Agreed lollimeister.
:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by ImAnOgre
Please tell me you are joking. :confused:
Printable View
Agreed lollimeister.
:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by ImAnOgre
Please tell me you are joking. :confused:
Its like falsely screaming fire in a packed movie, also very illegal. Look up the Italian Hall Disaster, Schenck v. United States, and "clear and present danger".
Amerika, the land of freedumb. :|
I find racist comments to be a sign of bad taste.
I could say things that would annoy racists too.
--------------------------------------
Talking about a world without politics and religion seems to be a "thread derailment" (trolling/flaming/spam) in a thread called "Name off-topics that have nothing to do with sex, politics and religion!".
Interesting.
If we think we can talk about A or B only...
It seems that if A is not B, and A is forbidden, talking about not A (which is B) is forbidden to, which leads to think that we can't talk about anything.
Why don't they close the CC forum at once and end it? Without it, no one should need to receive an infraction.
If the moderator knew who I am in real life, he would not be doing this to me. I am not a high school kid, or a Mr. Nobody nowadays.
I have met VIPs that treat me better than him. Some of them are people he would only dream of.
In the past when I was Mr. Nobody I realized that only people in middle levels mistreat people. Real VIPs do not do that.
When you mistreat someone, you need to make sure he will not be your customer... or your boss in the future.
Life allows people to harvest what they seed.
So in the future he would be in our situation.
I need not to move a finger.
Do you mean the old joke...Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbuk2
USA = Union Sovietika Amerikana (a south american told it to me)
Can he be banned for triple posting?
Reported
:mad:
Bad day? Or Atari moderation here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitter Jeweler
One interesting thing about knowing the whereabouts of politics is that politicians do not believe what they say.
Their words are often made to make people behave in a certain way.
In politics there is no good and evil.
War takes place when war is seen as politically cheaper than peace. It is not about good vs evil.
Good vs Evil is a fairy tale designed for simple and uneducated minds.
Politics is about convenience (for politicians) and not about values.
Without values, anything is justfiable under the light of convenience.
So taking nationalist positions is like being a soccer hooligan. But people are nationalist hooligan is not what happens when people talk about money.
One clear example is health reform. As a patriot, a citizen would gladly pay for a public option to save the lives of a fellow citizen in disgrace.
Nationalism is merely theatrical and hipocrisy nowadays. For many people, patriotism ends when money comes.
I wonder if I should re-think my old position on ignore functions
Circumstance should drive policy, not some never-changing conviction. Positions that never change are positions neglected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
So.... I'll just ask a question.... as you always seemed so open to accept those from DBZ....Quote:
Originally Posted by littlelolligagged
Actually, I won't ask that question. I'll just leave you guessing.
Should they be embraced simply for the sake of change, though? There are reasons for having a blanket ban on ignoring folks, no matter how pestilent and banal they be. I can see the reasons for ignoring them, too, but I suppose I don't think it's a very constructive policy. And as you know, the universe loves only destruction, construction requires effort, and patience.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
It looks Timmy is hardening his position, and losing respect, and getting tougher when that happens.
It seems he has not been trained in group management and leadership, which is the equivalent of becoming a teacher and trying to cover the mouth of students, used to speak their mind, with tape.
Communities self-regulate, and entering a community without earning respect is not advised. It is unwise, because communities outnumber moderators, no matter how much power moderator has.
Points may have a discouraging effect or an encouraging effect.
If member sees the infraction as an offense or injustice, points will achieve the opposite effect. Instead of discouraging a behavior, it may create a stronger disrespect towards moderator.
What he sees a "threat" is a reflection of his own emotions, a subjective perception. This is why people feel inconsistency. Big egos are weak characters, and the bigger the ego, the bigger the threat that is perceived. Being a moderator is a job for people with no ego.
He seems to be more prompt to add infraction points based on what his nerves and ego dictate.
And the most sad is that he feels it is OK.
Emotions are inconsistent, so he is creating and enforcing unwritten and inconsistent rules, which makes him to lose even more respect.
