Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 42 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
34
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 02:58:00 -
[691] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:
Also, the whole 'not shooting newbs in newb ships' thing irks me. What about that 3 day old cyno alt in lowsec? Don't tell me that's a newb that I can't shoot or I'm done.
You know better than to make yourself look like a moron with that scenario, Remiel. Like I said way back on page 2. People start to put out all kinds of bizzaro outlier situations to try and justify their fear of CCP doing to them what CCP is doing to the people that deserve it. You know this. You know that CCP is fine with you violencing newb ships as soon as they jump through the starter system gate. Or finish the beginner tutorials. Or whatever that very tiny exception says. You know this. So why on God's green earth do you people keep spouting stuff like what I quoted above? Why are you trying to muddy the already cloudy water? It males you look like you are trying to distract attention from something that you don't want common sense people to notice. Falcon stated simply and effectively what to do. He didn't say stay away from carebears. He didn't say to stop bumping the **** out of freighters. He said don't take the game into the real world. You, of all people, should understand the consequences of that. So give it a rest people. Stop being obtuse and willfully ignorant of what CCP is stating when you know full well where the fuzzy gray line is. If you honestly can't figure it out, then you are too stupid to be a part of this community anyway and deserve the ban you will eventually get. Mr Epeen I know. This is exactly what I'm saying, I agree with you. There cannot be a specific rule blanket banning the shooting of newbies for THAT EXACT REASON. I will shoot a cyno alt, but I won't go into a starter system and gank a Velator for easy killboard padding. I'm not trying to say, "there needs to be a clear definition of which noob ships we can and cannot kill", I'm saying exactly what you are. No obtusity intended. I'm sorry if I didn't communicate this as clearly as I could have, but, I am autistic and sometimes these kinds of complex nuanced communications are a bit out of my league.
Yup. As soon as they draw a real line every douche in the game will be waiting on the other side of it and use it as the excuse to not be banned. Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
|
Hannibal Crusoe
New Order Logistics CODE.
119
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:04:00 -
[692] - Quote
In the course of non- consensual interaction with high sec players sometimes a golden opportunity occurs. They are usually upset about the hard work that you have hindered in some way. They place a value of time or real life money on it. This in my opinion is very unhealthy. The time in game to plex, or the real money you give to CCP is to access the server. The experience is really the only thing we own. If mining to get more mining ships, knowing you can loose those ships makes you happy. Then that is great. In explaining this sometimes you find that you have interacted with them more than anyone else has in game.
The golden opportunity is to facilitate that eye opening experience. Sometimes tears are involved. I can see how some could view this as harrasment.
But some of us feel High Sec is worth fighting for. Ride a white mare in the footsteps of dawn |
Clara Pond
Never Not Snazzy
101
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:07:00 -
[693] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Stop being obtuse and willfully ignorant of what CCP is stating when you know full well where the fuzzy gray line is.
So tell me, is being a member of CODE crossing the line? Is being in an ingame chat channel with other people who are conducting a bonus room, even though I am not, crossing the line? Is Space Court crossing the line? Are RL threats and doxxing crossing the line?
There is nothing obtuse or wilfully ignorant about being confused about CCPs seemingly arbitrary application of their EULA/TOS. |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
6018
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:09:00 -
[694] - Quote
Hannibal Crusoe wrote:
But some of us feel High Sec is worth fighting for hiding in for cheap kills.
CODE! LOL!
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
6018
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:15:00 -
[695] - Quote
Clara Pond wrote:
There is nothing obtuse or wilfully ignorant about being confused about CCPs seemingly arbitrary application of their EULA/TOS.
Underlined the important part.
Just because you are ignorant of their reasons, as you should be*, doesn't mean the CCP hasn't got all the evidence needed to make the decisions it has.
*no one gives security info away to random customers.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |
Clara Pond
Never Not Snazzy
101
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:17:00 -
[696] - Quote
And a cherry picked response is exactly what I expected. |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
6018
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:22:00 -
[697] - Quote
Clara Pond wrote:And a cherry picked response is exactly what I expected.
