Page 2 of 2
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2003 2:09 pm
by Caranthir the great
Funny, there are also people out there doing things just because they think what they do is funny, not caring about what anyone else thinks.
The door swings both ways.
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2003 2:12 pm
by Arkadia Misella
They can always look away.
So...when you going to take me out on a date caranthir? I enjoy long walks on the beach while wispering sweet nothings in your ear, candle lite romantic dinners in the sand under the stars, and staying up all night thinking up new catagorys for the "in my pants" game
. So..when you gonna give me a call?
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2003 5:04 pm
by Caranthir the great
This came way too sudden.
Nevertheless, these boards are ment to be read by everybody, so I think that your solution to the problem is reasonable.
The point remains; Making stupid contentless topics is not a right, ít is a privlidge that should not exist.
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2003 5:06 pm
by Arkadia Misella
So then...what are you saying?....no dinner? no date?
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2003 5:09 am
by Cain Freemont
Here's my take on the topic...
"Talk about Illarion Off-topic things" sounds exactly like the General Board. Now, obviously I am mistaken on this, considering there are almost no topics about Illarion on that board.
I'm a moderator for a forum myself... that's right.. I go in between two forums. Its a pain. Here's what I think: If a game like 'in my pants' came around, I would accept it. Why? Because it is off-topic and thus fits in the off-topic board. It seems rather coincidental that most of the other topics in the off-topic board are discussion. I would allow the game, because it allows people to have fun and let loose, whereas the other boards (General, proposal, etc) are for serious discussions such as new ideas for the game, technical problems, and other such things that need more attention. Yes, it is true that not everyone will like all the topics in the board. But you know, I don't think everyone will like all the topics in any board.
Fact of the matter is, the GM's are being too harsh when locking a silly little game that fits within the description of the board's purpose. Its like IC and OOC... you can't let OOC emotions/opinions get in the way of your duty to play your character accurately. The GM's are letting their emotions or personal opinions sway what they do with their power as GM's. This should not be. And that is my personal opinion, no matter how wrong someone might say I am.[/i]
Note: I'm not saying that this must be as I say, because I know no one wants to copy someone else. But I also know that there is no real way to not copy someone's idea in some obscure way.
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2003 8:44 am
by Turnupto
Easy to answer, why it has been closed: It was just rubbish and Spam.
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2003 11:25 pm
by Vindigan
Turnupto wrote:Easy to answer, why it has been closed: It was just rubbish and Spam.
Not everyone thinks that. what if i thought that one of your threads was rubbish and spam and closed it without telling you why? i think you'd be a bit anoyed too.
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2003 11:30 pm
by paul laffing
1. <messaging> (From Hormel's Spiced Ham, via the Monty Python
"Spam" song) To post irrelevant or inappropriate messages to
one or more Usenet newsgroups, mailing lists, or other
messaging system in deliberate or accidental violation of
netiquette.
It is possible to spam a newsgroup with one well- (or ill-)
planned message, e.g. asking "What do you think of abortion?"
on soc.women. This can be done by cross-posting, e.g. any
message which is crossposted to alt.rush-limbaugh and
alt.politics.homosexuality will almost inevitably spam both
groups. (Compare troll and flame bait).
Posting a message to a significant proportion of all
newsgroups is a sure way to spam Usenet and become an object
of almost universal hatred. Canter and Siegel spammed the net
with their Green card post.
If you see an article which you think is a deliberate spam, DO
NOT post a follow-up - doing so will only contribute to the
general annoyance. Send a polite message to the poster by
private e-mail and CC it to "postmaster" at the same address.
Bear in mind that the posting's origin might have been forged
or the apparent sender's account might have been used by
someone else without his permission.
The word was coined as the winning entry in a 1937 competition
to choose a name for Hormel Foods Corporation's "spiced meat"
(now officially known as "SPAM luncheon meat"). Correspondant
Bob White claims the modern use of the term predates Monty
Python by at least ten years. He cites an editor for the
Dallas Times Herald describing Public Relations as "throwing a
can of spam into an electric fan just to see if any of it
would stick to the unwary passersby."
This is what dictionary.com had to say about spam. I don't think this post met the criteria. "In my pants" is entirely not spam.
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 3:52 pm
by Caranthir the great
This is one rare ocassion when I honestly didn't bother to read your post.
So, I don't really care if you pull a rabbit from your ear and it says that in my pants was not spam, does it have any influence on this matter?
No, I bet that the science world would go ballistics and make you a millionaire because of the fact that the rabbit talks, but it doesn't change the fact that the rabbit has no power over the matter, this goes also to the author of dictionary.com.
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 5:35 pm
by Moathia
How about this for a simple answer.
They can do what the hell they want with their forums, you have no rights here, except for the ones they give you, if they decide to delete a post, you can do nothing about it.
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 11:37 pm
by paul laffing
Caranthir the great wrote:This is one rare ocassion when I honestly didn't bother to read your post.
So, I don't really care if you pull a rabbit from your ear and it says that in my pants was not spam, does it have any influence on this matter?
No, I bet that the science world would go ballistics and make you a millionaire because of the fact that the rabbit talks, but it doesn't change the fact that the rabbit has no power over the matter, this goes also to the author of dictionary.com.
So you're saying that when the facts are in your favor, its okay, but when the facts aren't, ignore them? Makes sense to me...
Moathia, if a forum deletes every other message you post, do you still want to post at that forum? I doubt it. In order to keep players, the GMs might want to be a little democratic. I know you can't please everyone, but you can sure try to please most.
What the definition basically says is that two conditions for being spam are being irrelevant or being posted several times. As the game fulfilled none of these conditions, it is not spam. Therefore, there was no reason to delete it.
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 1:53 am
by Cuderon
You forgot one thing: this server belongs to some private persons, actually you do not have any rights here.
If they like to trash it... they´ll do it.
What about playing Calvin Ball?
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:57 am
by Caranthir the great
Paul, just one thing..
What facts?
So you have a quote taken from person completely irrelevant to the matter. Facts? Please, get real.
Lets see what I can make of the 'fact'...
To post irrelevant or inappropriate
Well I'll be damned.
The first sentence, and look what I found!
It matches in my pants, with the addition that in my pants was also stupid.
Please most? So you are implying that because you sided with the stupid game, its automaticly so that the 'most' side with it? Well I am pleased.
You have no rights, this is no democracy.
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 6:11 pm
by paul laffing
The "in my pants" game was not irrelevant. It was an off-topic post. It was not innapropriate, too much. It was not spam.
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2003 6:27 pm
by Caranthir the great
It was. It was deleted, and this is how it should be.
End of discussion. Period.