Hopefully the answer will be yes. Would you like to see Jargon banned or not? Let your voice be heard here.
IMO, please ban him, he floods the forums with useless threads and fills useful threads with useless posts.
We have 7 days to decide.
why create a thread that already exists?
atari2600a wrote:
why create a thread that already exists?
This one has it's own poll! Dazzling or what!
Didn't think we had one, never mind.
The quick answer is YES, but I have no clue about people being very soft with him...
and ya, there's a topic about this.
You should bookmark any phpbb forum's */search.php?search_id=newposts
Very easy way to see what's happening on the board.
BTW Jargon you're not allowed to vote! I wonder if admin will act on this poll if the answer is yes when it ends. Is this forum a Democracy or what?
I usually don't ban until I see rule violations. In fact, I created a new topic describing
THE RULES just so that I can be justified in setting bans. If you can define some
bright lines that you think jargon is crossing, I'll get on it.
If you created a law, you should have created it in a way that Jargon would violate it, else there isn't any point in creating it.
Anyway he have been impolite and insolent many times in addition to make irelevant posts with no point, if that is allowed then you should change the law to ban him, even to possibly change it back after he's banned.
Anyway it's very sad to see we have to make a rules board on nesdev, I've been here for more than 5 years and this was one of the only board where explicit rules were never needed.
Bregalad wrote:
If you created a law, you should have created it in a way that Jargon would violate it, else there isn't any point in creating it.
Anyway he have been impolite and insolent many times in addition to make irelevant posts with no point, if that is allowed then you should change the law to ban him, even to possibly change it back after he's banned.
Anyway it's very sad to see we have to make a rules board on nesdev, I've been here for more than 5 years and this was one of the only board where explicit rules were never needed.
Yes, let us make retroactive rules that specifically ban specific people just to ban those specific people alone for life, then undo the rules. Even though they have not broken any rules already in place either intently, or in the first place.
Bregalad wrote:
Anyway it's very sad to see we have to make a rules board on nesdev, I've been here for more than 5 years and this was one of the only board where explicit rules were never needed.
Yeah, I've actually noticed that these boards are usually very clean and professional compared to others, and it's sad to see vulgar language and content in recent posts here.
Actually, Tepples, I think you should put up some rules regarding vulgarity. It would be nice to keep these boards clean and not have them become all trashy.
jargon wrote:
Yes, let us make retroactive rules
I don't plan to make any bills of attainder or ex post facto rules. If you
continue behavior after rules come into effect, you get banned.
Celius wrote:
Actually, Tepples, I think you should put up some rules regarding vulgarity.
Good idea. I don't plan to go as far as ACC and AXA do, with their "keep it E-rated" rule. Would a UserFriendly.org style "keep it T-rated" rule work?
Bregalad wrote:
Anyway it's very sad to see we have to make a rules board on nesdev, I've been here for more than 5 years and this was one of the only board where explicit rules were never needed.
+1 on that. I care less about the jargon issue than this. F^ck making up rules.
jargon is clearly disrupting this board, you can't deny that. Just give him the boot and move on.
loopy wrote:
Bregalad wrote:
Anyway it's very sad to see we have to make a rules board on nesdev, I've been here for more than 5 years and this was one of the only board where explicit rules were never needed.
+1 on that. I care less about the jargon issue than this. F^ck making up rules.
jargon is clearly disrupting this board, you can't deny that. Just give him the boot and move on.
I agree, but now I dunno about a ban...
Go figure. He scored a point! >_<
I know this man or boy has lead a hard life or will lead a hard life without much potential to form the interpersonal relationships we all need to find happiness in our lives. For this reason I don't think its right to make his life that much harder by banning him. As long as he dose not get too out of control this time around just let him be.
Edit: it would seem the only people who voted no is me and jargon.
edit2: Now a message to Jargon. I know this dose not come naturally to you like it dose normal people but if you want a better life you must try harder to understand and respect the feeling of those around you. Force yourself to learn what you need to interact with people on a normal level and you will lead a better life. I am unsure if you have reached the age where most people realize they need people, if you have not act as you have anyway because for someone like yourself when you come to this realization it may be too late.
peppers wrote:
I know this man or boy has lead a hard life or will lead a hard life without much potential to form the interpersonal relationships we all need to find happiness in our lives. For this reason I don't think its right to make his life that much harder by banning him. As long as he dose not get too out of control this time around just let him be.
