|
|
#41
10-10-2005, 03:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Diablo, why not you?
i second pretty much all of what ihatecats has said in this thread.
i also agree with kkf that yeti is too nice for this. though i have posted less frequently in this forum, i still read every thread, and would appreciate if some crap were deleted or members banned. i would happily give a 2-day ban or whatever to anyone posting repeated or clear trash. an example: arod15 
|
|
#42
10-10-2005, 03:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diablo, why not you?
[ QUOTE ]
I decided to unlock this since a lot of you said there was good discussion going on, so I just deleted some of the unecessary crap between el diablo/garland. At the risk of sounding like my parents, let's try and keep it a little civilized. [/ QUOTE ] with all due respect, never deleting any of el diablo's posts sounds like an unbeatable strategy imho.
|
|
#44
10-10-2005, 03:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One of you guys should step up as the [censored] of MHNL
[ QUOTE ]
...ban users who post dumbass crap. Anyway, just an idea that has imo worked quite well in OOT (someone can link to the relevant threads) and I think would really improve this forum dramatically. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] You might be right, Dr. S. I was not familiar with [censored] prior to the whole banning thing. I just thought it would be an interesting experiment is all. Maybe it would turn out well, maybe it would be a trainwreck, whatever. It's just OOT, does anyone really care? [/ QUOTE ] that's the thing, oot is like a locker room or something, it's just ppl shooting the [censored] anyway, so that kind of experiment in letting a mod go hog-wild and ban anybody is ok, cuz like you said, even if it turns out to be a disaster, who cares? mhnl is an entirely different place, this is not a locker room, it's a classroom for a lot of ppl, myself included. on one hand, this means we need to keep the quality of discussion on this forum to a higher standard, but otoh, designating more mods and letting them go around banning ppl who post "dumbass crap" seems like it could be too arbitrary and severe. it's a delicate balance to strike but i think azk does a good job already without resorting to banning users.
|
|
#46
10-10-2005, 03:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diablo, why not you?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] so I just deleted some of the unecessary crap between el diablo/garland. [/ QUOTE ] OMFG. [/ QUOTE ] [censored] was able to retrive the deleted thread on OOT?
|
|
#47
10-10-2005, 04:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diablo, why not you?
[ QUOTE ]
I decided to unlock this since a lot of you said there was good discussion going on, so I just deleted some of the unecessary crap between el diablo/garland. At the risk of sounding like my parents, let's try and keep it a little civilized. [/ QUOTE ] reading el diablo's [censored] talking posts is the best part of this whole site.
|
|
#48
10-10-2005, 04:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diablo, why not you?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I decided to unlock this since a lot of you said there was good discussion going on, so I just deleted some of the unecessary crap between el diablo/garland. At the risk of sounding like my parents, let's try and keep it a little civilized. [/ QUOTE ] reading el diablo's [censored] talking posts is the best part of this whole site. [/ QUOTE ] I think this one was just a misunderstanding. Garland made some errors in logical reasoning and I was trying to help him learn so I told him that his reasoning was simplistic and wrong, much like his poker analysis. I think he kinda took that in a negative way, but I didn't mean it negatively.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
