logo Sign In

Discussion About the New Forum Rules (Also: Frink's Avatars) (Was: For those of you who want to be rid of me, you might get your wish sooner than you thought) — Page 2

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Darth Solo said:

Paranoid at all?

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

Author
Time

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

Author
Time

Hey, Leonardo, you're starting to look like TV's Frink!  As a former sufferer from Frink's Disease myself, I can sympathize.  Dont worry though:  Frink has the cure.  You'll have to be nice to him if you want him to put you out of your flippancy.

Author
Time

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

Author
Time

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?

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

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 :-(

Author
Time

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.

Author
Time

Darnit Frink, shape up! Put on a decent avatar and stop your moping!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

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.

Author
Time

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.

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

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

Author
Time
 (Edited)

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.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time

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).

Author
Time
 (Edited)

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.*

Author
Time

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.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

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.

 But its so played-out. It's beneath you.

Author
Time

I'd love to know what the heck was going on in here.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

I'd love to know what the heck was going on in here.

Are you talking about my avatar changes?

First avatar

Current avatar (you may need to refresh your cache)

Also, Leonardo briefly was using one of my old Frink avatars, which is what encouraged me to change mine.  Since he changed away from a meme (Struttin' Leo), I changed to one (Sad Keanu) in response.  And now I've got a less sad, more current meme (Witch Candidate).