| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On May 01 2019 08:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: XDaunt, did you not read any of my posts in here? I think I summed up your questions in my responses pretty well. What say you? Which post? If you're referring to the one in this thread discussing my ban, then, no, you did not sum the situation up well. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
Your temp ban was not because of one specific post. It was just a combination of your general attitude and the way you were responding to people. I must note that this is a really lazy justification, mostly because in practice all it serves to do is just support a circular logic. There are plenty of people who are belligerent and troublesome without ever getting actioned for it, one good example of which is mentioned in Neb's preceding post. The "bad history" argument, though, is really just used to single out particular people while being utterly vague and nebulous about any real justification. Sure as hell isn't even remotely consistent in what is and isn't actionable. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On May 01 2019 09:07 xDaunt wrote: Which post? If you're referring to the one in this thread discussing my ban, then, no, you did not sum the situation up well. The post where I discuss how there are certain posters who exhibit the same tendencies and therefore get actions more than others. The tendency being bad faith arguing, circuitous rationale, and general assholery. Feel free to name names, I'm sure we know who they are. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On May 01 2019 08:58 Nebuchad wrote: It's irritating to me that something like 75% of DMCD's posts are belligerent and low content and nobody ever seems to bat an eye What's the problem Nebuchad? Point to the one you have the most problem with and I'll see if I can help you. Perhaps by toning down the belligerancy if unwarranted. But rather naturally, my posts will seem low content to you because, I'm not interested in the accelerant thing; the content you are interested in is different from mine. I am only interested in GH explaining his own sentence, and from the looks of it GH isn't interested to explain either. | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On May 06 2019 20:45 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Gabbard is the best of a real bad bunch. I mean half of them are talking about reparations to descendants of slaves 150+ years ago.If theres ever a system ripe for abuse and chaos it’s that. Dems = Lunatics. So we're just letting this slide in the 2020 Dems Poll thread? It's cool. Just don't want to hear shit from any mods when it gets flipped around. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On May 08 2019 09:03 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: So we're just letting this slide in the 2020 Dems Poll thread? It's cool. Just don't want to hear shit from any mods when it gets flipped around. You best start your own website feedback thread for questions about that thread. + Show Spoiler + Off topic, but your problems may be soon solved On May 07 2019 05:54 Seeker wrote: I'm sorry but this: is not an acceptable OP. When I told you to add more content, I didn't mean make an opening statement that reads like a blog. Please edit the opening post. An acceptable opening post should state only facts about the Democratic candidates. It should get the readers interested in investing into the thread. And edit out our PM conversation, since that doesn't need to be public. EDIT: Thread will remain open for now since people are already having discussions. However, if the OP remains unchanged after a couple of days, then the thread will be closed. Or, if someone else feels like they can do a better job and would like to open and maintain a new thread, then feel free to PM me and I will close this one. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On May 08 2019 10:11 Danglars wrote: Oh, chill out for god's sake. There's plenty on this earth to get offended about besides other people's vernacular. You're welcome for the help. Assume, for one brief moment, that I had already seen Seeker's post in the thread, since you know. I fucking quoted from the same thread. I posted my complaint here because why create a whole thread for one post? If it was a lot of issues I found in that thread, I would have, I don't know...aired my complaint in a different manner? You best not assume you know my intentions. And you are most welcome for the help. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On May 08 2019 10:11 Danglars wrote: Oh, chill out for god's sake. There's plenty on this earth to get offended about besides other people's vernacular. You're welcome for the help. Like you don't word your posts specifically to get a rise out of people. There's more things to be upset about than losing my job or wrecking my car. Doesn't mean I ever want to deal with it. Don't goad people into responding a certain way and then act surprised that they took you up on it. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On May 08 2019 10:53 NewSunshine wrote: Like you don't word your posts specifically to get a rise out of people. There's more things to be upset about than losing my job or wrecking my car. Doesn't mean I ever want to deal with it. Don't goad people into responding a certain way and then act surprised that they took you up on it. Today I learned more than one person thinks “you best [verb]” is patronizing and meant to get a rise out of people. Good to know. Does it extend to “you better post that in its own thread,” or is that equally capable of wounding? Any mods want to have input on that first post? | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On May 08 2019 13:17 Danglars wrote: Today I learned more than one person thinks “you best [verb]” is patronizing and meant to get a rise out of people. Good to know. Does it extend to “you better post that in its own thread,” or is that equally capable of wounding? Any mods want to have input on that first post? I would assume, if the mods have a problem with the post, they would say so, and don't need you to speak for them. This coy routine is not necessary. | ||
KwarK
United States43818 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
I also don't think Danglars' first post is even necessarily accurate; given that the mod note in the nominee thread now says it will be moderated similar to the megathread it does not seem farfetched that the mods would accept queries about it here. It is at any rate a question for them to answer. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
I asked about the post I quoted because that seems to be as race baiting as they come. That is all. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On May 08 2019 14:47 KwarK wrote: I didn’t see an issue with “you best X”. It’s not like he said “you best git gon boy”. You don't see a problem with "Oh, chill out for god's sake."? In that is the response to being called out for being patronising, it can be inferred that Danglars is intending to be disrespectful. Anyways, in reporting iplaynettles' post would be the first step. | ||
|
brian
United States9639 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Afreeca Starleague
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
BSL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
