Moderator: Community Team
drunkmonkey wrote:I honestly wonder why anyone becomes a mod on this site. You're the whiniest bunch of players imaginable.
Ron Burgundy wrote:Why don't you go back to your home on Whore Island?
No, my guess is that he hasn't seen this yet. If he had, he would have replied. You can bet on that.Ace Rimmer wrote:1 vote for B, I bet it was eddie.
drunkmonkey wrote:I honestly wonder why anyone becomes a mod on this site. You're the whiniest bunch of players imaginable.
Ron Burgundy wrote:Why don't you go back to your home on Whore Island?
I've heard,by some very reliable sources, that Bogan is a master baiter.JoshyBoy wrote:I voted "A". That's pretty strong hatred being directed towards Bogan there. "B" could possibly, by some stretch of the imagination, be considered baiting.
Well I heard he was a mass debater.GallantPellham wrote:I've heard,by some very reliable sources, that Bogan is a master baiter.
drunkmonkey wrote:I honestly wonder why anyone becomes a mod on this site. You're the whiniest bunch of players imaginable.
Ron Burgundy wrote:Why don't you go back to your home on Whore Island?
your the first one, to mention his inch and a half of rusty steel needle.oVo wrote:I don't think eddie2's small penis should be the subject of public debate.
are you in congress?PLAYER57832 wrote:I believe both would be considered OK, in honesty. I would say both should be not OK, though.
They are likely considered OK by CC, but I don't think they should be.. nothing inconsistant about that.GallantPellham wrote:are you in congress?PLAYER57832 wrote:I believe both would be considered OK, in honesty. I would say both should be not OK, though.
+1 to Army of GOD?!?Army of GOD wrote:A is flaming, B is baiting.
Whether their severity is equivalent is an entirely different and unanswerable question. Baiting is much more passive than flaming.
What is the "in honesty" for?PLAYER57832 wrote:They are likely considered OK by CC, but I don't think they should be.. nothing inconsistant about that.GallantPellham wrote:are you in congress?PLAYER57832 wrote:I believe both would be considered OK, in honesty. I would say both should be not OK, though.
Sorry, I go on the assumption most people here (at least those in the US, Canada and the UK) are proficient in English. I do take the time to explain to non-English speakers, but generally cannot be bothered with those who just never paid attention in elementary schooljimboston wrote:What is the "in honesty" for?PLAYER57832 wrote:They are likely considered OK by CC, but I don't think they should be.. nothing inconsistant about that.GallantPellham wrote:are you in congress?PLAYER57832 wrote:I believe both would be considered OK, in honesty. I would say both should be not OK, though.
It makes no sense being there and disrupts your intended meaning.
Oh wait... It's Player.... Sorry I got confused for a moment, and thought your posts were supposed to make sense. My bad!
The phrase or term "in honesty" makes absolutely NO SENSE in your response.PLAYER57832 wrote:Sorry, I go on the assumption most people here (at least those in the US, Canada and the UK) are proficient in English. I do take the time to explain to non-English speakers, but generally cannot be bothered with those who just never paid attention in elementary schooljimboston wrote:What is the "in honesty" for?PLAYER57832 wrote:They are likely considered OK by CC, but I don't think they should be.. nothing inconsistant about that.GallantPellham wrote:are you in congress?PLAYER57832 wrote:I believe both would be considered OK, in honesty. I would say both should be not OK, though.
It makes no sense being there and disrupts your intended meaning.
Oh wait... It's Player.... Sorry I got confused for a moment, and thought your posts were supposed to make sense. My bad!