Have a Question? V3

[Strange Town]

Sorry but I dont post here regularly but why was Xyn and Aby banned?

Them being raging queens would be my guess.

[Abel.]

Both were men masquerading as women through use of photographs of actual women.

 

 

"Aby" may have been going through "transition". That's all there is to it.

 

 

My question is why the heck is this still being talked about?

[AboveAndBeyoncé]

Both were men masquerading as women through use of photographs of actual women.

 

 

"Aby" may have been going through "transition". That's all there is to it.

 

 

My question is why the heck is this still being talked about?

Cause of the many forum members who actually thought fhey were women are probably still in disbelief or wasn't around when sh*t hit the fan and people found out

[Reformed Squid]

You can only change your name once every 365 days.

 

When and why did this rule stop applying to certain members?

[Static]

When and why did this rule stop applying to certain members?

 

Firstly, it's not a "rule". Secondly, it didn't. Everyone gets one name change a every anniversary of their join date, but that is not the only way a name can be changed.

Edited May 24, 2015 by Static

[Reformed Squid]

 

When and why did this rule stop applying to certain members?

 

Firstly, it's not a "rule". Secondly, it didn't. Everyone gets one name change a every anniversary of their join date, but that is not the only way a name can be changed.

 

 

Alright, I'll put aside the fact that the only members I've ever seen getting a name change before their year period have been part of the OGA and give the benefit of the doubt that any member who has been around for a while can get a name change if they ask the staff. If this is the case, then my bad for bringing it up.

Edited May 24, 2015 by Cloudee

[Static]

Alright, I'll put aside the fact that the only members I've ever seen getting a name change before their year period have been part of the OGA and give the benefit of the doubt that any member who has been around for a while can get a name change if they ask the staff. If this is the case, then my bad for bringing it up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can also save your name changes, just because you get one, doesn't mean you have to use it as soon as you get it. And sometimes the member in question, didn't necessarily ask for the name change either.

[JOEsAGGRESSIVE]

Notwithstanding the fact it's none of your business, why do you care anyway?

The fact that you say it's none of our business but you personally were very forthcoming about banning Zee(for abusing the report button). I personally find that hilarious and well a bit hypocritical.

 

And I care because I know staff doesn't grant wishes from members who request a ban and I know for a fact that Xyn and Aby were highly respected(well Xyn did win most respected and Aby was also something of a respectable member here as well). I mean seriously,the majority of members who looked to those two saw how to act on this forum and now they are banned without a credible reason(other than them stealing somebody's instagram photos? or them both either being men or transsexuals? Neither of which should be a ban-able offense in my opinion).

I completely understand not wanting to tell everybody why anybody was banned but why is it common knowledge that certain members were banned for certain things but yet when these two come up people are met with the "its none of your business" response.(also it has spread like wildfire that gunwrath was banned for harassing female members through the pm system and that it happened several times not just once)

 

My question is why is there such a double standard?

 

I want to make it known that I'm not sympathetic towards gunwrath or Zee in the slightest.(the report button should never be abused which I learned the hard way and harassing somebody through an internet forum is extremely low)

[SWEETSAPRIK]

The fact that you say it's none of our business but you personally were very forthcoming about banning Zee(for abusing the report button). I personally find that hilarious and well a bit hypocritical.

Pretty sure nobody cares what you think, nor should they. No offense. I mean they don't and shouldn't care what I think either.

 

and now they are banned without a credible reason

There was a credible reason. You knowing (or not knowing) the reason(s) has absolutely no bearing on whether or not it was justified. Not that a reason is needed. The people who own and run the this site can ban anyone they want, with or without reason. They can decide one day that they don't like light blue text, and ban me for it. I'd have no recourse. I'm personally thankful that they don't randomly ban people without cause, because I'm cognizant of the fact that they don't f*cking need any.

 

or them both either being men or transsexuals?