It reminds me Derek Smart community very long ago.
It is good to have jumped off the ship. I do not want to be there when it sinks.
Timmy had a bad start. He should have tried to make us accept him, first. Today AtariCC looks like a circus, a pathetic neurotic circus with a war of egos.
This is the time when I compare the job Dread and Rand did as moderators all this time. Congrats Dread and Rand!!
No, unless your life needs spicing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Ignore doesn't work anyway.Quote:
There are reasons for having a blanket ban on ignoring folks, no matter how pestilent and banal they be.
The things you don't have to work for and which require no care are things hardly worth doing. We all value building things on whatever scale. Its the human condition. If the univese loves anything, its that.Quote:
I can see the reasons for ignoring them, too, but I suppose I don't think it's a very constructive policy. And as you know, the universe loves only destruction, construction requires effort, and patience.
The universe loves construction? Or the human condition?
Show your work, please
Sorry, even behind the ambiguity I mispoke anyway. I don't think the universe loves at all. The human condition must have something to do with building things. Probably some genetic drive that benefits survival. It feels like purpose.
It's based on greed, which is based in thermo-dynamics. Similarly, thermo-dynamics have gifted all life with a passionate need for destruction. As a result, each generation has participants quite willing to gleefully experiment in murder and violence.
I know the universe doesn't love anything, in the direct sense of the term. It's just poetic shorthand for observations of trends in physical laws.
I like to play Civ4, play with lego, plant a garden, draw a picture out of greed? Maybe building a life savings can be called greed but---? I don't know I can agree with that. Can you explain the thermo-dynamics basis of greed a little?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
I fully accept that. Entropy is a kind of destruction, isn't it? Its fundamental to the universe.Quote:
I know the universe doesn't love anything, in the direct sense of the term. It's just poetic shorthand for observations of trends in physical laws.
It's a bit more complicated than "I post at forums because it gets me money".Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Life, a cyclical process of construction, is about making ordered structures. But, due to thermo-dynamical realities, it needs energy for it. Where does it get energy? Other ordered structures, other life forms. We must consume other life to exist ourselves, a basic truth. In a larger scheme, all fauna is parasitical to the flora. (I am omitting the life-forms at the bottom of the oceans who feed on geo-thermal energy from this analysis as they do not really contribute to our biosphere) Therefore, the need to destruct is instinct. We must rip things from trees and butcher other breathing creatures. We have a need.
So this need fuels behaviour. We wish to ensure we can satiate it. We create towards that goal. Even cathedrals were built, after all, due to the need for societal power, and thus resources, for the shamans.
And directly from the sun. It all comes from the sun, don't forget. And, as a side, we will soon or later be able to get even our food energy directly from the sun - just synthesize food instead of paracitize the biosphere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
It works the same way down there - just substitute the sun for geothermal vents. Or vice versa.Quote:
(I am omitting the life-forms at the bottom of the oceans who feed on geo-thermal energy from this analysis as they do not really contribute to our biosphere)
But come on - harvesting a cow or wheat is destruction? We breed them, care for them, keep their species alive too. Better than they would be if left wild. With understanding, we nurture each other. Its behavioral symbiosis.Quote:
Therefore, the need to destruct is instinct. We must rip things from trees and butcher other breathing creatures.
The need is for energy and the goal is continued existance, short and long term. No doubt. But I think its a stretch to label all our activities to further that goal destruction.Quote:
So this need fuels behaviour. We wish to ensure we can satiate it. We create towards that goal. Even cathedrals were built, after all, due to the need for societal power, and thus resources, for the shamans.
Do you think the cow understands it is nurturing you, Chacha? What about the wheat?
I didn't forget the Sun, that's why fauna is parasitical to flora. The rest of your arguments seem to be silly but maybe I'm not reading it right.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Of course not. Does that matter? It isn't any less real without understanding.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlelolligagged
Maybe. Or maybe I'm a fucking idiot. Or you're too deeply jaded. Or something else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Have you noticed how is that lately Timmy is spamming the CC forum with mod derailing comments that are not on topic (not thread topic centered)? He also is flamebaiting people with infraction points. He is also trolling with warnings. Isn't it incredible what happens when you give too much power to the wrong guy?