Edit: it would seem the only people who voted no is me and jargon.
edit2: Now a message to Jargon. I know this dose not come naturally to you like it dose normal people but if you want a better life you must try harder to understand and respect the feeling of those around you. Force yourself to learn what you need to interact with people on a normal level and you will lead a better life. I am unsure if you have reached the age where most people realize they need people, if you have not act as you have anyway because for someone like yourself when you come to this realization it may be too late.
of course interpersonal stuff is hard, nobody relates to me because most have aspergers/autism or something and i am schizoid, two completely diametrically opposed personality types. people with trust issues on the aspie/autie level don't understand that most schizoids have completely seemingly alien, but are there, different trust levels.
people usually assuming people with schizotypal personality disorders of some kind or another either trust anything or nothing. quite different actually, we trust based on what we believe to be trustworthy. just like how aspergers/autistics trust only who they trust to be trustworthy, usually based off cues that are just as backwards as the cues of schizoids.
actually i never voted.
i attempted to go back and swap out vulgarities with more acceptable words or just cartoon-like scrambles, but can't seem to find all the old posts easily, for my sleep cycles are messed up now, and i keep going back to bed after just two hours.
making a bright-line word for vulgarities isn't quite fair when the persons that often use vulgarities are often not aware of the level of crass in their language, and could just as easily be reminded to once in a while go back and edit it out on their own. this is phpbb, the posts are "freakin" dynamic SQL data.
i am 27, or something close to that, i realize i need people, doesn't mean i get along very well. often i find myself screaming inside at normal people just as often if not more often than most people on this board feel like screaming at me, difference is i do not let myself indulge in a "mass-scream" at someone like most boards including this one especially, seem to think is cool in this new millennium. i am starting to think this has become the millennium of spoiled tarts, not acceptance and group growth; it is as if personal tolerance has flown out the window.
i have a good feeling a great deal of you are Autistic or have Asperger's Syndrome. I myself being schizoid, you gang up on easy targets.
Myself being schizoid, I don't gang up on people, and often rather make what i feel known; rather than keeping it in unless it is mass agreed upon.
Aspies/Auties tend to run with the crowd while feeling that they predominating actually are intellectually superior; Schizoids damn well know nobody ever takes schizoids seriously, and damn well just end up p.o.'d a lot of the time.
Neither group tends to have a fairly level headed mood; and without that neither group is intellectually superior over the other.
So stop treating others like garbage and maybe this board can return to a non-hostile conditioning.
there i just went ahead with you guys and voted 'no' just now to make the tally more clear.
I am afraid that last part in your second to last post is simply part of human nature, most of witch is derived from one trait. The one that drives us to conform to the norms around us and to reject those that ether wont or can't. It has always been like this and it always will.
This has its good points as it keeps most people from doing too many crazy things and it allows us as humanity to act as a cohesive group.
Also it has its bad side, it is responsible for things like racism and many of the other darker parts of man.
Peoples tendency to apply a label to someone else and consider them beneath themselves whether this label be a slut, a freak, a loser, or a nigger. this list could go on forever as there are many reasons people reject each other
Most people will ether dismiss or try to do harm to people they consider one of these things. All we can do as individuals is be aware of this nature and try to be above it ourselves as the group as a hole will never change.
edit: btw those with Asperger's also find it impossible to be "One with the heard" as they cannot grasp social norms "normal" people often find them annoying because of this. They are perfectly aware they can never really be like everyone else. I do not have this condition but I am aware of what it means to have this burden.
Aspies(or those with similar thought patterns) who manage to force themselves to try out the overall thought patterns of those negative individuals who tell them what to do, think, and say may indeed find the experience enlightening, and may well end up with them believing the majority of humanity to be idiots for being so similar to the forced emulation undertaken.
The primary model of my experiment that was most successful at allowing me to interact with others was forced ignorance. It took several years before I managed to convince myself to resort to this for any length of time.
For this reason, I wish for those on this board not to give me a reason to vehemently ignore them. I find it pointless to have to avoid idiocy based on the person posting it. A little abstract anti-logic can keep one on their toes, but sheer idiocy is just annoying.
ugetab wrote:
Aspies(or those with similar thought patterns) who manage to force themselves to try out the overall thought patterns of those negative individuals who tell them what to do, think, and say may indeed find the experience enlightening, and may well end up with them believing the majority of humanity to be idiots for being so similar to the forced emulation undertaken.