Has no bearing on anything. For the most part, the only people who actually think this is at all relevant to anything fall into one of three groups. First, people who think they have any right to tell people what they can be. (I.E. self-important prejudiced douchebag c*nts.) Second, people who were rubbing their fun parts at the thought of talking to "a real life girl on the interweebles yo." (I.E. people who are likely now confused and butthurt about having to question their already shaky sexuality.) And third, batsh*t crazy people who think everything is a f*cking conspiracy. Some of these people actually believe anyone's sexuality has anything to do with why some people are or aren't banned. (I.E. retards.)

 

Neither of which should be a ban-able offense in my opinion.

One isn't. At all. Never has been. Never will be. Ever. I can completely understand people getting tired of even having to respond to this, because it is so f*cking stupid. If people kept asking me why I banned someone for being black, when everyone who wasn't a complete f*cking retard knew that had absolutely nothing to do with the actions they took which resulted in their banning, I'd probably start to get annoyed at the sh*t-talking duplicitous c*nts who kept trying to misrepresent the action as some kind of hate/prejudiced related thing.

 

The other is questionable. It depends on the specific circumstances. In some places it is actually iffy in terms of legality. Maybe not to the point where it rises to criminality, but civil action on the other hand. And anything that can in any way result in the site being liable for anything is absolutely within their purview to act on. Obviously.

 

Moreover, there are lots of things which aren't explicitly stated in the rules, which are obviously ban-able. They can't list every f*cking thing in the world you can't do here, the rules would be five miles long. That said, anyone who isn't a complete f*cking idiot knows certain things are not kosher. And anything that results in problems for the site/network or problems in the community is also entirely in their wheelhouse.

 

My question is why is there such a double standard?

There isn't a double standard. Double standard implies that there are two types of treatment, one for one person or group, a different one for another person or group. That isn't the case. They (like most rational human beings) act on individual cases the way that specific situation requires.

 

It is simple, they are never under any responsibility to tell anyone why anyone was banned. Ever. The answer can be "none of your f*cking business" every time if they want. If anyone thinks they have any right to know, they need to get out more. If they were "close" with the person who was banned, they can try asking them. Or they could just mind their f*cking business and not be nosy pricks or creepy f*ckers right on that border of stalkerish behavior, not that I imagine that actually happening.

 

If in a certain instance they decide they want to respect someone's privacy, they can. On the other hand, the reasons for actions aren't exactly top secret. So they can decide for themselves what they think they should say and what they shouldn't. Not because of some set of hard and fast rules written in their staff batcave, but because some human beings are capable of deciding when to not share something that is personal, private, and none of anyone else's motherf*cking business.

 

The funny part is that the reason for both of their bans has already been outright stated more than once, in this topic and in others, but certain complete f*cking retards still insist on asking again every page or so. Just like certain people keep bringing it up not because they actually care about the question they're asking (which has already been answered more than once), but because they are batsh*t crazy f*cking retards who think everything is "staff favoritismz yo", and are looking for yet one more way to just be annoying f*cking c*nts.

 

TBH if I was staff I'd probably just start temping people who insist on bringing it up over and over, asking again and again pretending it hasn't already been answered. Not because it really matters at all, but just because it's f*cking annoying.

[Reformed Squid]

Are there any online or brick-and-mortar electronics stores that will pricematch Microcenter's in-store prices?

[NaidRaida]

Two questions closely related to each other:

 

1) Would it be a copyright infringement if I upload a patch for a game (official patch)?

 

1.1) Would it be okay with the forum rules too to post a link? (I'd say it pretty much looks like game file sharing which is prohibited)

[Ai®a©ob®a]

Two questions closely related to each other:

 

1) Would it be a copyright infringement if I upload a patch for a game (official patch)?

 

1.1) Would it be okay with the forum rules too to post a link? (I'd say it pretty much looks like game file sharing which is prohibited)

No it wouldn't be copywrite because you aren't acting as an offical employee of the gaming company or pretending to be them.

 

2. PM a mod or led-by of the modding section and ask them specificly

 

My question to you is why is this any of your business?

[sivispacem]

Stuff

The questions posed have been answered numerous times before. In the imminent wake of people's banning other members generally have questions about why, and for the sake of transparency some staff members are happy to address them, but it's a very personal thing. The fact I've previously explain why people have been banned doesn't really constitute hypocrisy as even then it wasn't anyone's business.

