Jedi Council Forums - Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
Excellence Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 10/16/05 11:20pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	The Rhondarooian approach should be utilisied for the anti-Maraites. She's not real. -----signature----- Rock-a-by baby, on the treetop, Beaming with pride, the filth they hold, But when the wind blows, my temper implodes, High above a pit, filled with sharkticons, Down will come hardcover addicts, beaming no more. ©
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Ris_jSarek Registered: Feb '05	Date Posted: 10/16/05 11:45pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Consider it signed, not that I've been involved in this debacle yet . . . MCP: Here's an idea: why not treat VIPs like anyone else, instead of paragons of virtue? Being a VIP doesn't automatically instill incredible insight and infallibility to that person. That's a very good idea. The thing is, if you treat anyone in such a rough-handed manner that a reasonable person in their place would choose to leave, you've gone too far. Borleias (you wrote a lot, so I'm going to do some snipping for my own sanity if nothing else): I'd take this as a representative of this board's general view of flaming, which seems to be categorized as more important than having something useful to contribute. This is an attitude I genuinely do not understand. Well, from my point of view, it is more important. Civility fosters communication that is more likely to inspire useful contributions. If civility is absent, people are discouraged from contributing useful ideas to the board. If you have civility without useful contributions, you at least have a community that's poised to accept useful contributions when they come along. If you have useful contributions without civility, you will soon be without either. Arguably, cultured posts of poor quality are a greater disruption to the board than flames in responses of higher quality. The former is, in my experience, the true provocation for flames that follow, which is actually mostly related to disbelief in the flamer's mind anyone can be that stupid. The latter is actually an attempt to restore order to the board. The thing is, plenty of people ARE that stupid - and stupider, even. Others just have a different viewpoint that frames things in such a radically different way that they don't seem coherent to one's own viewpoint. The former will never get smarter if they're driven away by the informed people; the latter will never be able to contribute their unique viewpoint if they're driven away before they can find a way to communicate it effectively to the board. The unfortunate thing about flames is that they generally are easy to identify. As opposed to poor posts or more veiled insults, which sometimes take a bit of knowledge and good judgment. That's why IMO the worst mods attack and ban for poking him the wrong way, the next worst do so for flames, and the good ones for your content. Critiquing boardmates follow similar rules. As far as I'm concerned, it would take an egregiously persistent poster of inane content to even make a mod think of banning him or her; there does come a point where raw idiocy can kill a board when applied with too much frequency. However, even bad content can be the springboard for good ideas; and corrected bad content sometimes brings a poster up to a level where they can contribute effectively to an insightful discussion. In the end, I'd just mention that There are Few Better Friends than Those Willing to Tell you Unpleasant Truths in an Unpleasant Manner. Those few, of course, are those willing to tell you unpleasant truths in a pleasant manner. ;-) -----signature----- http://churchofbrad.com/jsarek/ Proud recipient of Halagad_Ventor's MOO (Master of Obscurity) Award, Brett_Bass's Spiffy Crown™, and Thrawn McEwok's "Ohh...? Interesting..." Award™
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
GrandAdmiralJello Title: Emperor • EUC • JCC Registered: Nov '00	Date Posted: 10/17/05 12:05am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 12:10am (1 edits total) Edited By: GrandAdmiralJello
	Borleias: Can I just say that I laughed out loud when you started your post with "I disagree" at a seemingly innocuous comment of mine. It's just funny how we're almost never on the same side. Arguably, cultured posts of poor quality are a greater disruption to the board than flames in responses of higher quality. The former is, in my experience, the true provocation for flames that follow, which is actually mostly related to disbelief in the flamer's mind anyone can be that stupid. The latter is actually an attempt to restore order to the board. I disagree. A cultured and polite user, no matter how ignorant, is more impressive to me than a so-called quality poster who tends to flame a lot. Why? Simple--brute force is inelegant and a patent waste of time. Those who practice such techniques claim