:
Well Pet, that kind of response annoys me more... Please post only sensible, directly related responses to my more than valid points.... if you actually read the content of my posts... you would see that I agree with alot of what's been said in connection with spam... what I don't like is people not projecting valid reasons for their behaviour... I simply required clarification on Alcar's idea of spam and a little more than "Don't spam because the rules say so." I don't agree with the blind following of rules because they are just there... rules are there to be challenged... If you have a problem with that then I sorry but there's nothing I can do about that other than offering you a chill pill! |
While the rules are up for debate, we don't encourage it. The rules are what have worked for quite a number of years, and I don't expect them to change anytime soon.
The fact we give the members a right to voice their opinions (on administrative matters, other than bans) is much more than some forums do. Alcar... |
:
:
In theory your rules work fine... sadly this ain't a theoretical forum... real people with real ideas and beliefs! :
:D |
:
Alcar... |
:
Like, with the spamming... only Teal gave me a valid reason why it should be monitored... wading through it can be annoying! I agree! Everyone else just said... "because its in the rules" not valid in my book.. so I delved for depth! |
Because we've explained it so many times to so many people. It's simpler to say, "It's in the rules". Afterall, the rules were created for the reasons we would state anyway.
Your attitude towards rules is quite childish. Rules are everywhere, and you can challenge them if you want. But I doubt you'll get any government to change their rules because some citizen causes a stir. Sad, but true. Having the general populace against you can be a very depressing. Alcar... |
:
Testing boundaries and rules is how we develop our own morality, through prioratisation we rationalise our beliefs! Its a well known phenominon.... if we didn't test and rationalise we'd all treat a "no spamming" rule on a forum with the same degree of integrity as "thou shalt not kill!" Maybe not a citizen.... but citizens making a stand will make cause for concern... pro-active demonstrations and rallies really can make a difference! Its how a democracy works Peter! |
Your best bet is to just close this thread she isnt going to listen is she.
|
:
Alcar hasn't said anything yet!!!!! We are however, having a very mature and enlightening exchange of views... if you feel threatened by that I apologise but really... its fine! |
Im all up for exchanging views it can enlighten people on subjects but i agree with alcar here.
|
:
What are your views in connection with spam? |
I see that it is a problem and there is no point in taking this into a philosophical debate about spam for gods sake.
|
:
Deep! :D :p |
:
:
Also, I told you before that spam was "poinless drivel," then I later showed you a quote to back my statement up. http://www.oddworldforums.net/showpo...1&postcount=31 Okay, so now we know spam is three things thus far. 1. dual topic 2. argument 3. pointless drivel or offensive crude material Also, one on one conversation in a public thread is somewhat considered spam, because one on one conversations are meant for PM. Now we have four things. 1. dual topic 2. argument 3. pointless drivel or offensive crude material 4. One on one conversation in public thread From here I think you can get the idea of what spam is. Better? -oddguy |
:
2. Please do not call me 'Sweets'. And while I'm at it: 'dear', 'pet' or any other crap like this I also do not wish you to call me. :
3. *Very calmly* Spell my name right. |
This isn't going anywhere. The definition of spam has been explained to you on numerous occasions, convieniently in this thread. I've said and done what has needed to be said and done, therefore I'm closing this thread.
Alcar... |