You should feel blessed that I even deigned to acknowledge your post, peon.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4912
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:26:00 -
[698] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Clara Pond wrote:And a cherry picked response is exactly what I expected. You should feel blessed that I even deigned to acknowledge your post, peon. Mr Epeen
I do wonder sometimes if you aren't a dev with an agenda posting on his 'main' just so you can vent on players like this without repercussions from your employers.
I wonder it, but I won't assert it.
Carry on. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
4843
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:37:00 -
[699] - Quote
. =][= |
Clara Pond
Never Not Snazzy
101
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:43:00 -
[700] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Clara Pond wrote:And a cherry picked response is exactly what I expected. You should feel blessed that I even deigned to acknowledge your post, peon. Mr Epeen
That's a personal attack. |
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4912
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 04:00:00 -
[701] - Quote
I will say this much.
I don't believe that these bans have gone out without good reason. I've only indulged the possibility for the sake of discussion. Thing is, people aren't getting banned just because they're in a certain crowd, because I can still see a few of those crowd online right now, some of whom participated in the bonus room to a degree.
I don't see a pattern to these bans, I don't see an agenda to these bans. There are plenty of gankers still ganking. There are plenty of scammers still scamming. EVE, for now, is still EVE.
What I do believe is that the people who got banned know exactly what they did or didn't do for it, and they have a petition system by which to go through to appeal it.
My problem with all of this, as stated, is that there are people who have demonstrably committed out-of-game harassment of EVE players and are still playing.
Which beggarss the question, beliefs aside, can we really know for sure that anyone is safe from arbitrary banning or actual RL harassment while they're playing the game? GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Lady Areola Fappington
2210
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 04:31:00 -
[702] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:I will say this much.
I don't believe that these bans have gone out without good reason. I've only indulged the possibility for the sake of discussion. Thing is, people aren't getting banned just because they're in a certain crowd, because I can still see a few of those crowd online right now, some of whom participated in the bonus room to a degree.
I don't see a pattern to these bans, I don't see an agenda to these bans. There are plenty of gankers still ganking. There are plenty of scammers still scamming. EVE, for now, is still EVE.
What I do believe is that the people who got banned know exactly what they did or didn't do for it, and they have a petition system by which to go through to appeal it.
My problem with all of this, as stated, is that there are people who have demonstrably committed out-of-game harassment of EVE players and are still playing.
Which beggarss the question, beliefs aside, can we really know for sure that anyone is safe from arbitrary banning or actual RL harassment while they're playing the game?
Knowing the people involved, I'm absolutely positive there was some grey area "skirting" of the rules, and it likely did step over the line.
I have noticed a degree of bias though, when it comes to CCP taking action on harassment. Part of that is the "bad guys" fault, too...we tend to laugh at insults and such that the typical carebear would be all over reporting. Even with that, though, it seems pretty easy to get away with harassing a "bad guy", all by writing it off by "I was upset!"
I really wish CCP would put it's foot down on all that BS, though. Getting blown up doesn't give you license to whip out RL threats and disgusting insults. Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name. The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco De Mayo. Anytime minutes donGÇÖt let you call the future. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
11446
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 05:27:00 -
[703] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:As an aside. Does anyone else get the impression that every morning deep in the little bee inner sanctum there's a lotto to see who has to play the forum idiot that day? I do. And on top of that, I think they rigged it so James keeps winning that honor. Because...dude...your posting. It's like the surgeon accidentally removed the entire part of your brain that covers cognitive functions. Mr Epeen I'm tickled pink that you got all creative about how much you dislike my posting. Enjoying the rain today? ;) |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
11446
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 05:28:00 -
[704] - Quote
Clara Pond wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Clara Pond wrote:And a cherry picked response is exactly what I expected. You should feel blessed that I even deigned to acknowledge your post, peon. Mr Epeen That's a personal attack. That's the best kind of attack. Enjoying the rain today? ;) |
Mira Robinson
126
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:01:00 -
[705] - Quote
How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:
Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.
If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.