intellectual superiority, whereas I see this as crass, crude, and really rather base. In the professional world, for instance, one will not advance far at all with such puerile behavior--civility, tact, and etiquette take people much further than rude insistence and the sort. I've never ever been impressed by those tactics. They don't prove anything save for pure insensitivity, and rather than gain appreciation for the user or the material they just garner contempt. Deserved contempt, I might add. I would never hesitate to discuss matters with a mistaken user who was polite about things, but I would not bother to help anyone who was blithely aggressive about it. If one has erudition, then they'd best display it in their manner as well as their rhetoric, or all their education has simply gone for nought. They've learned nothing because whatever brilliance they may possess (and I'd arguable whether they have any if it's just potential knowledge that cannot be properly put forth), they've failed to use it as it should be used. The argument used seems to be that if a party is correct, then might makes right and their conduct is excusable simply on those grounds. Well, it's not. That's the sort of argument a child would put forth, not a seasoned rhetorician or a professional individual. It's utterly repugnant and the lack of apology from those individuals is even more shameful. -----signature----- SPQR Vates Jυλιαδις Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque - Ennius Tu regere imperio populos, Romanæ, memento; hæ tibi erunt artes; pascisque imponere morem, parcere subjectis et debellare superbos - Virgil
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
johnthejedi24 Registered: Oct '04	Date Posted: 10/17/05 12:16am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	I didn't even take part in the coversation but I will sign, I agree that people have their own opinions and they should not put those opinios right in peoples faces, that goes for both the saxonites which I am a part of that, the fanlorian-whatever that name was. Lets all try and get along together! -----signature----- All hail the Imperial Remnant.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Borleias Registered: Dec '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 2:20am Subject: PGC: Answers to people who actually READ "My View"
	Ris_jSarek posted: That's a very good idea. The thing is, if you treat anyone in such a rough-handed manner that a reasonable person in their place would choose to leave, you've gone too far. How about, if we treated them in a reasonable manner. Then they left to another bastion. Sarek posted: Borleias (you wrote a lot, so I'm going to do some snipping for my own sanity if nothing else): That's OK. You are the first guy that even really tried to discuss this, instead of just repeating the positions that are all overdone by the end of the 1st page. Sarek posted: I'd take this as a representative of this board's general view of flaming, which seems to be categorized as more important than having something useful to contribute. This is an attitude I genuinely do not understand. Well, from my point of view, it is more important. Civility fosters communication that is more likely to inspire useful contributions. If civility is absent, people are discouraged from contributing useful ideas to the board. If you have civility without useful contributions, you at least have a community that's poised to accept useful contributions when they come along. If you have useful contributions without civility, you will soon be without either. My (and I suspect mine has similarities with the average Saxtonite) experiences will tend to disagree. A board with zero civility does not live long, but I've honestly never seen such a board anyway - I think they exist only in theory, or maybe they die so fast that they kind of flash to ashes. Rather, what I've seen is that useful contributions (or at least a contribution that suggests you have potential), and a showing of integrity begets respect. This, in most cases, begets comradeship. That, not necessarily civility in the conventional sense (though you are not likely to be flamed now), fosters good and honest communications that is more likely to inspire further useful contributions. In "Saxtonite" dominated boards like SDN, your first big post is your entrance exam. Look at the main site - it helps you prepare for it. Now try and say something semi-useful and be prepared to defend it with evidence (a real SDN test). If you pass it, you still have a few more posts on probation, but this is like 2/3rds of the test. Generally, if you make a good post at the start, you'd make it. If you don't, you may well get flamed - but showing you have the integrity to be honest; the will to stay, learn and eventually contribute; as well as having the mental flexibility to concede will also buy you points. It is a race if you keep failing as to whether you leave crying first or they send you flying