Random News

I'm missing something, what's going on now?

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:I'm missing something, what's going on now?

I iz just as clueless as you. Join the ''We missed out.'' club *gives sponge a club brochure* XDDD

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:I'm missing something, what's going on now?

I iz just as clueless as you. Join the ''We missed out.'' club *gives sponge a club brochure* XDDD

Nah, I've my hands full at the moment being one of the founding members of the "Chopped Liver Society of Ignored Forum Members".

Maybe once I've got our treasury set up and running though.

Rianna Lauren wrote:Muslim are not terrorists... >___________________>

...Diiiid somebody say that they were?

Naked Snake wrote:

Rianna Lauren wrote:Muslim are not terrorists... >___________________>

...Diiiid somebody say that they were?

Judging by the comment directly after that quote, I would assume Ty did.

Oh, he edited the post. It used to say Ty though.

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:

Naked Snake wrote:

Rianna Lauren wrote:Muslim are not terrorists... >___________________>

...Diiiid somebody say that they were?

Judging by the comment directly after that quote, I would assume Ty did.

Oh, he edited the post. It used to say Ty though.

I can't even see any mention of the word "Muslim" in any post 'cept Ri's. Or "Terrorist."

Naked Snake wrote:
I can't even see any mention of the word "Muslim" in any post 'cept Ri's. Or "Terrorist."

Me either. I'll assume chatbox though, since neither of us really go there so that would explain not seeing it.


Further proves my point of ChatBox = Drama! :lol:

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:

Naked Snake wrote:
I can't even see any mention of the word "Muslim" in any post 'cept Ri's. Or "Terrorist."

Me either. I'll assume chatbox though, since neither of us really go there so that would explain not seeing it.


Further proves my point of ChatBox = Drama!

No. It was a crude and inoccuous joke that was not taken lightly (understandably so). Thats about it lol.

Not made by me lol.

Rain_of_Tears wrote:

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:

Naked Snake wrote:
I can't even see any mention of the word "Muslim" in any post 'cept Ri's. Or "Terrorist."

Me either. I'll assume chatbox though, since neither of us really go there so that would explain not seeing it.


Further proves my point of ChatBox = Drama!

No. It was a crude and inoccuous joke that was not taken lightly (understandably so). Thats about it lol.

Not made by me lol.

I took the liberty of giving the person who made the ''Crude and Inoccuous'' joke a strike. Its unacceptable, even if they were joking. You don't joke with things like that.

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:I took the liberty of giving the person who made the ''Crude and Inoccuous'' joke a strike. Its unacceptable, even if they were joking. You don't joke with things like that.

Speaking of the rules, I just have to ask... the way they are written it looks like I could post porn on this forum 11 times and the worst that would happen is I'm banned for three days.

I mean, I know you have the whole "Up to Admin discretion" thing as well, but the very, very specific numbers just seem very high.

I mean, I can see one or two warnings... but 12?

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:I took the liberty of giving the person who made the ''Crude and Inoccuous'' joke a strike. Its unacceptable, even if they were joking. You don't joke with things like that.

Speaking of the rules, I just have to ask... the way they are written it looks like I could post porn on this forum 11 times and the worst that would happen is I'm banned for three days.

I mean, I know you have the whole "Up to Admin discretion" thing as well, but the very, very specific numbers just seem very high.

I mean, I can see one or two warnings... but 12?

lol

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:I took the liberty of giving the person who made the ''Crude and Inoccuous'' joke a strike. Its unacceptable, even if they were joking. You don't joke with things like that.

Speaking of the rules, I just have to ask... the way they are written it looks like I could post porn on this forum 11 times and the worst that would happen is I'm banned for three days.

I mean, I know you have the whole "Up to Admin discretion" thing as well, but the very, very specific numbers just seem very high.

I mean, I can see one or two warnings... but 12?

12 warnings? where did ya see that? o.o

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:I took the liberty of giving the person who made the ''Crude and Inoccuous'' joke a strike. Its unacceptable, even if they were joking. You don't joke with things like that.

