The Banishing of Woodruff?

[Symmetry]

Quick question for theGreekDog. Were you in any way involved in Woodruff's ban? i note that you're clanmates with carpetman and barrackattack.

I was not as I was not a moderator when Woodruff was banned.

I'm in the McGill usergroup with those two, yes.

Cheers, have you dealt with any complaints from or against members of your clan?

Bullet Proof Bandits? No.

The usergroup McGill University? See question (original answer was yes).

Sorry Symm - Follow up question: What do you mean by "dealt with?"

Been involved with in your capacity as a moderator, say discussing a ban, or arguing against one.

[thegreekdog]

Quick question for theGreekDog. Were you in any way involved in Woodruff's ban? i note that you're clanmates with carpetman and barrackattack.

I was not as I was not a moderator when Woodruff was banned.

I'm in the McGill usergroup with those two, yes.

Cheers, have you dealt with any complaints from or against members of your clan?

Bullet Proof Bandits? No.

The usergroup McGill University? See question (original answer was yes).

Sorry Symm - Follow up question: What do you mean by "dealt with?"

Been involved with in your capacity as a moderator, say discussing a ban, or arguing against one.

I've discussed bans or potential bans regarding people in the McGill usergroup. I've argued both for and against bans for people in the McGill usergroup.

[shieldgenerator7]

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

Is this intentional trolling?

If so, what purpsoe does this statement serve?

Is it a test to see who will flame you back?

[Symmetry]

1) Do you think that being clanmates with those people affected your decisions?

2) Do you think it could potentially affect decisions of other mods if they discussed such decisions with regards to members of their clan?

3) Would you ask a mod to remove themself from a discussion if you felt they had a vested interest?

[Neoteny]

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

If I gave you a life-time supply of calcium, would you join my coalition?

Are you hitting on me?

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

Is this intentional trolling?

If so, what purpsoe does this statement serve?

Is it a test to see who will flame you back?

Are you hitting on me?

[pimpdave]

Hey Neoteny, wanna get greased up and have a greco-roman wrestling competition at my place tonight?

[shieldgenerator7]

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

If I gave you a life-time supply of calcium, would you join my coalition?

Are you hitting on me?

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

Is this intentional trolling?

If so, what purpsoe does this statement serve?

Is it a test to see who will flame you back?

Are you hitting on me?

haha neotony you're a funny troll (except when you flame )

you still didn't answer my questions...

[Aradhus]

How the f*ck can I have a counter argument when you've presented no evidence to your claims which amount to, having a great talent at spotting things other people can't.

Do you ever read the forum

That's a fucking laugh, coming from a guy who 90% of his posts are just baiting.

[Neoteny]

pimpdave is such a sweet young man. You hooligans could learn a lot from him about successful interpersonal relationships.

To answer your question, my response expressed my actual opinion, just in an hyperbolic manner, and including the word "f*ck."

[BigBallinStalin]

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

If I gave you a life-time supply of calcium, would you join my coalition?

Are you hitting on me?

Don't worry. I love people regardless of their scientific orientation!

[thegreekdog]

1) Do you think that being clanmates with those people affected your decisions?

No.

2) Do you think it could potentially affect decisions of other mods if they discussed such decisions with regards to members of their clan?

Maybe. I can't speak for other moderators.

3) Would you ask a mod to remove themself from a discussion if you felt they had a vested interest?

Yes. I've removed myself from disciplinary activities and discussions before. In all cases in which I've done so, it's because I'm arguing a particular point in a thread and feel that others would see me taking disciplinary action as influencing the course of the thread.

For example, if you and I are arguing about the color of the sky (you think it's blue, I think it's grey), and you have some potentially flaming comments, I won't participate in the discussions regarding your potential ban or non-ban.

[pimpdave]

Considering how quick they are to ban me, I doubt it effects their decisions. Woodruff was going off on me for months before I finally dished it back a little. Within a week, I was banned for six months. I come back, and john9blue started calling me names fucking constantly for months. Mods didn't do shit. I just kept on not responding, while the guy just kept on going and going and going. Finally, after months, they ban him for one measly little week.

So if anything, they show preference to the people who aren't in McGill.