from the window. Those who make through the "Flame Test" proceed to give high quality discourse. In general anyway. When a board values civility over useful contributions and integrity, it loses sight of the main reason for civility, which is at best a means to the end of Encouraging Useful Discussion - putting the Means over Ends. What happens is that the moderators begin to be picked for enforcing civility rather than discussion itself. As an example, DP4M might know everything there is to know about the EU, and efficient in crossing out four letter words, but IIRC when I came in, his posts suggested a lack of understanding on the Occult Scaling Method - the Grade One of visual analysis. A mod should not be expected to be omniniscent, but this is basic stuff... Because of the enforced civility, nobody is allowed to be rude, and eventually a dark pool begins to gather at the bottom of the board. Occasionally, the pool grabs a victim... An extreme example at the end of the slope is what SW.com is reputed to be, a place in which proper discussion is almost impossible because of "civility" concerns. Sarek posted: Arguably, cultured posts of poor quality are a greater disruption to the board than flames in responses of higher quality. The former is, in my experience, the true provocation for flames that follow, which is actually mostly related to disbelief in the flamer's mind anyone can be that stupid. The latter is actually an attempt to restore order to the board. The thing is, plenty of people ARE that stupid - and stupider, even. Others just have a different viewpoint that frames things in such a radically different way that they don't seem coherent to one's own viewpoint. The former will never get smarter if they're driven away by the informed people; the latter will never be able to contribute their unique viewpoint if they're driven away before they can find a way to communicate it effectively to the board. Intellectually, we know that some people are that stupid (after all, some people do have Down's Syndrome and all). However, one has to ask the question. If they are stupid, do we really want to keep them on our board? For the latter, statistically, the number of people with truly unique viewpoints in a debate that has gone on for a long time is actually quite rare. More often then not, they come in with a "unique" viewpoint. They find out that it had been refought so many times it has made it onto a FAQ as a Rejected Viewpoint. Besides, if he consistently cannot communicate with us, maybe he is better off in another board. Furthermore, Saxtonites also tend to stick out olive branches to give people a chance to explain themselves - just that they don't think they should keep giving the branch on for miles. Sarek posted: As far as I'm concerned, it would take an egregiously persistent poster of inane content to even make a mod think of banning him or her; there does come a point where raw idiocy can kill a board when applied with too much frequency. So we have a point of agreement that idiocy can be detrimental to the boarrd. Sarek posted: However, even bad content can be the springboard for good ideas; and corrected bad content sometimes brings a poster up to a level where they can contribute effectively to an insightful discussion. Yes, but the correction itself can hardly be of genuinely high quality. Bad content can occasionally spring off good ideas, but it is a very poor second to good content being the springboard. When a poster is forced to answer a crummy post, it takes time away from him making a good post. Sarek posted: Those few, of course, are those willing to tell you unpleasant truths in a pleasant manner. ;-) Yes, but sometimes, the unpleasant manner is more effective. Sometimes, you just need to slap a person to get them to listen. GrandAdmiralJello posted: Borleias: Can I just say that I laughed out loud when you started your post with "I disagree" at a seemingly innocuous comment of mine. It's just funny how we're almost never on the same side. Are you basically a "maximalist"? If so, perhaps we are on the same side more often than we are not. However, if I see that there are enough people fighting more or less on my side, generally I refrain from putting my oar in the water. So maybe I'm not fighting because you already are. Ah, you are the 2nd to take a shot. Here goes: Jello posted: Arguably, cultured posts of poor quality are a greater disruption to the board than flames in responses of higher quality. The former is, in my experience, the true provocation for flames that follow, which is actually mostly related to disbelief in the flamer's mind anyone can be that stupid. The latter is actually an attempt to restore order to the board. I disagree. A cultured and polite user, no matter how ignorant, is more impressive to me than a so-called quality poster who tends to flame a lot. You just said, a turd that is willing to conform to arbitary standards of conduct is more impressive to you than someone who has integrity enough to tell you all the unpleasant truths and opinions instead of hiding them behind the excuse of arbitrary standards? [quote=Jello]Why? Simple--brute force is inelegant and a patent waste of time. Those who practice such techniques claim intellectual superiority, whereas I see this as crass, crude, and really rather base.