Timmy: If you are sunk in quicksand, the more you move, the more you sink yourself.
The original old saying was too profane involving a more disgusting substance, so I used quicksand in my expression.
Tim seems to be an emotionally challenged individual. He's on a power trip right now, probably a sexual thing for him.
If you word this a little different, more truthfully perhaps, you're making Nessus' point.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
On further consideration, I think you don't understand. Your vision is clouded by the dark side of the force.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
You describe the relationship between animals and their food as one of destruction. The animal destroys what the food has used its energy source to make. And everything humans create is to further that destruction.
I think your mistake is perspective. You look at it on an individual basis, but life isn't concerned for the individual. It's the species that matters. And recall from your ecology classes that predator and prey species both benefit from their relationship. The same goes for humanity and our domesticated species. We all benefit. Humanity obviously can be very destructive, but its not basic in the nature of life like you say. Its not even basic to our species. Its mostly just an imbalance between power and understanding. We have the power to manipulate our natural world well beyond our understanding of the consequences of our manipulation. That's not destruction endemic to the nature of life, or people, that's just ignorance.
And everything dies, whether killed and eaten, by accident, by design, or the turning of the seasons. To say killing for food is somehow evidence of our innate destructive nature is silly.
No, Nessus' point is in error. And you can't handle the truth anyway. :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
I don't think you understood what was being said, at all :( Ah well.
Could be. It all began with me asking you to explain. Choose different words this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Wut? Entropy cares not for how you feel about the deliciousness of a specific mammal. Entropy cares not at all. Entropy just is.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Nah. I doubt understanding my ideas would benefit you anyway, so what the hell?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
To borrow a page from your book
Let's call Sigmund Freud...:DQuote:
Originally Posted by wabigbear
"...The picture was not anything pornographic, just shirtless doing a muscle pose (what many males do), and pants were obvious in the picture (at the correct position, in that they were not baggy or saggy)."Quote:
Originally Posted by wabigbear
http://www.ataricommunity.com/forums...7&postcount=12
Are baggy pants pornographic?
Shit.
I was highlighting the fact he actually felt it necessary to make a careful observation of the type of pants the underage kid was wearing.
Yeah, yeah.
I'm just concerned that baggy pants are porn.
As are saggy pants apparently.
Timmeh deleted my post about his crappy moderating over there in that thread. :haha:
Probably not. Imitation is the greatest form ofQuote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
I know. Everything is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
This just in! Discussing dinosaurs with lasers fighting the Roman Empire is not okay, unless that dinosaur is Mechagodzilla, and that empire is Japan...
Big ego and low self esteem makes people to consider a remark on him more offensive than sexual images, political comments or religious discussions. Right now his fight is not about politics or religion, but about trying to censor "thread derailment" of those who think he is a lamer. Showing evidence of such a thing is called "discontent" or "flame/trolling".Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Obviously he needs a mirror, for he is blaming other of his worst faults.
I made a humorous remark about the Galactic Empire (politics in a mythical civilization) and this was my first infraction in 10 years at the AtariCC. It should show the kind of LOSER Atari appointed as moderator.
My sin was not violating AtariCC rules, but hurting Timmy's ego. This is why Timmy thinks his actions are "justified". Everyone with a big ego needs to justify attacks conducted in the name of self-defense.
Timmy should take a vacation offline, sort his emotions, kill his own ego, and then come back. I might welcome Timmy without the big ego.
@Timmy: Ego is a creature that starts a fight, blames others, and makes you to be beaten by others like a slave. How do yo set free? When you let your ego die and you see that you lose nothing if you let your ego to be defeated. You are not your ego. Ego is a mask we use as a shield to hide our true self.
Take this as valuable feedback for your life. I may not be in your life forever, but your ego will haunt you with suffering, until you kill it.
