Page 3 of 8
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:40 am
by noone
Psyko wrote:The post is just as serious whether a mod made the comment or another forum member did. If a regular member said it, how does that not give the impression that the entire forum membership is the same, as it apparently does if a mod says it?
Doing IT work at peoples homes on accasions too, I get ask to protect computers and install monitoring and tracking software too.
PArents check and see in a later stage the seriousness of such jests, and will actually go through quite lengths to see who said what.
And yes, some would definatly judge the entire forum like that without giving it a second though.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:17 am
by Clarkey
~Thamuz~ wrote:I agree 100% with Nostra here, this kind of talk should not be used in any situation joking or not, besides that i thought Jason wanted the forums to be kept PG 13 which this clearly is not.
haha very funny, this makes me laugh (nothing personal Thamuz), but i have always disagreed with people using the term "I raped you ingame". People associate it with raiding people ingame. Yet the majority of the community are happy to use this term.
I don't agree with anything on this forum that insinuates certain sexual actions to minors or non-consenting adults.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:19 am
by Ashu
I think the GC is the only exception ( i don't know why tho, if a child would play the game he'd fight ). I also agree with Clarkey's last statement.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:30 am
by Juliette
I love how easy it is to ignore context. Do you think parents will make an exception for General, the GC, Misc? They won't. Parents, in their infinite wisdom, are like kids who would like to see someone get a warning. Oblivious to context. Anyway, I have asked for the warning certain parties would die for to see me receive, and made sure Andy is, in fact, okay after that horrible ordeal he must have gone through.
He's fine, by the way.
I also love how the first moron sent me a "Paedophile" PM already. You know who you are, and you and your disgusting boss/lover will learn what that gets you, as soon as my Albanian contacts come through for me.
And with that, I bid you a fond good day, see you in a few hours.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 5:20 am
by Jack
[spoiler]
Nostra wrote:Zeratul wrote:true on both counts, Nostra.
While we do not have kids, we can also understand why you speak as you did... had it been anything except that obvious jest, it would have been very wrong.
That opinion would lay in the eye of the beholder ...
The people involved may laugh ... a parent reading his kids activity may see the jest, and simply block.
Cos psyko, when a parent would see and understand its a moderator talking like that, they would simply deem the entire staff might be the same ... and block the site pre-emtpively.
Parents tend not to argue with people involved with disputable behaviour online when it comes to their childs upbringing. They simply prevent any further riscs of further involvement of their child.
I would.
And julliete, you and Andy might not be offended, parents might definatly think otherwise.
Mind you, the parents are the legal gaurdians, their childs personal opinion of a grown up women appraoching them like that, is of no concern to them. They will do what they feel is right for their child.
[/spoiler]
Then let the parents decide what its ok and what is not and stop trying to babysit someone elses kid.
[spoiler]
Nostra wrote:Zeratul wrote:in circumstances where one of the parties is in any way offended, then this would indeed be very wrong. But should neither party be offended, then it is basically not wrong.
...
Someone getting offended on another's behalf when he/she/it is not offended him-/her-/itself, is more wrong we'd say.
Mind you, these are personal opinions of ours, not official admin decrees.
.....
Those are your personal opinions too zera
You obviously dont have kids.
[/spoiler]
So because Z does not have childern his opinion is instantly invalidated or is it because he does not agree with you? Maybe it is both? Because that is exactly what you just said.
[spoiler]
Clarkey wrote:~Thamuz~ wrote:I agree 100% with Nostra here, this kind of talk should not be used in any situation joking or not, besides that i thought Jason wanted the forums to be kept PG 13 which this clearly is not.
haha very funny, this makes me laugh (nothing personal Thamuz), but i have always disagreed with people using the term "I raped you ingame". People associate it with raiding people ingame. Yet the majority of the community are happy to use this term.
I don't agree with anything on this forum that insinuates certain sexual actions to minors or non-consenting adults.
[/spoiler]Rape means to utterly destroy one's opposition. It's in the dictionary.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:15 am
by The Doctor
It's inappropriate, discussion of illegal activities with minors, so I modded it.
