nightbloom wrote:OMG I LOL!!!!!! at whomever thinks I am all peachy and rainbows. Holy cow that speaks VOLUMES about who has been here a long time and who hasnt. I can hardly be called someone who is afraid of confrontation or doesnt speak their mind.
I would *guess* that since your post uses terminology mine did (i.e. peachy), this response was to my post. FYI, my comment was not directed at you - it was about "people" with the general mindframe of "confrontation is bad, lets always pretend everything is great!". IMO, the fact you instantly reflected this upon yourself speaks VOLUMES about your train of thought.
nightbloom wrote:I am a hypocrit? How?
Well, since you asked, I'll be happy to point it out for you. Early in the thread you made this comment:
nightbloom wrote:What I DO mind is ppl just adopting this attitude of condescending superiority.
Yet, in the remainder of this thread you said the following:
nightbloom wrote:I do not believe in having a war of words with someone who obviously cant use them correctly.
nightbloom wrote:Your ignorance just becomes more apparent every time you speak.
nightbloom wrote:Your attitude is going to seperate and hurt SRF as a community, a happy one before you showed up. Im not a mod, but if I were Id clean you guys out because SRF shouldnt be what you are making it.
nightbloom wrote:they are changing our nice SRF into a flaming ahole fest.
nightbloom wrote:FOr being a veteran member, you are so new. LOL Where have YOU BEEN? Have you just not read any of my posts before this moment?
nightbloom wrote:Yes, lets rearrange the entire forum cause 10 ppl are jerkoffs and can't restrain themselves from commenting negatively on everything. Good idea, you're brilliant.
nightbloom wrote:I can certainly be accused of doing my fair share of flaming, I am not the most restrained person I know.
It appears to me you're displaying an attitude of condescending superiority in your comments. In fact, in the last quote you admit you have done your fair share of flaming before - but isn't this a direct contradiction to saying "you mind ppl adopting a condescending attitude"?
Or how about this:
nightbloom wrote:How would you like everyone to be a carbon copy of you? Do you not allow for differences in ppl? What is important or not important to YOU is not what is important or not important to the rest of us.
Isn't this comment somewhat hypocritical of the point of this thread? You make the case that the negative people are changing the vibe of the forum and should stop the negative comments, yet you then argue that not everyone should be a carbon copy of each other. But if everyone was always positive, isn't that a copy of each other?
Also, you say differences in people should be allowed. But then, you turn around and say that people who are negative should be stopped (not allowed). So, which is it?
Lastly, you make the comment that what is important (or not) to person A is not what is important (or is) to person B. But does this not go both ways? This point is a contradiction in itself - the same argument could be said about your viewpoint.
nightbloom wrote:A novel concept coming up... if you dont like the topic, dont read it and certainly dont post on it.
Considering I pretty much said the same exact thing in my first post . . . no, thats not a novel concept.
nightbloom wrote:I dont care if he skins small animals in his bathtub on his own time, here he is a decent, contributing, helpful forum user.
Wow, now there's a comment - and it touchs on one of the same points I brought up months ago. My question for you would be: When is the line crossed and loyalty dissolved? For example, say a friend murders someone - would you still remain loyal? What if they murder your mother?
Are those extreme examples? Yes. But it shows why this can be more than "just a game" - this is a matter of ethics, and a persons ability/willingness to turn a blind eye to the actions of thier friend, which is very much a RL issue.
nightbloom wrote:I am not only loyal to ppl, I am loyal to ideas.
So, heres an honest question (same as above more or less): What do you do if one of your good friends does something you strongly disagree with?
Or how about this: If you are loyal to an idea (e.g. an ethical practice), and you know someone (say, a random person on the internet you have exchanged a few words with) who has done the opposite of that idea, should you say something? If you do not say something, does that mean you are in fact *not* loyal to the idea? And if you do say something, should you be flamed for it?
nightbloom wrote:This is the last I am going to entertain this topic <HuyFong goldbuying, etc.>. It died when the thread was locked. That means case closed, everyone has said their piece and the subject is a dead one.
I completely disagree. Just because threads are locked, and people try to suppress a topic, does not mean a topic dies. If anything, the resistence to talking about the topic just makes people want to talk about the topic more, and can lead to a revival of the same topic with even greater magnitude. This could not be anymore evident than in the HuyFong case - months ago I brought all the evidence to the table, and it was deleted from the forums. Look what happened . . . the whole topic came back twice as strong.
Ryoko wrote:This topic has nothing to do with HuyFong
For most people, I would agree it doesn't. However, for me, it does. Why?
When I first started posting on these forums it was pretty much all in character/skill discussion, with me trying to help people - it was a positive experience. Then, when I brought the HuyFong topic to the table, this forum chastised me. For me, that was when the "tone" of this forum changed.
All I did was ask a couple tough questions (didn't flame anybody, didn't call anyone noob), but yet next thing I knew a barrage of negativity and flames were aimed my way. Although the main impetus for my lengthy posts proving my point was because HuyFong hardcore flamed me and then said I was a liar, I was still the bad guy for defending myself.
See, from from where I stand, the recent threads with people being negative towards people killing uniques and posting pictures some consider negative are *absolutely trivial* compared to the hardcore negativity that was aimed at me. Guess what - those kinda of threads were here months ago, so I don't know why people are making a big deal about them now. I can't help it if you're just now noticing them, but those threads are nothing new (perhaps more prevalent, but not new). Perhaps people are a little more sensitive after the latest HuyFong threads?
I wanna know why people are rushing to defend the people who ask the same question for the 100000 time in char/skill discussion, but won't *even consider* defending someone who has the balls, *and the evidence*, to show someone is a flat out a liar. Yeah . . . I wanna know where all the anti-negative backers were when I was getting flamed up the ass. The kind of negativity that was shown in this forum in the past completely dwarfs the current negativity, but people don't give a shit because it wasn't them. Awesome.
It may sound like I'm blowing it out of proportion, but try walking in my shoes . . . I stood up for ethical practices I believe in (1. Not purposefully lying to and misleading people 2. Not using money to buy admiration), was flamed and called a liar, had to defend myself, then got massively flamed by a large part of this forum once I did. OTOH, this forum is now complaining about people saying "Use search noob" to people asking the same question for the 1000 time, and about people basically saying "who cares" to a person when they kill a unique - both of which are not surprising considering the evolution of the forum.
Oh hell, wtf am I thinking? How someone responds to someone killing Tiger Girl is obviously more important then RL ethics.
senapanaga wrote:Lol?
RACIAL PROFILING!!!!
Yeah, racial profiling is pretty LOL.