If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game. Earlier today, the Dixon Mining Guild and the Butz Manufacturing Corporation formed a coalition.
It's hard to tell if there is a light at the end of the tunnel for the Dixon-Butz Alliance. |
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
12073
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:06:00 -
[706] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Of course, it is easier to whine about the 'grey areas' then to actually help CCP remove them. It also seems that it's very easy to whine about being banned rather than using a shred of common sense to maintain the most basic level of decency and etiquette when interacting with people in EVE. Yes, EVE is designed to be harsh and unforgiving, but there's a blatant difference between that and outright harassment. Those people who're saying that the lines are blurred and they don't understand the definition of harassment are looking for clarification so that they know how much they can bend the rules and push the boundaries before we'll take action, with a view to using any statement we make as ammunition for an appeal should they fall foul of the rules and be slapped with account action. Sorry, but my original statement still stands. CCP will use best judgement on a case by case basis to ensure that real life harassment is kept out of EVE Online.
It's good that you provided any response at all to the discussion, but out of all the posts with questions and requesting clarification you've decided to respond to a superficial one-liner about whining.
If all legal systems on the planet used the justification you've provided here in order to make laws as ambiguous and undecipherable as possible then we would truly be living under arbitrary justice systems where both oppression and crime are rampant. Clarification doesn't preclude justice or encourage crime. Quite the opposite. Clarification provides a consistent set of rules by which GMs can operate. Consistency doesn't hamstring the enforcers, it helps them execute the law swiftly and decisively.
I also find it curious that your opinion of your own userbase is that we all exist to circumvent your laws.
Everyone in thread can wax poetic on the evils of TS scamming, but the reality is that some of the players banned had nothing to do with Bonus Room scams, extracting tears from other players (a completely valid pasttime, btw), or any other sort of griefing.
Some real concerns were posted in thread (see below), and I wonder if it's any priority at all to provide an official response.
Rabe Raptor wrote:You can be happy all you want for some bonus room dudes getting banned; I imagine a lot of people wanted them gone. The measure of fuss that's going on over the blanket bans for "real life harassment" is that many of the players who were banned had nothing to do with it and were banned anyways (without warning).
Rabe Raptor wrote:
Actually the Teamspeak in question is a hangout for all sorts of players, many who have nothing to do with any of the bonus room or CODE or any of it. Some random null guys got banned, some random FW guys got banned.. lol
CCP won't respond to it either.
Stop tolling me. Im jnot drunk...-áIm going to stop posti --Pepper the Penguin ~ And when the seasons change, will you stand by me? ~ |
Lady Areola Fappington
2210
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:15:00 -
[707] - Quote
Mira Robinson wrote:How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:
Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.
If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.
If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game.
I've always been an advocate of keeping things classy, no matter what it is you're doing in EVE.
Sadly, some people just don't understand what being classy means, on any side of the "divide". Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name. The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco De Mayo. Anytime minutes donGÇÖt let you call the future. |
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
12073
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:16:00 -
[708] - Quote
LUMINOUS SPIRIT wrote: Change: introduce even lower threshold for bans due to griefing Result: Healthier gaming experience in high-sec for players
Stuff like bumping orca's/freighters/miners for hours straight Stuff like shooting new players in velators repeatedly just for lols Stuff like deliberately stealing mission items from players' missions
All of this and more is griefing. All of this must end.
I've noticed your short sighted celebration of the CCP decisions which this thread was created for. You seem to be glossing over the still-standing CCP position that you're not supposed to feel safe in New Eden and that bumping is perfectly acceptable.
I imagine you will, however, continue to request and wish for changes to EVE that would essentially destroy its core characteristics.
Stop tolling me. Im jnot drunk...-áIm going to stop posti --Pepper the Penguin ~ And when the seasons change, will you stand by me? ~ |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4922
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:17:00 -
[709] - Quote
Mira Robinson wrote:How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:
Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.
If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.
If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game.
Why is it only the people doing the exploding who need to be told to keep it in game? GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Mira Robinson
126
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:22:00 -
[710] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Mira Robinson wrote:How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:
Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.
If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.