Plain and simple.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:37 am
by Iƒrit
for the record I was the one that reported the post, it was sexually suggestive and that is against the forum rules last I knew.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:43 am
by stuff of legends
[BoT] Jack wrote:[spoiler]
Nostra wrote:Zeratul wrote:true on both counts, Nostra.
While we do not have kids, we can also understand why you speak as you did... had it been anything except that obvious jest, it would have been very wrong.
That opinion would lay in the eye of the beholder ...
The people involved may laugh ... a parent reading his kids activity may see the jest, and simply block.
Cos psyko, when a parent would see and understand its a moderator talking like that, they would simply deem the entire staff might be the same ... and block the site pre-emtpively.
Parents tend not to argue with people involved with disputable behaviour online when it comes to their childs upbringing. They simply prevent any further riscs of further involvement of their child.
I would.
And julliete, you and Andy might not be offended, parents might definatly think otherwise.
Mind you, the parents are the legal gaurdians, their childs personal opinion of a grown up women appraoching them like that, is of no concern to them. They will do what they feel is right for their child.
[/spoiler]
Then let the parents decide what its ok and what is not and stop trying to babysit someone elses kid.
Lets use your logic then and remove word censoring, let the parents decide whats ok for their children.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:54 am
by deni
stuff of legends wrote:[BoT] Jack wrote:[spoiler]
Nostra wrote:Zeratul wrote:true on both counts, Nostra.
While we do not have kids, we can also understand why you speak as you did... had it been anything except that obvious jest, it would have been very wrong.
That opinion would lay in the eye of the beholder ...
The people involved may laugh ... a parent reading his kids activity may see the jest, and simply block.
Cos psyko, when a parent would see and understand its a moderator talking like that, they would simply deem the entire staff might be the same ... and block the site pre-emtpively.
Parents tend not to argue with people involved with disputable behaviour online when it comes to their childs upbringing. They simply prevent any further riscs of further involvement of their child.
I would.
And julliete, you and Andy might not be offended, parents might definatly think otherwise.
Mind you, the parents are the legal gaurdians, their childs personal opinion of a grown up women appraoching them like that, is of no concern to them. They will do what they feel is right for their child.
[/spoiler]
Then let the parents decide what its ok and what is not and stop trying to babysit someone elses kid.
Lets use your logic then and remove word censoring, let the parents decide whats ok for their children.
There is a difference between insults and sexual innuendo
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:54 am
by RoKeT
ƒëmmë ƒatalë wrote:why is it deemed appropriate that a 24yr female can talk of taking the virginity of a 14 male minor?
Uni your only 24 HOLY HELL how come you never talk like that to me
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:59 am
by MajorLeeHurts
Iƒrit wrote:for the record I was the one that reported the post, it was sexually suggestive and that is against the forum rules last I knew.
Thank you Paul , I saw it and agree with you. Her statement was very inappropriate.
Juliet is a mod and should know better. A simple reprimand should do as opposed a burning at the stake.
Juliet ... a plea of temporary insanity maybe , because honestly I have never witnessed you posting like that before and am a little surprised and concerned about your original intent albeit in jest or simply to test or jest
Thank you for Modding it Haz.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:01 am
by Jack
It violated no rules.
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:05 am
by MajorLeeHurts
[BoT] Jack wrote:It violated no rules.
True Jack , but even I who can ride the hairy edge of inappropriateness was taken back by it
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:10 am
by Clarkey
[BoT] Jack wrote:It violated no rules.
No-one has said it does break any rules (unless I skipped that bit), that's why the thread is titled appropriateness because it was felt the comment was inappropriate as opposed to breaking rules.
I admit it breaks no rules, however, I stand by my statement that I disagree with anything that suggests or otherwise (even a sick joke, because that's what it would be a sick joke as opposed to a joke) any sexual act towards minors (boys or girls).
Re: appropriateness
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:11 am
by The Doctor
[BoT] Jack wrote:It violated no rules.
Discussion of illegal activities (sexual activity with minors). Not a rule, but it is still illegal, and should not be on the forums.