[john9blue]

Considering how quick they are to ban me, I doubt it effects their decisions. Woodruff was going off on me for months before I finally dished it back a little. Within a week, I was banned for six months. I come back, and john9blue started calling me names fucking constantly for months. Mods didn't do shit. I just kept on not responding, while the guy just kept on going and going and going. Finally, after months, they ban him for one measly little week.

So if anything, they show preference to the people who aren't in McGill.

yes, you are such a VICTIM LOL

nobody here thinks you're innocent at all, bro. you aren't fooling anyone.

[pimpdave]

It'd be nice if the rules were enforced equally.

[john9blue]

it would be nice. you would have been banned at the same time i was due to your constant baiting and trolling (and for longer, since you insult entire groups of people and you are a repeat offender)

[pimpdave]

[pimpdave]

I don't go after anyone personally. I might criticize their ideas or lampoon their expression of them, but I don't go after the person. And I made it a point to not engage you at all.

[CreepersWiener]

I don't go after anyone personally. I might criticize their ideas or lampoon their expression of them, but I don't go after the person. And I made it a point to not engage you at all.

When Congresswoman Giffords got shot in the head in Arizona and other people got killed (including a nine year old girl), I quoted the father of Giffords as blaming the Tea Party. I just brought up the idea that the Tea Party ideology might have led to the shooting of Giffords. Also, the Palin targeting propaganda that had Giffords in the middle of a gun sight.

When I made the point of how inflammatory conservative rhetoric may be used as an excuse to start blowing away democrats and liberals, I got threatened by a mod (can't remember who) for targeting a GROUP OF PEOPLE. So, I deleted all my discussions and posts on that thread, and let everyone else debate, just because I got threatened with a ban.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... it=Arizona

If I happened to say the Klu Klux Klan was bad for the things they did or believe...would it have gotten the same treatment? They are a group of people too.

I don't see how pointing out the flaws in people's or groups of people's beliefs is considered flaming or targeting a group of people.

Note: Woodruff did have a good discussion going in that thread before it died off.

[john9blue]

I don't go after anyone personally. I might criticize their ideas or lampoon their expression of them, but I don't go after the person. And I made it a point to not engage you at all.

oh, so that makes it okay?

in that case, everyone whose name starts with "d" is a faggot, and everyone with an apple-related avatar has a 3 inch dick.

not like i'm calling out anyone in particular, though.

[pimpdave]

I don't go after anyone personally. I might criticize their ideas or lampoon their expression of them, but I don't go after the person. And I made it a point to not engage you at all.

oh, so that makes it okay?

in that case, everyone whose name starts with "d" is a faggot, and everyone with an apple-related avatar has a 3 inch dick.

not like i'm calling out anyone in particular, though.

Dude, calm down. Go after my ideas. That's the whole point. Call them stupid and idiotic and all of that. When you get back, that is.

[john9blue]

Dude, calm down. Go after my ideas. That's the whole point. Call them stupid and idiotic and all of that. When you get back, that is.

since when do you go after ideas?

you go after people and the groups they identify with.

you constantly try to troll and it always fails because nobody genuinely believes the BS that you say about the tea party and whatnot.

P.S. "when i get back"? did you write another sob story to the mods that you "hate" so much to try and get me banned again? cute.

[pimpdave]

That word you posted is so serious one can't even write it as a typo on this website without getting banned. Just sayin'.

[shieldgenerator7]

wow. baiting and flaming?

those two are from completely different worlds to me. I've seen it happen, but I've never been a part of it so I don't really understand the rift forming between good players like john9blue and pimpdave (who I'd miss just as much as AoG)

-SG7 ( )

[army of nobunaga]

like happens people.... I mean real life.. taht which most of you have never experienced.

woodruff is a teacher of men. I do not care his views.. his personality, he has a profession deemed by my gods as most honorable.... you other have chosen your paths.

Leave him alone ye men of little.

[john9blue]

That word you posted is so serious one can't even write it as a typo on this website. Just sayin'.

the problem here seems to be that you can dish it out, but you can't take it.

if you're genuinely offended by the fact that i used the word "faggot" for the sake of illustrating an example (which wasn't even addressed at you) then you need thicker skin.

that is, provided you actually were offended (which you weren't, you're just pretending to be offended again so that i can receive more punishment. reminds me of my little sister back when she was 6.)