Banned Topic

[Vector]

I dont think that taking jabs at someone who cant respond is what this thread is about.

Nope, it's not, but it happens all the time anyway.

[Member_of_STARS]

I dont think that taking jabs at someone who cant respond is what this thread is about.

[Manji]

I too agree with that sentiment, and it was until it was brought here saying why News Bot was banned. I felt it necessary to let people see both sides of things (especially when comments such as "maybe News Bot needs to calm down" as if he was the only one at fault and had actually broken any rules) were beginning to be posted. It is now being resolved in private and it'll stay there.

No League for the Musketeers I take it ?

@Rosetta Mist: +1.

[WeskerIncarnate]

Corrin's got a week off due to posting porn links and goatse. Possible extension to permanent depending on his behavior when he returns due to past issues.

He tells me off about how 4chan is a bunch of stupidity, and then does THAT.

That's a bit hypocritical to me. Week ban deserved.

I mean, if he didn't see any kind of banning coming from that (which is part of what made doing that so stupid in the first place)....

[Vector]

^I agree. He's had a lot of second chances...

[Stu]

That sort of stuff should be perma stuff, particularly taking past discrepencies into account. If someone clicks that kind of thing when they're in work or school the effects and are seen the effects are going to be pretty bad.

Not that my opinion matters, just saying.

[Dot50Cal]

Corrin's got a week off due to posting porn links and goatse. Possible extension to permanent depending on his behavior when he returns due to past issues.

[Dot50Cal]

.

[Corrin]

*~fOrUm^DrAmA~*

[Alexia_Ashford]

I too agree with that sentiment, and it was until it was brought here saying why News Bot was banned. I felt it necessary to let people see both sides of things (especially when comments such as "maybe News Bot needs to calm down" as if he was the only one at fault and had actually broken any rules) were beginning to be posted. It is now being resolved in private and it'll stay there.

[nemesiswontdie]

Not that my opinion counts much...but shouldn't some of this be discussed among the mods/admins privately rather than taking the back biting publicly? It's very unprofessional for all parties involved. Yes, most of the problem stemmed from the private forum accessible to only a select number of members, but this has escalated beyond that. While this thread is great to inform why members receive bans, I don't believe it is the proper place for people to discuss the fairness of said bans, especially when the matter at hand is of the integrity of well respected sites.

I too am with this.

[Vector]

Not that my opinion counts much...but shouldn't some of this be discussed among the mods/admins privately rather than taking the back biting publicly? It's very unprofessional for all parties involved. Yes, most of the problem stemmed from the private forum accessible to only a select number of members, but this has escalated beyond that. While this thread is great to inform why members receive bans, I don't believe it is the proper place for people to discuss the fairness of said bans, especially when the matter at hand is of the integrity of well respected sites.

^ This. I'm all for you guys figuring out your shit together, but isn't that what said 'private' forums are for?

[Bertha]

Not that my opinion counts much...but shouldn't some of this be discussed among the mods/admins privately rather than taking the back biting publicly? It's very unprofessional for all parties involved. Yes, most of the problem stemmed from the private forum accessible to only a select number of members, but this has escalated beyond that. While this thread is great to inform why members receive bans, I don't believe it is the proper place for people to discuss the fairness of said bans, especially when the matter at hand is of the integrity of well respected sites.

[Alexia_Ashford]

Am I bitching? I'm sorry. I just had to re-read my posts here now, just so I could be sure... that... the majority, if not all, the so called bitching seems to come from you at the moment. Adding citations to the stuff you guys have written should be your job. You're the guys who've written it. Don't expect the user to cross-check everything you've written and go on a treasure hunt to find the source material for each individual statement presented as fact.

You might also want to go check your history for edits both under my username and James' account, to see some of the nit-picky contributions I've made to Project-Umbrella in the past. Unfortunately, your general attitude and inability to accept feedback (and act on it) just makes me (as well as many others) feel it's been a complete waste of time even trying to contribute to that site.

Also, you didn't do all the articles on Project-Umbrella, stop taking credit for other people's work. And, oh, do your research next time before you make baseless and snarky remarks and comments about stuff.



Would these be the same Umbrella Chronicles and Resident Evil 5 which I had to boot up and take pictures of to show Mr. Spencer in order to prove that they did not use Oswell, but in fact Ozwell?Also, as a general tip; I think you should work on that elitist attitude.

You missed this one. Nothing News Bot replied to it was especially insulting other than calling you a "pompous prick" at one point. He might be having a bad day, I don't know. My main point is though, did his behaviour in this instance (review his posts again in that topic) deserve a 4 day ban? I don't remember anyone recieving a ban straight away, completely avoiding the infraction system other than MoS. Especially given the argument was with a moderator who made no attempt to quell the argument pre-ban.

[Carnivol]

Word of the day: kaitaishinsho

Since people might want to know the full context of my horribly insulting comments;

This reminds me; PU still doesn't have any source citing for the articles nor the content within them. Only category tags. I requested it before it went live, and also brought it up a few times post-launch, but alas...

The closest you get to any citations on PU are the transcripts of the files, as they're sorted by game.

You can't just expect stuff to be taken as good fish just 'cause it's "put there in good faith" or "written by someone who has the book." It's not without reason that most wikipedia articles gets flagged whenever someone edits them without adding sources for the new information that's added. Besides, it's pretty useless to say that "**** is ****", if there is no way for a user to actually verify this, without buying every single franchise product, to then carefully browse through every single piece of it in order to find where this "fact" supposedly comes from.

It's also a rather important thing when it comes to spotting mistakes and verifying shit later. Not citing the sources of content is lazy, unprofessional and most of all pretty darned stupid.

Anyway, those two posts triggered a long chain of fantastic posts with some usual "E-Attitude", encouragement to stop fingering one's asshole, poorly presented attempts at guilty tripping, CAPS LOCK, incorrect accusations, incorrect information, more CAPS LOCK, snarky sarcasm, ignorance, etc... So, Emma and Gareth, should I go on? Or should I just cut it here before I make him look even more of an ass for something he for all I know might've posted on a very bad day?

All in a sub-forum which description contains;
A place where mature and thoughtful members of the forum can discuss Resident Evil

As for the Hogwarts talk (this is where they got that from - in the Darkside topic on the public forums);

Seeing as you so fondly speak up about how you fix things where you believe Capcom is wrong and supposedly retroactively correct them on things, I'm merely just pointing out the fact that I'd prefer to have a clean one without any of your wizardry or translation magic applied to it.

A simple request for him to just post the original text for something he constantly kept referring to. Not his own article, transcript or translation for it. Just the original source text, which was what he kept referring to as the a reliable and good source for various statements.


In my eyes, this seems like someone just getting cornered in a case of potentially being wrong, and getting all worked up over the thought of someone proofreading it. Potentially on a really bad in the midst of Christmas/New Year stress.