Speaking of the rules, I just have to ask... the way they are written it looks like I could post porn on this forum 11 times and the worst that would happen is I'm banned for three days.

I mean, I know you have the whole "Up to Admin discretion" thing as well, but the very, very specific numbers just seem very high.

I mean, I can see one or two warnings... but 12?

12 warnings? where did ya see that? o.o

I think he means that people can get away with just about anything here with a light punishment. The penalties for transgression are iffy at best. I've often said this.

"Each rule infraction will give you one strike.

3 strikes within one month: Banned from chatbox or forums for 1 day( Every 3 strikes= 1 day banning)

12 strikes in one week: Automatic 2-day suspension from forum the next week

PERMANENT banning is left to Admin discretion."


12 strikes in one week isn't enough, according to the rules, for a permanent banning. Actually, all it does is suspend the person for two days. And that's really only a one day suspension since the person would have been losing one day for having their 4th third strike.

And, well, a two day suspension isn't really all that harsh. Thus, I called it a warning.

I'm just saying, maybe the admins/mods should get together and come up with a new punishment system, since the current one isn't really a deterrent at all.

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:"Each rule infraction will give you one strike.

3 strikes within one month: Banned from chatbox or forums for 1 day( Every 3 strikes= 1 day banning)

12 strikes in one week: Automatic 2-day suspension from forum the next week

PERMANENT banning is left to Admin discretion."


12 strikes in one week isn't enough, according to the rules, for a permanent banning. Actually, all it does is suspend the person for two days. And that's really only a one day suspension since the person would have been losing one day for having their 4th third strike.

And, well, a two day suspension isn't really all that harsh. Thus, I called it a warning.

I'm just saying, maybe the admins/mods should get together and come up with a new punishment system, since the current one isn't really a deterrent at all.

Oh yeah, I see what your saying now. An admin did say the rules needed some modifying not long ago and yes, they do. Lately, we have been doing most things by discretion and by a ''3 strikes, your out'' thing. But yea, I agree with you, we need some more order to that. We are too lenient at times.

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:"Each rule infraction will give you one strike.

3 strikes within one month: Banned from chatbox or forums for 1 day( Every 3 strikes= 1 day banning)

12 strikes in one week: Automatic 2-day suspension from forum the next week

PERMANENT banning is left to Admin discretion."


12 strikes in one week isn't enough, according to the rules, for a permanent banning. Actually, all it does is suspend the person for two days. And that's really only a one day suspension since the person would have been losing one day for having their 4th third strike.

And, well, a two day suspension isn't really all that harsh. Thus, I called it a warning.

I'm just saying, maybe the admins/mods should get together and come up with a new punishment system, since the current one isn't really a deterrent at all.

Oh yeah, I see what your saying now. An admin did say the rules needed some modifying not long ago and yes, they do. Lately, we have been doing most things by discretion and by a ''3 strikes, your out'' thing. But yea, I agree with you, we need some more order to that. We are too lenient at times.

I seem to recall threatening to murder someone came with a hefty 24 hour chatbox suspension...

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:Oh yeah, I see what your saying now. An admin did say the rules needed some modifying not long ago and yes, they do. Lately, we have been doing most things by discretion and by a ''3 strikes, your out'' thing. But yea, I agree with you, we need some more order to that. We are too lenient at times.

A three strikes you're out rule set is better, yes. Maybe add in that every three months (or something, I'm just idea tossing here) one strike is erased, so as to not screw over people that are usually not breaking rules. Also add in that certain rules are zero tolerance, or at least LESS tolerant that way not everything isn't blanketed with the same punishment. Posting explicit porn on a forum with kids on it should earn you more strikes than, say, making a less than tasteful joke. And hey, repeat offenders should probably get punished more severely if they've not learned from previous infractions.

Just tossing out some ideas. Regardless of what you do though, you really need to change the rules that are posted fairly soon, that way new posters have realistic views of what is expected of them when they join here.