 

I fail to see the point in staff members repeatedly explaining the justification for their actions when they've almost always been explained once already. If you're really that nosy, use the search button.

[DEALUX]

Does the phrase "unconscious causality" make any sense? Can you use the "unconscious" adjective to describe causes that are not observable by us directly?

 

This is a title for a song I'm going to write. It's about the ways in which love is mysterious (i.e. why do we like certain features as opposed to others?).

Edited May 24, 2015 by Kristian.

[TheGoodSgtScooter]

A casualty is usually used to refer to the loss of life, and is not usually something that can obtain consciousness or unconsciousness for that matter, although it does sort of sound cool. Unconscious Hearts, Minds, Souls, Bodies, Conflicting Souls, Minds, Thoughts, Hearts, maybe subconscious choices?

 

 

 

 

 

It's 2:30 in the A.M., where I am by the way so I may be entirely wring in everything I just typed.

Edited May 24, 2015 by TheGoodSgtScooter

[epoxi]

We should really bring back the statement in the rules section that says:

 

 

Remember, you are a guest on a free service. Our moderators and admins reserve the right to remove you from these forums at any time for any reason. You have no rights and may make no demands.

So we don't have to deal with these inane questions.

 

It was there in the 2004 revision so I don't know why it has been removed.

[johnny_zoo]

Notwithstanding the fact it's none of your business, why do you care anyway?

 

Is it just me or every time you reply to a post of mine I feel a personal animosity coming my way? You got a chip on your shoulder about something? I care mainly out of curiosity. They we're popular members here for a long time so you can understand if I want to know what happened to them when they suddenly disappear.

I'm part of the same community they are so I have a right to ask about other members on this board.

 

Both were men masquerading as women through use of photographs of actual women.

 

 

"Aby" may have been going through "transition". That's all there is to it.

 

 

My question is why the heck is this still being talked about?

 

If that's true that's both creepy and hilarious.

 

Also I said I wasn't around when they were banned so my apologies if I'm uncovering old news.

 

 

Both were men masquerading as women through use of photographs of actual women.

 

 

"Aby" may have been going through "transition". That's all there is to it.

 

 

My question is why the heck is this still being talked about?

Cause of the many forum members who actually thought fhey were women are probably still in disbelief or wasn't around when sh*t hit the fan and people found out

 

Yes, pretty much my position.

Edited May 24, 2015 by johnny_zoo

[Share Sharqi]

 

Two questions closely related to each other:

 

1) Would it be a copyright infringement if I upload a patch for a game (official patch)?

 

1.1) Would it be okay with the forum rules too to post a link? (I'd say it pretty much looks like game file sharing which is prohibited)

No it wouldn't be copywrite because you aren't acting as an offical employee of the gaming company or pretending to be them.

If you think that employees of the company that make the game are the only people, or indeed the people most likely to be guilty of copyright infringement, I would say that you don't know much about copyright. I believe that if you posted the link in some place where you might stand to enjoy any economic benefit; were the page to have any ads, for instance, I believe it could most certainly be construed as such. You would also have to include many copyright disclaimers regarding production/proprietary rights/copyright status.

 

Regarding the second part; likely not, a polished turd is still a pile of sh*t. Thinly veiling something under the guise of something else to try and subvert the rules is rarely a good idea.

 

Does the phrase "unconscious causality" make any sense? Can you use the "unconscious" adjective to describe causes that are not observable by us directly?

 

This is a title for a song I'm going to write. It's about the ways in which love is mysterious (i.e. why do we like certain features as opposed to others?).

 

Conciousness confers awareness in aspects of its definition, so yes to both. The first person to reply to this read 'causality' as 'casualty', and perhaps this is what you yourself intended, it is not so hard to tell at present. In the case of 'causality' I see no issue, but with casualty I would query in the same vein as the other respondent how one can be unaware of being dead, or indeed that conciousness should persist (tied to physical) form following death [or that it should persist at all]. Although if you simply want to use the word, you would not be the first person in music to include words simply for the purpose of them being there; look at scat singing in Jazz and Blues, they skipped the 'meaningless words' stage and went for the 'tuneful sounds'.