The primary model of my experiment that was most successful at allowing me to interact with others was forced ignorance. It took several years before I managed to convince myself to resort to this for any length of time.
For this reason, I wish for those on this board not to give me a reason to vehemently ignore them. I find it pointless to have to avoid idiocy based on the person posting it. A little abstract anti-logic can keep one on their toes, but sheer idiocy is just annoying.
Wow.
Very, Very Deep.
I had Asperger's Syndrome until my brain broke on December 18th, 2001 based on a journal I kept. For some reason my brain just went *foop*. My younger brother is Autistic, btw.
Ofcourse you must realise that sort things are just anouther part of lableing people differint from you things and considering them beneath you because of it, that is what you are doing there.
I voted no because clearly Jargon is an unending source of the highest quality intelligence and critical thinking on this forum
also this is a joke
If you know someone who will repeatedly escape from a logical debate by use of the form of language, or will refuse to admit their lack of knowledge in-so-far as they continue an argument with no basis, or by redirection of the topic discussed, then I'd consider them below me. I don't urinate on those I consider inferior, simply because they're inferior, but I certainly consider some individuals inferior enough to not care about.
Inferior intellectual and willing to learn is a newbie. Play nice.
Inferior unintellectual and unwilling to learn is a moron who I don't care about.
Inferior and uncommited to the mind is just someone ignorant. Poor them.
I take the stance that if I can do something or understand something, then that should be a sign that virtually anyone should be able to concieve of it. I'm not so good that everyone else is less. I'm just enough to wonder how the hell people can be so stupid as to be too incapacitated to out-think me if the problem and solution is explained to them. Why do you need to try and pull a fast one on me, when there's either a better solution, or not a better solution. I don't have to like being outdone, but I'd at least like them to best me without changing the subject to how much I know, and killing the argument that way.
As for labeling...um...yeah. I do that. It helps a lot. Intelligence can't be labeled easily, because of it's diversity. People who know some things somehow tend to learn more than those who resolutely stand by their infallibility. Ignorance is a lot easier to pin down, because it's either incidental and reversible, or a core belief. Which one I find determines if I think the person is wasting oxygen too close to me.
ugetab wrote:
If you know someone who will repeatedly escape from a logical debate by use of the form of language, or will refuse to admit their lack of knowledge in-so-far as they continue an argument with no basis, or by redirection of the topic discussed, then I'd consider them below me. I don't urinate on those I consider inferior, simply because they're inferior, but I certainly consider some individuals inferior enough to not care about.
Inferior intellectual and willing to learn is a newbie. Play nice.
Inferior unintellectual and unwilling to learn is a moron who I don't care about.
Inferior and uncommited to the mind is just someone ignorant. Poor them.
I take the stance that if I can do something or understand something, then that should be a sign that virtually anyone should be able to concieve of it. I'm not so good that everyone else is less. I'm just enough to wonder how the hell people can be so stupid as to be too incapacitated to out-think me if the problem and solution is explained to them. Why do you need to try and pull a fast one on me, when there's either a better solution, or not a better solution. I don't have to like being outdone, but I'd at least like them to best me without changing the subject to how much I know, and killing the argument that way.
As for labeling...um...yeah. I do that. It helps a lot. Intelligence can't be labeled easily, because of it's diversity. People who know some things somehow tend to learn more than those who resolutely stand by their infallibility. Ignorance is a lot easier to pin down, because it's either incidental and reversible, or a core belief. Which one I find determines if I think the person is wasting oxygen too close to me.
are you on drugs?
No. My particular views are a side-effect of having taken a fair amount of time to determine whether or not people in general did the things they do for any good reason.
In the process of this, I believe I figured out what motivates most people, at a rather basic level, to continue going about with the tasks they do, and their decisions on what to think about and what not to.
It's as simple and stupid as I make it out to be, so I don't really care if you disagree(with or without reason), as I have yet to read a better theory of what's going wrong than the fact that people don't even try to break down the ideas they encounter and find reasons for dismissing them at an interval that would be productive.
ugetab wrote:
No. My particular views are a side-effect of having taken a fair amount of time to determine whether or not people in general did the things they do for any good reason.