If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game. Why is it only the people doing the exploding who need to be told to keep it in game? Poorly worded. Keep it in game no matter what side of the wreck you're on.
But it's aimed more towards gankers because they do the tear-harvesting. Earlier today, the Dixon Mining Guild and the Butz Manufacturing Corporation formed a coalition.
It's hard to tell if there is a light at the end of the tunnel for the Dixon-Butz Alliance. |
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4922
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:25:00 -
[711] - Quote
Mira Robinson wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Mira Robinson wrote:How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:
Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.
If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.
If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game. Why is it only the people doing the exploding who need to be told to keep it in game? Poorly worded. Keep it in game no matter what side of the wreck you're on. But it's aimed more towards gankers because they do the tear-harvesting.
What's good for one is good for all. You can't single out a group of people based on their choice of legitimate in-game behaviour. It doesn't matter if one does more 'tear harvesting' than another, that's not the point. Because on the other side, it's the tears themselves that often trigger the emotional urges that lead to the vilest forms of real life harassment. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Mira Robinson
126
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:26:00 -
[712] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Mira Robinson wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Mira Robinson wrote:How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:
Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.
If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.
If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game. Why is it only the people doing the exploding who need to be told to keep it in game? Poorly worded. Keep it in game no matter what side of the wreck you're on. But it's aimed more towards gankers because they do the tear-harvesting. What's good for one is good for all. You can't single out a group of people based on their choice of legitimate in-game behaviour. Hey genius, once you get them on TeamSpeak, it's not in-game behavior anymore, is it? Earlier today, the Dixon Mining Guild and the Butz Manufacturing Corporation formed a coalition.
It's hard to tell if there is a light at the end of the tunnel for the Dixon-Butz Alliance. |
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
12073
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:27:00 -
[713] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote: There are other activities that are probably not ok. Activities tinged with sadism. Like using the sunk cost fallacy to convince a player to lose all their sp. That stuff can be avoided with common sense, and common decency.
Since you've decided to reopen this can of worms, please explain how a grown adult who's has voluntarily surrendered $30 worth of things is subject to "sunk cost" ransoming? Was this player under some impression that he was investing in a legitimate fund with guaranteed profit?
Maybe we can consult the opinion of the victim of so-called "sadism" as you put it.
In Sohkar's own words:
Quote:He never petitioned Erotica 1, does not believe Erotica 1 should be banned, and comes out and says that he should technically be banned for the things he said himself while raging at E1 and his associates if the recording is considered legit evidence for TOS violations.
Sohkar rejects the claims that he was tortured. He got angry. He points out that after Ripard's blog post, he tried to reach out and talk to Ripard and sent him an eve-mail. Ripard has still not responded to him after several days.
What you've incorrectly labeled as sadism is, in fact, PVP exploitation that is mandated by CCP's own official statements littered everywhere on the forums.
Stop tolling me. Im jnot drunk...-áIm going to stop posti --Pepper the Penguin ~ And when the seasons change, will you stand by me? ~ |
Lady Areola Fappington
2210
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:30:00 -
[714] - Quote
Mira Robinson wrote: Poorly worded. Keep it in game no matter what side of the wreck you're on.
But it's aimed more towards gankers because they do the tear-harvesting.
To be honest, I think "tear harvesting" is what ends up crossing the line. It's one thing if your chosen target flips they lid and rages out. It's something totally different if you sit there, work at, and needle someone into snapping.
Don't do the latter. Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name. The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco De Mayo. Anytime minutes donGÇÖt let you call the future. |
Mira Robinson
126
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:32:00 -
[715] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Mira Robinson wrote: Poorly worded. Keep it in game no matter what side of the wreck you're on.
But it's aimed more towards gankers because they do the tear-harvesting.
To be honest, I think "tear harvesting" is what ends up crossing the line. It's one thing if your chosen target flips they lid and rages out. It's something totally different if you sit there, work at, and needle someone into snapping. Don't do the latter. I agree. I think a lot of New Order folk should be handed their spaceship retirement papers. It's disgusting. Earlier today, the Dixon Mining Guild and the Butz Manufacturing Corporation formed a coalition.