Edited May 24, 2015 by Share Sharqi

[Mr. Scratch]

My, my, bunch of nosy peckers you are.

[DEALUX]

A casualty is usually used to refer to the loss of life, and is not usually something that can obtain consciousness or unconsciousness for that matter, although it does sort of sound cool. Unconscious Hearts, Minds, Souls, Bodies, Conflicting Souls, Minds, Thoughts, Hearts, maybe subconscious choices?

 

 

 

 

 

It's 2:30 in the A.M., where I am by the way so I may be entirely wring in everything I just typed.

Yeah. You totally read my post wrong. I said "causality" not "casualty".

[Ai®a©ob®a]

 

 

Two questions closely related to each other:

 

1) Would it be a copyright infringement if I upload a patch for a game (official patch)?

 

1.1) Would it be okay with the forum rules too to post a link? (I'd say it pretty much looks like game file sharing which is prohibited)

No it wouldn't be copywrite because you aren't acting as an offical employee of the gaming company or pretending to be them.

If you think that employees of the company that make the game are the only people, or indeed the people most likely to be guilty of copyright infringement, I would say that you don't know much about copyright. I believe that if you posted the link in some place where you might stand to enjoy any economic benefit; were the page to have any ads, for instance, I believe it could most certainly be construed as such. You would also have to include many copyright disclaimers regarding production/proprietary rights/copyright status.

 

Regarding the second part; likely not, a polished turd is still a pile of sh*t. Thinly veiling something under the guise of something else to try and subvert the rules is rarely a good idea.

I do know what i'm talking about no need to be snotty about it, I misworded what i was trying to say....

[TheGoodSgtScooter]

@Kristian.

 

Oops. Please refer to the second part of my post, ha ha.

Edited May 24, 2015 by TheGoodSgtScooter

[Ai®a©ob®a]

My, my, bunch of nosy peckers you are.

Douno why but this reminded me of this...

 

[uNi]

We should really bring back the statement in the rules section that says:

 

Remember, you are a guest on a free service. Our moderators and admins reserve the right to remove you from these forums at any time for any reason. You have no rights and may make no demands.

So we don't have to deal with these inane questions.

 

It was there in the 2004 revision so I don't know why it has been removed.

 

 

[sivispacem]

Is it just me or every time you reply to a post of mine I feel a personal animosity coming my way?

I wouldn't flatter yourself. It's not animosity specifically directed at you or anyone else, just general nihilism and misanthropy. If it makes for feel better for whatever reason to view it as personal, then fill yer boots.

 

I have a right

Except, you absolutely don't. You're a guest on a free service. I do miss the large disclaimer Epoxi posted that used to be in the forum rules making that clear. Perhaps we should reinclude it.

[Kirsty]

The funny thing is, they are not even banned. They have new accounts.

 

So please, in Tank's name, let this be the end of this conversation forever.

[Red Hat]

Why is everyone changing their profile pictures to dickbutts?

[GTA_stu]

Why is everyone changing their profile pictures to dickbutts?

 

It's a Jewish/Bolshevist conspiracy to push degeneracy and weaken our moral fibers.

[Abel.]

 

 

 

 

 

Why is everyone changing their profile pictures to dickbutts?

 

It's a Jewish Bolshevist conspiracy to push degeneracy and weaken our moral fibers.

 

 

I know mate, it's a bloody disgrace.

 

 

Kirst: Let's be honest here, they should remain banned. A few years ago there'd have been no question about them remaining banned. If Xyn and "Aby" are getting second chances, let's extend the same courtesy to Mortukai and The Night Fox.

Edited May 24, 2015 by Failure

[Red Hat]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why is everyone changing their profile pictures to dickbutts?

 

It's a Jewish Bolshevist conspiracy to push degeneracy and weaken our moral fibers.

 

 

I know mate, it's a bloody disgrace.

 

 

Kirst: Let's be honest here, they should remain banned. A few years ago there'd have been no question about them remaining banned. If Xyn and "Aby" are getting second chances, let's extend the same courtesy to Mordekai and The Night Fox.

 

 

And Zee, and all other dead souls!