In the process of this, I believe I figured out what motivates most people, at a rather basic level, to continue going about with the tasks they do, and their decisions on what to think about and what not to.
It's as simple and stupid as I make it out to be, so I don't really care if you disagree(with or without reason), as I have yet to read a better theory of what's going wrong than the fact that people don't even try to break down the ideas they encounter and find reasons for dismissing them at an interval that would be productive.
are you a robot, or just a lawyer from a non-English-speaking country?
Xkeeper wrote:
I voted no because clearly Jargon is an unending source of the highest quality intelligence and critical thinking on this forum
also this is a joke
This poll? No it aint bud. And while I do sympathise with Jargon's condition, something simply must be done about his threads/posts.
I thought he meant his comment was a joke... not the poll...
Meh. I wasn't going to vote, but jargon's clearly not getting any better with time.
He could learn a lot from me if he hadn't hit his head that hard, and been suffocating for so long, and taken so many hallucinogens, and had so many strokes, and lived with such a low skull capacity, and developed ADHD. Yeah, I think it's safe to say that if it hadn't been for that, I could teach him a lot. Oh well.
@Tepples: Yeah, T-Rated should be good. Some strong language every now and then shouldn't be a problem, like some frequent users occasionally dropping the F bomb shouldn't get them banned or anything like that. But heavy sexual content in any post shouldn't be as acceptable. Mostly, I think that frequent profanity and vulgarity should be what needs to be concerned about. But definitely NOT E Rated... That would make everything boring.
At this point I'm not worried about Jargon. He should be banned because well, we all know why.
What I want to know is, why was he unbanned? And will -- if other "jargons" decide to show up -- be unbanned also?
I know first hand that many many people were PMing me on the same network #nesdev is on, on other networks, and even in public channels unrelated to NESdevvery about him being unbanned and being furious about it.
This is and was a bad move on the mods' part.
B00daW wrote:
At this point I'm not worried about Jargon. He should be banned because well, we all know why.
What I want to know is, why was he unbanned? And will -- if other "jargons" decide to show up -- be unbanned also?
I know first hand that many many people were PMing me on the same network #nesdev is on, on other networks, and even in public channels unrelated to NESdevvery about him being unbanned and being furious about it.
This is and was a bad move on the mods' part.
i have no idsa what the deal is considering i never but used nesdev bbs irregularly in the first place.
only real issue i see is that you aren't getting NES code or help that much from me.
btw regarding vulgarity, i don't like sexual innuendo either, nor do i like hate words.
I mean even as we speak he's flooding the General Stuff forum with absolute garbage. Go check it out.
ugetab wrote:
If you know someone who will repeatedly escape from a logical debate by use of the form of language, or will refuse to admit their lack of knowledge in-so-far as they continue an argument with no basis, or by redirection of the topic discussed, then I'd consider them below me. I don't urinate on those I consider inferior, simply because they're inferior, but I certainly consider some individuals inferior enough to not care about.
Inferior intellectual and willing to learn is a newbie. Play nice.
Inferior unintellectual and unwilling to learn is a moron who I don't care about.
Inferior and uncommited to the mind is just someone ignorant. Poor them.
I take the stance that if I can do something or understand something, then that should be a sign that virtually anyone should be able to concieve of it. I'm not so good that everyone else is less. I'm just enough to wonder how the hell people can be so stupid as to be too incapacitated to out-think me if the problem and solution is explained to them. Why do you need to try and pull a fast one on me, when there's either a better solution, or not a better solution. I don't have to like being outdone, but I'd at least like them to best me without changing the subject to how much I know, and killing the argument that way.
As for labeling...um...yeah. I do that. It helps a lot. Intelligence can't be labeled easily, because of it's diversity. People who know some things somehow tend to learn more than those who resolutely stand by their infallibility. Ignorance is a lot easier to pin down, because it's either incidental and reversible, or a core belief. Which one I find determines if I think the person is wasting oxygen too close to me.
I had no motives behind what typed its simply the truth. I have already explained where I stand on the subject in my second to last post in this thread. And your post is an example of what I was talking about Don't assume to know what people are thinking
I don't usually assume I know what people are thinking, but have you ever expected to get an honest, well-reasoned answer out of some stranger you were debating when you asked them "What are your thoughts on this issue"?
