Edvard stated: source post
What was unseemly in what I said here?
I find deeply insecure people extremely off-putting.
Lols aside, his views support Dex's older Joshua copy/paste meme, among others, something you openly complained about when I was willing to let it slide.
and yet metas the first to make a long ass rule post that doesn't matter.
Meta has always been like this, while your stance is a lot more fluid based on personal ties and personal annoyance as opposed to any sense of consistent structure.
dubious and not backed by any evidence
As for you, your version was not that detached. Your bias is blatant, which is why it was worth trying to steer away from that for this discussion.
dubious and not backed by any evidence
You have been a lot more on edge, less stable lately, and it's been affecting your interactions even before now.​
dubous and not backed by any evidence
Whats your problem? You've always been the most meticulous guy in an intellectual discussion here. But when it comes to taking a side in drama, almost every post that comes from you consists of dubious claims not backed by any evidence.
Apart from the community to decide when something is too much, perhaps these guidelines are good:
1. If a username spams a thread, or multiple threads, or makes many threads, or cross-spams for longer then an hour, then its an offense and refer to number 2.
1.1. A spam is considered anything thats off-topic or the majority of users have no interest in, while containing very little(the amount of new knowledge you would gain if you assume you know nothing that is said in the post must be less or equal to a sentance) information on its own and is not involved in a current debate on the forum. Or has been repeated before in the last 3 days
2. Any spam thread/post should be deleted, in addition to the following points:
2.2 If the username of the spammer is a puppet ban it.
2.3 If the username of the spammer is a puppet and the main account is know, or its not a puppet and this is his/her 1st offense, warn the main account for a future ban.
2.4 If its a second offense ban the main account. If the main account is unknown, then ban the main account once its known, if this is his second offense, otherwise look at number 2.3.
3. If a post or a thread, or several posts or threads cause technical difficulties, then these posts or threads are to be considered spam, in which case refer to number 2, unless its proven it was not intentional.
3.1 Technical difficulties are considered when posts other then the malicious one experience any kind of technical difficulties, because of the malicious one.
3.2 Technical difficulties are considered when the malicious post makes anyone's browser or other programs crash or experience technical difficulties.
3.3 If the malicious post is proven to cause technical difficulties, but was not intentional, then the post should only be removed by a moderator, if a majority of users have these technical difficulties.
4. If a post contains child pornography directly(not linked) or contains links to such material with intent on simply sharing it, then its considered spam and refer to number 2.
5. If a post is made to somehow create illegal activities based in this forum, then its considered spam and refer to number 2.
Turncoat stated: source post
I do recall skeleton trumpet meme-ing, but not in a chain posting fashion.
I need to get into that again
TheCrowOnTheFence stated: source post
In my initial posting on this matter, I made my stance clear
...What? You had no other stance on this matter (chain posting) apart from telling me out of the blue that my emotions are leaking.
Turncoat was asking your opinion on how to handle this situation and you were using that as another opportunity to accuse him of manipulation and abuse of power. That was neither on-topic, nor rational. If you respond emotionally, your emotions will be commented on. That's how SC works.
Exaggeration and distortion (eg. using a minor incident as excuse to generalize about the gravity of a situation and justify an action you desire) is a known tactic of manipulation. It's all over in politics. Turncoat gives a lot of thought to how he formulates his posts, so the "oops I jumped the gun a bit" excuse doesn't hold water at all. When I called Turncoat out on that, it was out of 100% pure conviction that he intended to manipulate. You talk about how biased I am for Xena, but what really bothers you to the point of surprise and upsetting feelings of betrayal is that I am not giving YOU TWO some preferential treatment.
TheCrowOnTheFence stated: source post
I find deeply insecure people extremely off-putting.
Your emotions are leaking.
Turncoat stated: source post
Bane puppets, the less energetic Dex posts, Sinister towards the end before she acted more human, a slew of puppets in the past posting things like goatse across multiple topics if not straight down the page... This angle isn't new and the bias blinds, which is why I feel like there needs to be a standard.
You specifically said that chain posting had been considered a problem before. I said I only remembered chain posting in Dexter's case, and no matter who else has chain posted before, had it been limited to one thread, no one would have given a fuck.
Before Dexter arrived, no one would have even imagined debating deleting a string of 5 posts, or chain posting like the one in the example. That we are now discussing the deletion of under 10 shitposts is amazing to me, and it should be to anyone who cares enough to take a few steps back and analyze this ridiculous situation. These things have been happening since the beginning of sociopath forums after all. Mods should keep in mind what made them necessary and stick to that: dexters and illegal content (also, the 'delete my dox pretty please' situation that we agreed upon out of empathic mercy).
ONLY ONE RULE: DO NOT RUIN THE USABILITY OF THIS SITE (SUCH AS SPAM, FLOODING OR ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES).
No usability of the site was ruined. This thread should not even exist.
Lols aside, his views support Dex's older Joshua copy/paste meme, among others, something you openly complained about when I was willing to let it slide. Meta has always been like this, while your stance is a lot more fluid based on personal ties and personal annoyance as opposed to any sense of consistent structure.
Jog my memory a bit. What copy-paste meme? If it was cross posted in threads, and above the number of 5, then reread my first post here.
As for you, your version was not that detached. Your bias is blatant, which is why it was worth trying to steer away from that for this discussion. You have been a lot more on edge, less stable lately, and it's been affecting your interactions even before now. I'd rather we get to the point than make it about your need to start beefs lately or about how much you feel the need to support Xena regardless of what goes on.What's been wrong anyway? I figure that knowing that will make it easier to steer discussions towards a more civil direction.
I'm fine, thanks for the concern. Now let's get back to the topic.
It was more tangental as opposed to outright overriding, interrupting.
No, Alena was just unintelligent enough to confuse off-topic with spam. "You were spamming Xena, your posts didn't have anything to do with Cad's topic!!". That needed clearing up imo.
Edvard stated: source post
Meta didn't say anything that I hadn't say either.
You said more, and much of it was not on point. His was simplified and efficient, much like Alter's response.
What did you feel was not on point from what I said in my first post?
Hope the next mod thread won't be about deleting posts "with unnecessary words", because that would mean big trouble for you and Crow. :D
If it were Cad doing chain vid-spam to a Xena topic, I'd still have responded in that way, and somehow I feel like you wouldn't have cared.
You are immensely wrong about this. Had anyone else been the author of the chain posting you quoted I would still have been firmly against it. Even if it were Tony.