[/quote] Just to make this clear, I don't think they claim superiority because of such techniques. Actually, they may think it is rather crude, like belching. But they claim intellectual superiority over those who do not know how to place the importance of the crudeness correctly (somewhere very close to the bottom). [quote=Jello]In the professional world, for instance, one will not advance far at all with such puerile behavior--civility, tact, and etiquette take people much further than rude insistence and the sort.[/quote] Honestly, the last is actually a tragedy of mankind, who still has not evolved to place skin-deep things like politeness in their proper place (which is quite low). Nevertheless, while I'd agree in our imperfect world that people who are rude do not get far, people who are incompetent shouldn't get anywhere. If they get farther ahead with their politeness than a competent that's rude, does that not suggest a fundamental flaw in our society to you? Do you want an engineer who's sole virtue is that he's polite? [quote=GrandAdmiralJello]I've never ever been impressed by those tactics. They don't prove anything save for pure insensitivity, and rather than gain appreciation for the user or the material they just garner contempt. Deserved contempt, I might add. I would never hesitate to discuss matters with a mistaken user who was polite about things, but I would not bother to help anyone who was blithely aggressive about it.[/quote] Nobody expects you to. However, they do prove a certain integrity and honesty, and is a release from the fakeness that goes on in the world all day. Also, to say that a otherwise good post deserves contempt because it incorporated a couple flames is style over substance and thus a logical fallacy. [quote=Jello]They've learned nothing because whatever brilliance they may possess (and I'd arguable whether they have any if it's just potential knowledge that cannot be properly put forth), they've failed to use it as it should be used. [/quote] Isn't it rather arbitrary to decide that if someone did not conform to arbitrary, indoctrinated norms in constructing his paragraph, despite putting his life's knowledge and reasoning in it, they've failed to use it? [quote=Jello]The argument used seems to be that if a party is correct, then might makes right and their conduct is excusable simply on those grounds. Well, it's not. That's the sort of argument a child would put forth, not a seasoned rhetorician or a professional individual. It's utterly repugnant and the lack of apology from those individuals is even more shameful.[/quote] A child is often unbound by the invisible indoctrination that society applies to people over a period of close to two decades, and can occasionally see things that we stopped being able to see. That's not really the argument anyway. Might makes Right is Mod Abuse. A better way to put it is that If He is Correct, He is not Wrong because He swore a Little. If He is Wrong, He Does Not become Correct because His Opponent Swore. Put the battle in reasoning, not rhetoric. A Saxtonite can in fact be most respectful when his opponent is worthy of it. When his opponent is not worthy of it, he can be rude. This ability to withhold respect is arguably an important ability. Respect is earned, not given indefinitely - that's not such a bad principle, is it? You think people earn it by phrasing their paragraphs a certain way and eliminating tough truths. We think it is earned by making logical paragraphs and having integrity.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
FTeik Registered: Nov '00	Date Posted: 10/17/05 2:56am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	"Respect" and "tolerance" are a two-way-door. If i'm expected to give respect i expect to get some in return. Now, if i have a justified question and i get rubbish for an answer or something of which i have evidence to the contrary or if somebody sits on the high horse and tells me to shut up, because "i'm the expert here" and if that gets so far, that the person in question runs away to a safe heaven, from where he/she can snipe un-impeded then i feel a lot of things, but certainly NOT respect. -----signature----- My first completet story: Pride's Prize: http://boards.theforce.net/message.aspx?topic=22758760 "In the Battle of Coruscant alone, hundreds of millions of battle droids saw action on the ground and in space. " Insider #86 - The story of General Grievous
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Borleias Registered: Dec '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 2:59am Subject: PGC: A chat with the Treaty proposer...