A big ego makes a big target. People anywhere would gladly want to hit it as it becomes bigger.
Please, refrain from offending Julius Caesar in your posts...:D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
Negativity could ionize the forum and damage servers. If I post this, there where we know, I would earn an infraction for pointing out the obvious.Quote:
Negativity and complaining are no longer tolerated
Complaining can also be done in an alternate way. 1 of 25 customers complain. Moderators may want to reduce it to 0 of 25 to save costs.
New forum rules:
Rule 1. Moderators are always right.
Rule 2. Moderators are never wrong.
Rule 3. In case Moderators are wrong, rule 1 applies.
Rule 4. Moderators never derail threads, they just rant about moderation in any thread they want. Non moderators are not allowed to derail threads.
Rule 5. Negative comments and complaining is forbidden, even if moderators transmit negative emotions with infraction points.
Rule 6. Flaming and trolling is forbidden. Questioning or labeling with adjectives what a moderator does is considered flaming or trolling.
Rule 7. Humor is to be considered either spam or an attack to the big ego of moderators.
Rule 8. You are allowed to become moderator only if you belong to the list of authorized people. This list includes Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, Stalin, Hugo Cháves, Leopoldo Galtieri, Augusto Pinochet and Adolf Hitler.
Rule 9. To speak your mind is considered negativity, specially when it hurts egos of moderators with low selfesteem. If you want freedom to talk without hurting egos, go to China.
Rule 10. Talking about a world without negativity and without complains is also considered as complaining and negativity.
Rule 11. Not talking about politics, religion, sex and advertising will be considered as an attempt to deceive moderators not to see the politics, religion, sex and advertising in your comments, and therefore it will be subject to infraction.
In the thread "Are You A Fan of Comics Adapted Films?" Timmy said...
Timmy should set an infraction upon himself for saying that.Quote:
This thread is for expressing your like or dislike of the various animated films that have come out over the years
It is negativity and complain impersonated by a thread created by a moderator.
Is it a trap? Then it is flameaiting, trolling and spam.
<O>^<O> was banned and he said...
It seems the trap may have worked. Timmy violates the rules, and he enforces the only rule: "Never attack Timmy's ego". The thread should be renamed "fall in my trap".Quote:
Originally Posted by <O>^<O>
After that Timmy used the words "affair" and "sexual". He violated the rule about not talking about sex.
There is another proof that it is in the eye of the beholder.Quote:
Where I said "due to the indication that Ultraman was "having an affair" with an Earth woman. Thus the "3" minutes indication in the post/picture as well." Meaning a sexual encounter that was implied, and that due to his "timer", he was only able to do so for 3 minutes.
There is a test called Roschard, where everyone sees what he wants to see.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_UqCLULs_ve...roschard+2.jpg
So I would wonder if Timmy has a problem.
But then Timmy says...
Of course, under moderator judgement, moderator is never wrong and never violates the rules, because HE IS THE RULES.Quote:
The rules also state that Atari admins and moderators will make judgement calls on the issues of situations in accordance to what is spelled out in the rules (meaning, we will interpret and make assessment in the nature the rules are expected to be carried out, based on the content that is in question).
then he implies Superman is vulgar...
Vulgarity is in the eye of the beholder.Quote:
a picture is scrutinized for the message conveyed
Everyone sees what he wants to see.
Proof? What do you see here? Karaoke or something else? A kid would say "the woman is singing", Timmy probably would see something else.
http://thumb9.shutterstock.com.edges...n-12743950.jpg
If Superman is vulgar, I wonder what could be said about Spiderman...
http://siguealconejoblanco.com/cine/.../spiderman.jpg
I got an infraction for making a joke about the Galactic Empire.
He says he was modertator since 2006. Well, I was a member since 1999, before the big crash of 2000.
So I think I have enough moral authority to say Timmy moderation sucks. Unfortunately for Timmy, he is misusing power, and some day he will know what it is to be in the other side. Life gives to you what you give to life. I do not need to move a finger, life enforces that rule by itself.
Does anyone actually read ar81's posts anymore?