I see signs of people not thinking, and I'll usually choose either to get away from them, or challenge the notion they've given me by trying to see what they have in mind. It sometimes happens that I find them to be a poor communicator. This usually leads to me leaving them alone. Other times, I find them to be using something other than sound thinking to come to their conclusions.
I won't ignore the hints that people leave that tell how they've come to a conclusion, because I've tried it, and that leaves those giving detailed explainations about the sun, and those giving detailed explainations about the monkeys living on the sun even footing from the start. It also leaves those telling you what to do for your own good and those telling you what to do for their own narcissistic 'perfect' view of the world on even footing.
It's not always obvious if someone is giving you information or a belief, or how they came to their conclusion. Some complexity is inherent to complex topics, and some is misdirection. Trying to come to the conclusion of which is which is sometimes impossible because it's a case of someone repeating what they heard. Then it becomes a case of how well the person can filter out ideas that make no sense, or a matter of not believing a thing they say.
I don't feel the need to think in a politically correct sense. If I've found a use for labeling, and testing those labels shows them to be subjectively accurate to an acceptable degree, then I'll use labeling as a guide to what qualities in a person I should test first. If you're going to get information from someone, it's important to know how much to trust that information, or how to concieve of it from their viewpoint. (This is like 'profiling' at an airport. Even if it's illegal, if some guy acts nervous, and resembles how a hijacker is believed to look like, then there's a decent chance that person will be checked a bit more thoroughly than someone who doesn't display such signs)
I'd cite an example of how experience and understanding shape how people use language, vocal or bodily, but I don't think that's neccesary in present company.
In the case of Jargon, I threw him something to chew on, and I'd have to say he choked or puked in response. Admittedly, it's not everyone's interest to talk about the issues I threw around, but simple sheer randomness prevailed(as in, redirecting the conversation, only randomly)
In your case(peppers), you believe I shouldn't label people(because I can't know what they think), where-as I believe I'm doing little harm in pre-judging people to the degree of what I test in them to get insight. If someone wants to think I'm wrong, that's fine. If you want to convince me I'm wrong, that's fine. If you want to say I'm wrong, see the previous sentence, because in some way you're suggesting that someone should stop my belief.
Correct me if I'm wrong, guys. But since jargon's presence it still well... present, other people have begun to direct animosity toward each other by comparing their inner-workings to him and comparing themselves to others.
ugetab's lengthy post in summary has made me draw the conclusion that indeed jargon is getting what he wants: Attention. Also, turmoil and chaos.
We really shouldn't be focusing on each other but on NESdev, helping each other out as a community, learning, and having fun -- but not at the expense of others. (Even though we know that jargon doesn't and will not feel bad if people flame him or if he gets banned from NESdev board again. I want him to be able to read, but posting is a no no.)
It's silly to let these topics continue.
I vote we get rid of him and trash the threads. Silly fucking shit.
I agree 100% with you, let's focus on NESdev, not on user accounts.
Also, it's really not worth the trouble making long post about how silly someone is, that really is pure time wasting.
The issue isn't that it wastes too much time to write long, useless posts, the point is it takes little effort to do so, even if you make it semi-accurate. Don't make useless clutter. If you disagree with the clutter, stop the people who make the most trash posts.
At some point, free speech becomes harassment. You can't read a thread you want, and also give someone full rights to continually misdirect the topic. Conversations just don't evolve in that type of environment. If we'll split off a divergent conversation into 2 decent topics, why won't we split off a garbage topic, and then get rid of it?
B00daW wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, guys. But since jargon's presence it still well... present, other people have begun to direct animosity toward each other by comparing their inner-workings to him and comparing themselves to others.
ugetab's lengthy post in summary has made me draw the conclusion that indeed jargon is getting what he wants: Attention. Also, turmoil and chaos.
We really shouldn't be focusing on each other but on NESdev, helping each other out as a community, learning, and having fun -- but not at the expense of others. (Even though we know that jargon doesn't and will not feel bad if people flame him or if he gets banned from NESdev board again. I want him to be able to read, but posting is a no no.)
It's silly to let these topics continue.
I vote we get rid of him and trash the threads. Silly fucking shit.
Quit being a conspiracy nut.