	Havac posted: Both sides have been at fault in this -- that's why I'm looking for pledges from everyone. However, the point that if you disagree with Karen, then leave her alone, is a good one. I think you've gotten your point through to her. She isn't going to change her mind and neither are you. So instead of incessantly complaining to her about one subject, just let it slide, discuss it with others, but don't ruin her experience. Let her post in peace and don't force it into a numbers debate. I agree that three million is way too few. But I've read the article and the way the number is presented is sufficiently ambiguous that I feel able to let it slide and retcon it up. But please, don't ruin the boards for her and don't screw over all the people who genuinely do enjoy conversing with her. Think about it -- wouldn't you leave too if every post you made, anwhere, people kept turning it into an argument about something you don't have much interest in and incessantly going after your position on it? Please, just extend her the same common courtesy that you would prefer. I don't think I've talked personally to this Treaty's Proposer yet. I think I'd rectify this deficiency right now. 1) Your original treaty text and attitude, to me, suggests a lack of understanding to the average "Saxtonite's" psyche, which is perhaps why you had not a single signer from that block. Basically, you need our signatures, or else this treaty is worse than worthless (a cease-fire has to have both parties willing to sign, and I think so far most of you aren't working too hard to bring us in - Sarek and Jello, in actually debating my principles, are probably working the hardest and the most effectively). 2) For those, BTW, who are complaining about the fact we hadn't signed, the fact we are here already shows our interest. However, it is quite obvious our priorities are slightly different from the average TFNer's, and we won't sign a treaty which is made by someone who does not even seem to understand our psyche without telling him what we think first. Agreeing to disagree is not a big part of a Saxtonite's psyche. It can only be done when we feel the odds on an issue are really even, and if we think the odds are even, we generally don't flame anyway so that's not going to cause any sparks. As for the rest ... while we might somehow be able to refrain from using the word "idiot" in our posts, I don't see how we're going to avoid saying that our opposition is plain dead wrong (and by impliance that the facts are behind us). It is also difficult to see how you can "respect" their rights to intepret the Star Wars canon differently. Are we supposed to respect their right to interpret Star Wars incorrectly? If it is so, no meaningful debate seems possible, and we cannot sign such a treaty. If not, then the debate is to prove their interpretation wrong and ours right (or at least ours is much more probable). How we can do that without crushing their interpretation, and thus stepping on their "right" to interpret Star Wars differently is difficult to see. See my other posts for our general views of flaming as a whole. 3) However, if all you want is a more limited and specific treaty roughly in the lines of the above, something might be done. I'm actually already disappointed beyond the limit line (see my first post) with Traviss, both by her initial decision and how she handled all this (see Painrack, FTeik discussion). As long as Traviss doesn't make any more provocations (like sniping out of her SW bastions, or having any delusions about how 3 million makes sense on her return), I won't mind not hounding her when she comes back. In fact, nobody would have hounded her if she hadn't done this. It is even possible that the next time she makes a horrible mistake, I might not scream at her - what's the point ... she's beyond screaming... - Borleias
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Commander5052 Registered: Aug '05	Date Posted: 10/17/05 5:38am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 5:38am (1 edits total) Edited By: Commander5052
	I believe I'm at least partially responsible for the debate going on because I was the one who posted why Karen left. I forgot to add she said the flaming were also on her blog and the starwars.com forums as well. I would like to apologize for the flame war on the ARC thread and anything else that may have occured as a result of this. -----signature----- Honored recepient of Thrawn McEwok's Bronze Thranta™ A Liberal and proud of it "Politics is simply the continuation of war by other means." --Mandalore the Ultimate
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
razzy1319 Registered: Jun '04	Date Posted: 10/17/05 5:42am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 6:14am (2 edits total) Edited By: razzy1319
	I'll sign this... though good luck in ever getting her back... from the looks of it some people arent gonna stop, me being one of them... and I dont think the saxtonites criticising did make her leave... she probably left because she knew a flame war was about to happen... probably from the advice of experienced authors or LFL. -----signature----- In Space No One Can Hear Your Scream, Except For The BattleCry Of A Galactic Marine -Fictional BattleCry My Kind Weren't Made To Kneel -Fictional Clone Trooper Worst Admin Ever - http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/User:WhiteBoy/Kuralyov
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Kudzu Registered: Jun '05	Date Posted: 10/17/05 6:45am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 6:46am (1 edits total) Edited By: Kudzu
