namelesstavern.net

by **Langston** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:05 am

Or - well the EE forum.... forgot the name changed.

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:07 am

my question remains...

this is R&F...

by **Langston** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:07 am

OK - so what you're saying is leave off on THIS thread. Go back to EE?

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:10 am

I'm saying that the rules apply to every forum but EE and TAA. Ya'll have been 'hounding' her an awful lot outside of those 2 forums. If she wants to ignore you in the 2 'free' forums - win win.

by **Langston** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:12 am

Right... so no more flaming Garg in the Rants and Flames forum. Especially in threads that were moved there by a moderator. Keep all flames to the catch-all discussion forum instead.

Gotcha.

by **Tacks** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:13 am

This thread was moved to this forum when in fact it should have been moved to EE.

by **Langston** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:14 am

Yes, I see that now.

by **Drem** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:24 am

god i should've added agrajag to my poll list

HEY KEEP GETTING HEAD FROM FATTIES

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:29 am

Ugzugz wrote:Right... so no more flaming Garg in the Rants and Flames forum. Especially in threads that were moved there by a moderator. Keep all flames to the catch-all discussion forum instead.

Gotcha.

Telling someone that they are wrong for saying something that could possibly be seen as rude does not have to include cum-guzzling, trailer-park whore writing.

Ganzo's innocent post was turned into a 'rant'... usually we would delete the 'single' posts that do this... but when it spirals into a completely different thread, we split it and move it to R&F. Why should this case be any different? Should Azlana have assumed that, because Gargamellow was involved it would eventually lead to the kind of bullshit that I'm pissed at, and therefore move it to EE instead of R&F? No... a flame was started IN a moderated forum and was moved into the appropriate 'moderated' forum. Most of the especially 'bad' hounding took place after the split anyway.

Simply put - If you start a rant in an otherwise innocent thread, you are breaking the rules and your post will be deleted. If the 'flames' in the thread are numerous enough to warrant a new thread, they will be split and moved into the R&F.

Furthermore, the fact that Gargamellow sees this type of bullshit more than any other member makes me notice it a bit more. Flames are obviously allowed in the R&F section, but you all are hounding her past the annoying level.

by **Tacks** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:32 am

I could be mistaken, but isn't R & F for Everquest related flames? Ii's listed under the Everquest related forums. This ranting and flaming had nothing to do with EQ

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:34 am

Well... it's kind of gray =/. I didn't want to make ANOTHER forum-category specifically for rants... but then I made a WoW rants forum and nothing made sense..

generally speaking, this is a place to rant about shit..

by **Tacks** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:36 am

Ok well that's quite confusing. I just thought EE was for going off about anything. R&F was for EQ flames and Pit of Woe was for WoW flames...head spinning.

So...we can rant here but the rants will be edited by mods...but we're not supposed to rant in EE where it's unedited?

by **Langston** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:44 am

It's pretty simple Taxx:

- No rants and flames in the forums. Exceptions being: R&F, EE, and AA
- Special rules for R&F: these are tame flames that do not attack any one person more than some unspecified number of times per period... what that period may be is unknown to anyone but the moderators at this time. If a thread is created in this forum, you may flame and rant as long as no one person is singled out repeatedly. This would violate the basic principles of what rants and flames are all about.
- Special rules for EE and AA: No racial or other icky references. Flame and rant here for anything that you can't rant and flame about in the rants and flames forum. These threads are allowed to be rants and flames but please keep them to off-topic discussions unless such topics could actually be considered related to a topic that is actually covered in another forum (and about which you aren't ranting or flaming about someone more than the designated number of times per period - see above).

Does that about cover it?

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:46 am

EE and TAA are basically the same... I just made the split so the 'on-topic' people were happy and the something-awful people had their own spot...

Rants is rants is rants... there are an awful lot of non-eq rants here... we don't move them to EE or such. I mean, if it's extra silly and fefn-esque, we'd move it... but someone ranting about the economy or Mindia or whatever would stay here.

This isn't preferential treatment, it's a weighted decision. By contrast, if some 12-post chump had made the mail-order bride statement, a rant still would have occurred. It would have been split to R&F. People would have called the guy an idiot and life would continue. Even THIS rant 'would' be okay if it were targeted towards someone else... But ya'll aren't focusing on what she said... you are repeating the same type of shit that she's seeing in almost any thread she posts in. That's the 'hounding' rule.

by **Tacks** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:46 am

no..let's condense them all into 1 forum and fuck the haters

by **Tacks** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:48 am

Oh and what do I become after queer eye

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:49 am

Take the emphasis off the 'flame' aspect and focus on the 'hounding' rule. THIS is what I'm combating here... not the location of the flame. THIS thread is hardly the first example of the rule being broken in regards to Gargamellow. THIS thread just happens to be the latest one - so I'm stepping in.

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:50 am

Taxx wrote:Oh and what do I become after queer eye

Hmmm...

I just realized, the ranks aren't displayed in the F.A.Q. anymore... I need to do that really quick.

by **Tacks** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:51 am

If you want to be technical, she's just as much at fault for the hounding rule.

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:54 am

Wouldn't that be funny though? If I banned someone for being mean to taxx?

by **Tacks** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:58 am

Hah, I wouldn't ask anyone to be banned. I'd just run them off, like usual.

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:00 am

Yeah... but... the whole concept would be awesome.

by **Langston** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:32 am

Well - if that is the case, then quantify "hounding". I do not post on every thread she posts on. I post on the threads where she says something stupid or inane - or in the case of the Ganzo thread, I made a single line comment regarding something rude she said. Both Taxx and I agreed that that thread wasn't a place for a flame fest - she created the flame and we just refused to back down to her stupidity.

Regardless - this *IS* preferential treatment for Gargamellow. I didn't see you stepping in when Mindia was getting attacked on every thread.... remember Mindia? The guy who you even changed his title to be insulting? Or does that not count because YOU didn't like Mindia and you feel sorry for Gargamellow?

I'm sorry that she is so stupid, ugly, and whorish. I am also sorry that she feels the need to flaunt these things. I am NOT sorry for flaming her for it.

by **The Kizzy** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:35 am

I dont think shes ugly.

by **vonkaar** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 9:38 am

I don't have to quantify anything. I was seeing a trend with her posts and I want it stopped. If you or others continue doing it, I'll ban you. It's that simple.

P.s. the rule didn't exist when Mindia was here and even then, the 'hounding' wasn't nearly as mean-spirited as what I've seen towards Gargamellow and a few others.

namelesstavern.net

Getting Old..

Who is online