Code:
struct stats
{
unsigned long postcount;
}
void main(void)
{
stats vector nesdev;
while(nesdev['jargon'].postcount+=1)
{
nesdev['B00daW'].postcount++;
nesdev['ugetab'].postcount++;
nesdev['WedNESday'].postcount++;
}
}
It is ridiculous that they feed like this.
Will any admin act on this poll when it ends?
Staff will act when rules are proposed, enacted, broken, and shown to be broken, in that order.
tepples wrote:
proposed
Had that.
tepples wrote:
enacted
Yep, that too.
tepples wrote:
broken
Many times...
tepples wrote:
and shown to be broken
Just check the forums already...
WedNESday wrote:
tepples wrote:
and shown to be broken
Just check the forums already...
PM me URLs to violating posts (right-click the dog-eared page icon to the left of the posting date and choose Copy Link Location) and I'll get right on it.
Ah! Don't be so silly, as you know jargon will NEVER violate any of those rules. As far as he can jargonize here, it'll be always junk... unless, of course, this place isn't a real forum for NES-related discussion..?
What Tepples is saying is completely logical, so long as Jargon doesn't break the rules, he will not be banned. If he doesn't break the rules, there won't be a problem. And also, if there are other annoyances that arise, new rules will probably be established regarding them.
I propose a rule against posting ban this person threads.
They just end up being a big waste of breathe, and certain people just use it to reverse troll the board for postcount++, without any actual motive behind their posts except to kick out people they simply dislike.
If you want to post ban questionnaires, maybe you should instead ask an admin to create intervention threads, not create ban polls yourself.
This thread is pretty much mostly nonconstructive criticism.
Not once have I seen a single constructive suggestion about how I could operate the board any differently, other than tepples suggesting that I don't curse so much.
jargon wrote:
Not once have I seen a single constructive suggestion about how I could operate the board any differently, other than tepples suggesting that I don't curse so much.
Well, you could stop double or triple posting; for some reason it gets on everyone's nerves. You could stop posting things like this:
http://nesdev.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=4318
Or stuff where you make the pages twice as wide as they should be, like here:
http://nesdev.com/bbs/viewtopi ... 98&start=0
And even though this is old, stuff like this:
http://nesdev.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=4081
Those are just some suggestions.
EDIT: And also, keeping your personal life/health problems more private, and not making them so public. We do like to know that our community members aren't dead, so just saying "I have some health issues" should be enough rather than going into more detail.
Soon the forum will return to anarchy, and all will be as it should. People who haven't implicitly understood the "don't be a dick" rule quickly find their posts disappearing (it's been very rare, though). If mods and admins are like invisible dictators of society, they should be loved for deleting spam and removing bots (the unending and under-appreciated job), rather feared for enforcing rules.
Over the years there's always been some wild threads with lots of various opinions, it's always been interesting.
Celius wrote:
Well, you could stop double or triple posting
So "Mods may combine multiple posts to a topic in rapid succession by a single user." Good idea.
Celius wrote:
http://nesdev.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=4318
http://nesdev.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=4081Flooding General Stuff.
Celius wrote:
Or stuff where you make the pages twice as wide as they should be, like here:
http://nesdev.com/bbs/viewtopi ... 98&start=0
So "Mods may edit posts that break the forum layout." Good idea.
jargon wrote:
I propose a rule against posting ban this person threads.
They just end up being a big waste of breathe, and certain people just use it to reverse troll the board for postcount++, without any actual motive behind their posts except to kick out people they simply dislike.
If you want to post ban questionnaires, maybe you should instead ask an admin to create intervention threads, not create ban polls yourself.
This thread is pretty much mostly nonconstructive criticism.
Not once have I seen a single constructive suggestion about how I could operate the board any differently, other than tepples suggesting that I don't curse so much.
Code:
In A.D. 2101
War was beginning.
Captain: What happen ?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.
Operator: We get signal.
Captain: What !
Operator: Main screen turn on.
Captain: It's you !!
CATS: How are you gentlemen !!
CATS: I propose a rule against posting ban this person threads.
CATS: They just end up being a big waste of breathe.
Captain: What you say !!
CATS: You have no chance to survive make your time.
CATS: Ha ha ha ha ....
Operator: Captain !! *
Captain: Take off every 'ZIG'!!
Captain: You know what you doing.
Captain: Move 'ZIG'.
Captain: For great justice.