	razzy1319 posted: I'll sign this... though good luck in ever getting her back... from the looks of it some people arent gonna stop, me being one of them... and I dont think the saxtonites criticising did make her leave... she probably left because she knew a flame war was about to happen... probably from the advice of experienced authors or LFL. Mm. Good point. God knows enough people here bash Zahn, KJA, Hambly, and Saxton (I just don't like Saxton's style much, for my part). EDIT - Oh. And Denning and Kathy Tyers get laid into by rabid fans incapable of disassociating "author" with "book" or "author" with "character". -----signature----- Super Golden Ewok™ Recipient It should be the right of every American to go out and get wasted the day they're told that they're being sent to war. Ron Paul for U.S. President 2008
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Borleias Registered: Dec '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 7:23am Subject: PGC: Razzy and Kudzu
	razzy1319 posted: I'll sign this... though good luck in ever getting her back... from the looks of it some people arent gonna stop, me being one of them... and I dont think the saxtonites criticising did make her leave... she probably left because she knew a flame war was about to happen... probably from the advice of experienced authors or LFL. Her rather provocative and contemptuous responses do not seem to match with this theory. I think that she was trying to conduct the part of recce-by-fire (a dumb move if you ask me) that involves quietly killing off minor dissent. From their responses, it is quite clear that they never thought that we would be that infuriated (not that they are taking the right actions to make us less angry). Kudzu posted: Mm. Good point. God knows enough people here bash Zahn, KJA, Hambly, and Saxton (I just don't like Saxton's style much, for my part). EDIT - Oh. And Denning and Kathy Tyers get laid into by rabid fans incapable of disassociating "author" with "book" or "author" with "character". Thanks for at least acknowledging that Saxton gets really bashed here. While one can argue Author can be separated from their Character, how can Author be separated from Book? While no doubt there are many pressures on authors in a franchise like LFL, ultimately what goes into their book is their responsibility when they put their names on it. Especially if they try to defend the book in public. The least you can do if you are forced into something is to keep quiet in public.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ywingempress Registered: Sep '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 7:41am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Borleias posted: From their responses, it is quite clear that they never thought that we would be that infuriated (not that they are taking the right actions to make us less angry). I think they were more disturbed that people were angry at all, let alone "infuriated"... this is all supposed to be fun and none of it is worth getting angry over, IMO. The hostility and high emotion in those threads made me steer clear of them. Some people must like debating in that kind of atmosphere, but I and many others are not among them. And if I were a VIP whose work was being 'discussed' as such, and offshoots from that discussion were following me to my own blog and flaming, I'd be out of here too. The fact is that it primarily started on these boards, even if most of the true infringements took place elsewhere. So yeah, I'm signing this for sure. -----signature----- [- Amy -] RepCom Website: http://clonecommandos.net Star Wars Journal: http://order66.livejournal.com "A well-built sniper rifle is a beautiful thing. Ours has two separate levels of zoom: up-close-and-personal and hello-you're-dead." -- Sev
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
razzy1319 Registered: Jun '04	Date Posted: 10/17/05 7:44am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	oh look at that, another backhanded snipe. no offence man but I think that was what they interpret as flaming here. not if youre already out in public... probably one more reason why she left early. -----signature----- In Space No One Can Hear Your Scream, Except For The BattleCry Of A Galactic Marine -Fictional BattleCry My Kind Weren't Made To Kneel -Fictional Clone Trooper Worst Admin Ever - http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/User:WhiteBoy/Kuralyov
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ywingempress Registered: Sep '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 8:14am Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 8:16am (2 edits total) Edited By: ywingempress
	... (nevermind) ... -----signature----- [- Amy -] RepCom Website: http://clonecommandos.net Star Wars Journal: http://order66.livejournal.com "A well-built sniper rifle is a beautiful thing. Ours has two separate levels of zoom: up-close-and-personal and hello-you're-dead." -- Sev
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Borleias Registered: Dec '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 8:23am Subject: PGC: Razzy II
	razzy1319 posted: oh look at that, another backhanded snipe. no offence man but I think that was what they interpret as flaming here. not if youre already out in public... probably one more reason why she left early. I suppose you wrote this in response to me. Anyway, if what I wrote is called "flaming", then I'd say little meaningful discussion is possible in this board.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 » - Previous | Next | Reload