Darth Solo said:

Paranoid at all?

Well, someone has suddenly adopted one of my former avatars...

Is there, mmhey, is there a problem? mmh-Flayven!

No problem.

*mopes*

I'm sorry I made Keanu have a sad. It won't happen again. :)

What about replying to threads like the Hanbo one?

Surely if the thread is a bit of a joke it's safe to reply in kind?

Darth has a sad when he looks a Frinks new avitar.

Its just not Frink to me. Hes a broken man. Its almost like i have him on ignore now :-(

Bingowings said:

What about replying to threads like the Hanbo one?

Surely if the thread is a bit of a joke it's safe to reply in kind?

Yeah, I've been wondering about this too.  Or how about the ADYWAN tuna thread, which was meant as a serious thread but was ridiculous from the first post?

The rules are meant to be simple, cut and dried.  But this issue is more complex than that.  Either moderator discretion must be allowed, or there will be lots of banning.

NO!!!!!!

NO!

TV's Frink said

 

The rules are meant to be simple, cut and dried.  But this issue is more complex than that.  Either moderator discretion must be allowed, or there will be lots of banning.

Dude has a point. For example, if i was to make a post say about how AT-ATs fall over in a serious thread and i just replied with:

even though its on topic and just supposed to be comedy relief, would i get a warning for not being constuctive to a thread?

There are gray areas.

And do the mods have the time to take on the increased policing of the site?

I agree it needs doing absolutly, but not with an iron rod to stick with Jays statement.

zombie84 said:

Frink, I don't think you will be banned or punished the second you make some kind of sarcastic remark or off-topic reference. Everyone does that here and its part of the off-the-cuff charm that makes non-preservation discussion entertaining at OT.com. I think its just a warning about doing this chronically without ever contributing anything worthwhile to a discussion. I have to say you are often guilty of this and sometimes it gets a bit old. But if you got in trouble for any "technical" breach of this new rule then we'd all be in trouble as well, and obviously this is not going to happen. So I would say just be yourself but take it down a few notches in areas where it otherwise might impose upon more "informative" discussion, or whatever.

Careful. With common sense like that, you might find yourself an active member here for a long time to come.

scrubbed

I believe Zion is still a mod (and Jay as well, obviously).

My name is Gaffer Tape, and I disapprove of the preceding statement.  I also want to point out that we do have more than one mod.

Jay said:

zombie84 said:

Frink, I don't think you will be banned or punished the second you make some kind of sarcastic remark or off-topic reference. Everyone does that here and its part of the off-the-cuff charm that makes non-preservation discussion entertaining at OT.com. I think its just a warning about doing this chronically without ever contributing anything worthwhile to a discussion. I have to say you are often guilty of this and sometimes it gets a bit old. But if you got in trouble for any "technical" breach of this new rule then we'd all be in trouble as well, and obviously this is not going to happen. So I would say just be yourself but take it down a few notches in areas where it otherwise might impose upon more "informative" discussion, or whatever.

Careful. With common sense like that, you might find yourself an active member here for a long time to come.

Ok, this answers my question(s).

Gaffer Tape said:

My name is Gaffer Tape, and I disapprove of the preceding statement.  I also want to point out that we do have more than one mod.

My name is TV's Frink, and I disapprove of your disapproval of my statement.*

Chewtobacca said:

Come on, Frink!  Let's have that avatar back.

I don't know, I kind of enjoy my new one.  It won't be around for long, however.

Fine, you win.