Sorry, but is he suggesting that I now get banned? Now we wouldn't want that now would we guys.................Guys?
Oh my god this is terrible. Not only jargon is annoying all of us, but so without breaking a signle rule.
Just like flies are really annoying, you just smash them without finding a pretext so that they break rules. It's pretty much the same with jargon.
After all rules are a way to technically say if someone shoud be blamed or not, but there is no way to technically say if that person really was to blame.
What tepples seems not to understand, is that as a matter of a fact it is perfectly possible to be a total jackass while following all laws in the world (G.W. Bush), and it's also possible to break multiples rules and yet do something really honorable (Robin's hood). Anyone who has ever played Dungeon & Dragons should understand what I'm saying there.
I'm pretty sure the "Don't be a dick" rule has been broken.
Tip to mods: When there are two independant "Should we ban jargon?" polls, that should tell you something.
FWIW, I don't really care about jargon anymore, he seems to have mellowed out lately. But even if he's a perfect saint, if every post of his encourages a flurry of follow-up bickering posts, he should go anyway, for the sake of keeping the peace here.
Bregalad wrote:
What tepples seems not to understand, is that as a matter of a fact it is perfectly possible to be a total jackass while following all laws in the world (G.W. Bush), and it's also possible to break multiples rules and yet do something really honorable (Robin's hood). Anyone who has ever played Dungeon & Dragons should understand what I'm saying there.
I understand what a lawful evil character is; I work at a shop that sells D&D stuff. Perhaps if we gave the topic "ban jargon" less attention, he'd quiet down. As it is, nearly half the recent posts are related to the issue.
loopy wrote:
FWIW, I don't really care about jargon anymore, he seems to have mellowed out lately.
If only the bickerers would mellow out in the same way. It makes it difficult to see who's the real dick: user A, or user B for calling user A a dick.
But this time, I've noticed that jargon has abused General Stuff, in addition to all the other alleged dickery. So I'm putting him in time-out for two weeks, the same amount of time as the breaks I took when I made big faux pas on alt.aol-sucks and on tetrisconcept.com. He can appeal this when I'm online (try the AIM and ICQ buttons below). If he wants to prepare his tutorial, he can do so on NESdevWiki, where he hasn't caused any controversy yet.
Looks like Jargon just got banned from
Acmlm's Board II.
Dwedit wrote:
Looks like Jargon just got banned from
Acmlm's Board II.
Let the revolution begin!!!
I'm with loopy.
For the record, jargon -- and many other people can hold me to this. I don't hate you and I'm sure most people don't "hate" you. Others can surely vouch for me that administrative decisions (such as in #nesdev) were made not as personal attacks, but as majority consensus appeal.
I think people just really don't like how you appear to be entirely incapable of (1) apologizing, (2) showing a submissive, learning, role, when you have little to nothing to teach, and (3) absolute inconsideration of others and for the community.
First off, I apologize if these statements are slightly more strong than they need be.
I humbly request to jargon: Lurk, man. Lurk. You have been chilling out lately like loopy says. I do see that. I don't at all mean to irritate you, so I wouldn't appreciate a response of negative intent.
And a humble request to administrators: I know as jargon has said, I do focus too much on this instead of contributing to other threads. (It's because unlike jargon of the past, I don't have much to contribute so I haven't been.) I say kill this thread and the other against jargon -- no need to really tidy up posts -- and just let this thing ride out as it is, hopefully forever. However, if it goes back to how it was, please just get rid of jargon and do NOT remove the ban.
I am officially NOT talking about this any more. No matter the bait from anyone.
Dwedit wrote:
Looks like Jargon just got banned from
Acmlm's Board II.
i was banned for posting a thread with pictures of cats with guns photoshopped.
...as a get well card to an admin..
...in "Spatula", a sub-board where nothing makes any sense in the first place.
B00daW wrote:
I'm with loopy.
For the record, jargon -- and many other people can hold me to this. I don't hate you and I'm sure most people don't "hate" you. Others can surely vouch for me that administrative decisions (such as in #nesdev) were made not as personal attacks, but as majority consensus appeal.
I think people just really don't like how you appear to be entirely incapable of (1) apologizing, (2) showing a submissive, learning, role, when you have little to nothing to teach, and (3) absolute inconsideration of others and for the community.
First off, I apologize if these statements are slightly more strong than they need be.
