death threats against people I personally know, I have seen you spew the most hateful **** I've ever heard in local at people who aren't even gankers because they have negative sec status (it was a PL blops pilot going for a skillbook), I have seen you encourage people to use exploits that don't even work to get out of being ganked, and I have seen you encourage people to abuse the petition system to get losses reimbursed that don't qualify.
In short, you are all slime, and I don't believe a word that any of you say. If you people told me the sun was coming up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty to double check.
And as for bumping, there are a number of reasons why you will never get your way. Any one of them would work to stifle your thinly veiled attempt to kill more emergent gameplay, but all of them stand against you nonetheless.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Bunnyhopping days
141
|
Posted - 2016.01.31 01:20:50 -
[330] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote: As said previously, some of the people in AG have identified recycled ganker alts and reported them to CCP.
Yeah, if you people told me the sun would come up tomorrow, I would wake up at five thirty just to double check. I don't believe a thing you angsty, hateful carebears say. Oh, and hiding my posts just makes it look like I hit the mark. Bullseye. Whoops, I didn't block your posts. Do you routinely block those who disagree with you? If so that speaks volumes to your intellectual honesty...which IMO, is so low right now anybody considers you even remotely believable...well except maybe the incompetent and foolish.
In game I used to block those who spammed local. Lately I just stopped checking the local and removed the blocks. Not sure what intellectual honesty has to do with not wanting to have to sift through rubbish to get to occasional useful piece of information. If someone continually calls you a liar, hateful person, makes up stuff you never said, while continually derailing the discussion, I'd say that removing his posts can only make whole thread easier to read. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |