Re: Necal Application - Accepted to Sith

by **Necal** Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:11 am

Unless we have different definitions of 'flaming', then no.

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:19 am

Sqrl2k wrote:guys im sorry to say but this is an application for JvS not a debate in the Rancor Pit

Yes. Please continue this via PM or other means. This is not related to his application. We're are not here to judge you at first sight, so don't give anyone means to do so. Play the game, let us get to know you.

However, pointing out the insecurity of a respected member, a good buddy of mine, in your application thread, is not a good start.

Just play nicely. Cool

by **Necal** Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:26 am

I actually have sent him a PM with both a continuation of the argument (what there is that needs to be continued) and an apology. So, unless he feels angry (knowing him he won't), then the matter should be more or less settled.

Of course, I am a bit angry that I lost my first argument on these forums... I'm used to winning at least the first two when I join a new forum. But, that's what I get for being a jerk.

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:33 am

Necal wrote:I actually have sent him a PM with both a continuation of the argument (what there is that needs to be continued) and an apology. So, unless he feels angry (knowing him he won't), then the matter should be more or less settled.

Of course, I am a bit angry that I lost my first argument on these forums... I'm used to winning at least the first two when I join a new forum. But, that's what I get for being a jerk.

The maturity Zohan was expressing you have lives up to its standards.
I'm impressed by your ability to recognize your mistakes.

As long as Zohan is not angry, everything's fine.
I see great things in your future, young sith.
Necal Application - Accepted to Sith - Page 3 124834

Necal Application - Accepted to Sith - Page 3 124834

Oh, and for future reference, our definitions of flaming can be found in the rules. Champion wrote these things himself, so this is his defintion(s).

Champion wrote:1> NO FLAMING/FLAME BAITING. Flaming is posting anything which may be offensive. This includes racism, attacks on anothers religion, cursing or insulting another person or anything along those lines. If you have to ask yourself if you may get in trouble for posting something, don't post it. Flame baiting is posting something which may not be that offensive but is aimed at luring someone into a flame war or posting something flaming. Key point in this rule: BE RESPECTFUL TO ALL.

~JvS Forum Administrators.

And this is how serious we are about flaming, Not saying you were, just for future reference.

Champion wrote:Let this be a warning to all of you who are malicious at heart. Your flaming and flame baiting will not be tolerated. I have instructed my admins to start handing out infractions for violations of rules. And if they do not start doing there job I will remove them from there power. DO NOT FLAME OTHERS OR INSTIGATE ANY PROBLEMS. If you dont have something nice to say, dont say it at all. THIS IS YOUR WARNING, you will NOT get one in any future threads AS OF NOW.

Again, this is just for future reference. Cool

- Saint

by **Champion** Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:42 am

Necal wrote:I actually have sent him a PM with both a continuation of the argument (what there is that needs to be continued) and an apology. So, unless he feels angry (knowing him he won't), then the matter should be more or less settled.

Of course, I am a bit angry that I lost my first argument on these forums... I'm used to winning at least the first two when I join a new forum. But, that's what I get for being a jerk.

Necal Application - Accepted to Sith - Page 3 NotSureIfSerious

by The Zohan Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:52 am

Lol

I'll check my PM's but its all good.

by **Necal** Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:52 am

Speaking of his definition of flaming, that would seem to be far to general.

One of the best definitions I have heard was 'posting something with the intent to offend'. Placing a rule against posting anything that may offend covers an extremly wide variety of things. People get offended by certain types of music or bands, people could get offended by that picture he just posted considering that Heath Ledger is dead, ShadowSaints name could be offensive to certain devout catholics as a saint must be cannonized to be considered as such (and named as such).

The intent is correct, but its a sloppy execution. And you know what? This could offend people, even though its designed to correct a flawed rule.

And yes, I am serious.

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:54 am

Skorp wrote:none of us are serious ^^

Necal wrote:Speaking of his definition of flaming, that would seem to be far to general.

One of the best definitions I have heard was 'posting something with the intent to offend'. Placing a rule against posting anything that may offend covers an extremly wide variety of things. People get offended by certain types of music or bands, people could get offended by that picture he just posted considering that Heath Ledger is dead, ShadowSaints name could be offensive to certain devout catholics as a saint must be cannonized to be considered as such (and named as such).

The intent is correct, but its a sloppy execution. And you know what? This could offend people, even though its designed to correct a flawed rule.

And yes, I am serious.

Oh and don't talk too much. Very Happy

by **Necal** Thu Feb 11, 2010 3:05 am

That's the only way to talk online; you put too little, and you chance people not getting it.

Bertter to err on the side of caution.

by Guest Thu Feb 11, 2010 3:07 am

Necal wrote:That's the only way to talk online; you put too little, and you chance people not getting it.

Bertter to err on the side of caution.

Whatever you say... Smile

by Nihil Thu Feb 11, 2010 3:09 am

oook, so, i'm guessing that we are EDGING on a conversational hazard here...