I humbly request to jargon: Lurk, man. Lurk. You have been chilling out lately like loopy says. I do see that. I don't at all mean to irritate you, so I wouldn't appreciate a response of negative intent.
And a humble request to administrators: I know as jargon has said, I do focus too much on this instead of contributing to other threads. (It's because unlike jargon of the past, I don't have much to contribute so I haven't been.) I say kill this thread and the other against jargon -- no need to really tidy up posts -- and just let this thing ride out as it is, hopefully forever. However, if it goes back to how it was, please just get rid of jargon and do NOT remove the ban.
I am officially NOT talking about this any more. No matter the bait from anyone.
it isn't easy for me to chill, all things considered i am doing pretty well.
1. i have full-blown schizophrenia
2. i have (ultra?) rapid cycling bipolar disorder
3. my neruologist thinks my experiences of "temporal displacements" are caused by "retinal migranes" i might have, (he is still running tests, have yet to hear results regarding the last EEG.)
The EEG itself didn't go so well i assume, i was supposed to be asleep with theta (?) brainwave activity while dreaming during most of it, but that didn't work out.
Dwedit wrote:
Looks like Jargon just got banned from
Acmlm's Board II.
Guess I'll go over there to chat a little because at least they are in peace.
Bregalad wrote:
Dwedit wrote:
Looks like Jargon just got banned from
Acmlm's Board II.
Guess I'll go over there to chat a little because at least they are in peace.
they ban 19 in 20 of their regularly active members at-least once. it is a total drama island type board. everyone there has issues.
jargon, it's just that your posts are really weird. You make comments on other people's threads that are not always relevant, or you simply show that you haven't read most of the topic.
Even your own threads don't make much sense, because you don't provide the background information necessary for people to understand you. You shouldn't just dump a huge block of code or a crazy ass chart on people without explaining what it is, why you did it and what you expect from posting it.
tokumaru wrote:
jargon, it's just that your posts are really weird. You make comments on other people's threads that are not always relevant, or you simply show that you haven't read most of the topic.
Even your own threads don't make much sense, because you don't provide the background information necessary for people to understand you. You shouldn't just dump a huge block of code or a crazy ass chart on people without explaining what it is, why you did it and what you expect from posting it.
let me show you examples of what i have to deal with on other boards for retro development.
random person 1 wrote:
HTE DATA ITS SKGFYSJFKLYSFYSFY JGSKY FKGGSY KJGYDFJ KGF YADKGYRE UGETYAIGUYTERGHYETRGHUQWYT7AW 444444421111111111111111111111 POONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!! 111111111111111111111111111!!!!!!!!!
random person 2 wrote:
is it wrong to have a self-gratifying desire lick the gym teacher's whistle all over? i did it, then put it back where it was when she had me fetch the balls.
random person 3 wrote:
o/` NEVERRRRR ENDING PEACE WHERE THE WORLD IS WONDERFUL AND LIFE IS FREEEEE o/`
(and on and on and on for 70 posts)
now you understand why they ban 30 to 60 people a day.
takumaru wrote:
You make comments on other people's threads that are not always relevant
jargon wrote:
let me show you examples of what i have to deal with on other boards for retro development.
I couldn't give a shit about what happens on other boards. This is NESDEV, and I'm trying to explain to you why we are sometimes annoyed by your behavior.
BTW, justfying your actions by pointing at worse bahavior is a very childish thing to do, to say the least.
tokumaru wrote:
jargon wrote:
let me show you examples of what i have to deal with on other boards for retro development.
I couldn't give a shit about what happens on other boards. This is NESDEV, and I'm trying to explain to you why we are sometimes annoyed by your behavior.
BTW, justfying your actions by pointing at worse bahavior is a very childish thing to do, to say the least.
i wasn't justifying it, it was a reference to this:
Bregalad wrote:
Dwedit wrote:
Looks like Jargon just got banned from
Acmlm's Board II.
Guess I'll go over there to chat a little because at least they are in peace.
jargon wrote:
i wasn't justifying it, it was a reference to this:
Then why you quoted me?!
tokumaru wrote:
jargon wrote:
i wasn't justifying it, it was a reference to this:
Then why you quoted me?!
i did? hrm, i have no idea.
jargon wrote:
words
For great justice! Take off every Zig!