Rain_of_Tears wrote:

Rianna Lauren wrote:Muslim are not terrorists... >___________________>

Here, the discussion of terrorists has almost been taken to a comical level. In your country, you could probably never understand it.

Sure. I can never understand it. Cause Indonesians are SOOOO stupid.

Rianna Lauren wrote:

Rain_of_Tears wrote:

Rianna Lauren wrote:Muslim are not terrorists... >___________________>

Here, the discussion of terrorists has almost been taken to a comical level. In your country, you could probably never understand it.

Sure. I can never understand it. Cause Indonesians are SOOOO stupid.

I think you're probably taking what Rain said the wrong way. I highly doubt he was basically calling Indonesians stupid. Merely commenting on the cultural barrier that might prevent you from understanding such unless you lived in America. There, discussion of terrorism or such is likely serious business; but the past eight years in America have seen the word "terrorist" thrown around so much that it's almost a glorified joke. Think "Red Scare", only no one takes it as seriously as they did back then; basically so many groups have been called terrorists and stereotyped as such that no one here really seems to take the term "terrorist" seriously anymore and probably won't again until it's put to bed for several years to regain some semblance of meaning.

Long story short; I think you took what he said in the complete opposite way he intended.

The rules/punishments have been modified and updated. :D

Rule 7- Online dating is defined as dating someone on this site only, with absolutely no real-life ties whatsoever, is not allowed. This is NOT a dating site.

As silly as online relationships are, this rule is even sillier.

Naked Snake wrote:

Rule 7- Online dating is defined as dating someone on this site only, with absolutely no real-life ties whatsoever, is not allowed. This is NOT a dating site.

As silly as online relationships are, this rule is even sillier.

...I think online dating iz sillier. :geek:

The wording is weird, though. o.o lemme fix dat.

In the past, online dating only created unneccessary drama, anxiety, insecurity and even jealousy. We were really permissive towards online dating, until it eventually led to that whole ''sexual harrassment'' thing.(One person ruined it for eveyone, unfortunately.) Plus, it isn't safe. (I think we all know why.) And there are plenty of dating and matchmaker sites. But this site ain't one of them. Think of this rule as a ''No smoking'' policy; its not saying you can't smoke EVER, period. Its merely saying ''don't do it here.''

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:The wording does look weird. o.o lemme fix dat.

In the past, online dating only created unneccessary drama. We were really permissive towards online dating, until it eventually led to that whole ''sexual harrassment'' thing. Plus, it isn't safe. (I think we all know why.) And there are plenty of dating and matchmaker sites. But this site ain't one of them. Think of this rule as a ''No smoking'' policy; its not saying you can't smoke EVER, period. Its merely saying ''don't do it here.''

I think I get what you're saying. But how about changing the wording of the rule to something like "If you've got a 'relationship' going on with someone else that is also a member of the forum, that's great and we're happy for you. But we also don't care. Keep it off the forum. They make YIM and Skype for a reason. If you've come here looking for love, you're in the wrong place. We aren't E-Harmony."

Well, maybe not that abrasive...

Something like that, but excluding the "we're happy for you but we don't care" part. XD

Xenophobic Sponge wrote:

Thecrazykid3649 wrote:The wording does look weird. o.o lemme fix dat.

In the past, online dating only created unneccessary drama. We were really permissive towards online dating, until it eventually led to that whole ''sexual harrassment'' thing. Plus, it isn't safe. (I think we all know why.) And there are plenty of dating and matchmaker sites. But this site ain't one of them. Think of this rule as a ''No smoking'' policy; its not saying you can't smoke EVER, period. Its merely saying ''don't do it here.''

I think I get what you're saying. But how about changing the wording of the rule to something like "If you've got a 'relationship' going on with someone else that is also a member of the forum, that's great and we're happy for you. But we also don't care. Keep it off the forum. They make YIM and Skype for a reason. If you've come here looking for love, you're in the wrong place. We aren't E-Harmony."

Well, maybe not that abrasive...

No no, make it abrasive. Abrasive is entertaining.