It's hard to tell if there is a light at the end of the tunnel for the Dixon-Butz Alliance. |
Josef Djugashvilis
2508
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:36:00 -
[716] - Quote
Even when CCP does very clearly draw a line in the sand; Erotica 1 for example, a vocal minority are still not satisfied and argue that either there should be no line in the sand because this is, Eve Online and it meant to be 'ard innit' or they see the line and argue that it is is the wrong place.
Once again, I put it to those who want 'clarification' come up with a workable proposal CCP and the player base can get behind.
Most of this thread is just like three year kids kids saying, 'yeah but' to everything their parents say.
Put up, or shut up. This is not a signature. |
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
12073
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:37:00 -
[717] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote: Falcon stated simply and effectively what to do. He didn't say stay away from carebears. He didn't say to stop bumping the **** out of freighters. He said don't take the game into the real world. You, of all people, should understand the consequences of that.
So give it a rest people. Stop being obtuse and willfully ignorant of what CCP is stating when you know full well where the fuzzy gray line is. If you honestly can't figure it out, then you are too stupid to be a part of this community anyway and deserve the ban you will eventually get.
I was about to violently rearrange your view on this whole thing, but I can't. I have this strict e-policy to never verbally wrestle with space hunks with a gleaming cueball and tinted sunglasses.
Stop tolling me. Im jnot drunk...-áIm going to stop posti --Pepper the Penguin ~ And when the seasons change, will you stand by me? ~ |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4923
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:39:00 -
[718] - Quote
Mira Robinson wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Mira Robinson wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Mira Robinson wrote:How much simpler things would be if the EULA was shortened to:
Eve contains spaceships. These spaceships may or may not shoot at each other. Sometimes things explode.
If you got exploded, don't be a crybaby.
If you did the exploding, don't be an *******, and keep it in-game. Why is it only the people doing the exploding who need to be told to keep it in game? Poorly worded. Keep it in game no matter what side of the wreck you're on. But it's aimed more towards gankers because they do the tear-harvesting. What's good for one is good for all. You can't single out a group of people based on their choice of legitimate in-game behaviour. Hey genius, once you get them on TeamSpeak, it's not in-game behavior anymore, is it?
Don't make me link this again. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
4923
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:40:00 -
[719] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Mr Epeen wrote: Falcon stated simply and effectively what to do. He didn't say stay away from carebears. He didn't say to stop bumping the **** out of freighters. He said don't take the game into the real world. You, of all people, should understand the consequences of that.
So give it a rest people. Stop being obtuse and willfully ignorant of what CCP is stating when you know full well where the fuzzy gray line is. If you honestly can't figure it out, then you are too stupid to be a part of this community anyway and deserve the ban you will eventually get.
I was about to violently rearrange your view on this whole thing, but I can't. I have this strict e-policy to never verbally wrestle with space hunks with a gleaming cueball and tinted sunglasses.
I know the consequences of taking the game to the real world. The person who did it to me is still playing the game. Why, they're online right now. GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥ - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104 |
Lady Areola Fappington
2210
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:40:00 -
[720] - Quote
Mira Robinson wrote: I agree. I think a lot of New Order folk should be handed their spaceship retirement papers. It's disgusting.
I agree with a lot of the "ideals" behind The New Order, but yeah, I disagree with the way things have been done as of late. Entirely too much "pestering" for lack of a better term, trying to get someone to snap and generate an all-important blog post.
I'm cool with a gank, a smarmy evemail asking for a permit, and going from there. It's just not cool to keep digging at and targeting someone, regardless of their "goldmine" status.
If you get tears, great, show 'em off, post 'em, and get it out there so we can all giggle. If you just get a "gf", don't keep going on someone in an attempt to elicit rage. Kentucky Derby losers are not turned into Ikea meatballs. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not accidentally blow up vowels in his own name. The chupacabra does not deliver presents on Cinco De Mayo. Anytime minutes donGÇÖt let you call the future. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 42 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |