Forumwarz is the first "Massively Single-Player" online RPG completely built around Internet culture.

You are currently looking at Flamebate, our community forums. Players can discuss the game here, strategize, and role play as their characters.

You need to be logged in to post and to see the uncensored versions of these forums.

Log in or Learn about Forumwarz

Civil Discussion
Switch to Role-Playing Civil Discussion
Unban Unban Merc. Also demod spacekadt

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

A+ would ban again

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Inertia Posted:

wow that is a ****ty firefox theme

i was thinkin the same thing lol

Nicco

MODERATOR
Avatar: 24745 2011-07-31 00:34:23 -0400
51

[Harem and Sushi Bar]

Level 69 Troll

Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco

i didn’t read any post in this thread

Nicco

MODERATOR
Avatar: 24745 2011-07-31 00:34:23 -0400
51

[Harem and Sushi Bar]

Level 69 Troll

Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco Nicco

Nicco Posted:

i didn’t read any post in this thread

i believe it goes like this

The beauty of FWZ DOM is that from it,

it teaches EXTREMELY REAL real-life skills.

Most notably of course… leadership, and organizational management.

When I command my clan raids… it’s essentially a task tantamount to herding tasks.

coordinating 13guys simaeltaneously is difficult in general.

But on FWZ…. it’s particularly tricky.

As you might have noticed… the majority of the player-userbase for FWZ is…

well, not particularly sound from the psychological standpoint.

They are extremely diverse, and in many ways, represent the lowest-tier of taste on the Internet.

4chan rejects — and if not — something only one or two tiers above it.

Ergo… being able to make them join in common cause…

to work like a team… even if only for something as petty as gamer medals,

it a REAL accomplishment.

in a way… being able to get guys to come together for somethign petty is more of an achievement than getting htem to come together for somethign TRULY meaningful like money.

At least with money loyalty and cooperation is bumured;

in a Quake TeamDeathmatch or a FWZ scoop-raid… mmm. not so much.

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Spacekadt is quickly moving up in the rankings of “FINGERZ’ FAVORITE MODERATORS”. Log in to see images!

Sergeant Cid

MODERATOR
Avatar: 167814 2011-07-31 00:46:27 -0400

[The Airship]

Level 35 Re-Re

Scientifically Proven Terrible fabulous person..... Evidence shows mbumive build up of semen deposit in bum.

In any event, Merc, if you actually want to discuss this further, feel free to do it in an actual CD thread. A thread in RP isn’t really going to be taken seriously by anyone for very long.

But just know that you’re not going to win this. A smart lawyer knows when to throw himself on the mercy of the court.

Fortunato

Avatar: 72902 2010-02-03 18:45:17 -0500
32

[Grey Goose Mafiosi]

Level 51 Troll

ZOMBIE CANNONBALL OF GORE

EXPANDPOST

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Sergeant Cid Posted:

A smart lawyer knows when to throw himself on the mercy of the court.

Therein lies the basis of Merc’s problem.

He r not smrt. Log in to see images!

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Fingerz Posted:

Therein lies the basis of Merc’s problem.

He r not smrt. Log in to see images!

Also, internet lawyer lol

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Fingerz Posted:

Also, internet lawyer lol

GB2LICKING TOM DASCHLE’S bumHOLE, IMO

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Fingerz Posted:

GB2LICKING TOM DASCHLE’S bumHOLE CHOCOBO TUNNEL, IMO

FIX’D

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Log in to see images!

Johnny Mac

Avatar: 37704 2011-07-31 00:49:39 -0400
35

[Full of SbumSS]

Level 35 Troll

hot horse great times lover

MercWithMouth Posted:

if you can point out some instances where you’re aware that “I’ve (i.e., MercWithMouth) seen people temp-banned for less,” then I’d be seriously prepared to revise my position or apologize.

dairybans

Skyman747

Avatar: 115546 2011-07-31 00:23:14 -0400
17

[Harem and Sushi Bar]

Level 69 Hacker

DIRTY ****ING fine upstanding member of society woman's genitals

Inertia Posted:

wow that is a ****ty firefox theme

And this entire dthread is tl;dr, even though I don’t know why everyone is making references to a court. Pretty sure the only court merc has been in was this one.

Log in to see images!

Shii

Avatar: 23167 2010-01-24 16:31:18 -0500
27

[Phantasmagoric Spl-
endor
]

Level 35 Emo Kid

I haven't seen a bad idea that I didn't like.

I don’t get why everyone is trying to argue something with him.

I have never, ever, even once seen someone get Merc to change his mind about something. Not even me.

If he has his mind made up about something, seriously no amount of evidence or number of testimonies to the contrary will sway that. So just accept that from now on he’s going to hate spacekadt for her unfair bans and move on.

Fingerz

Avatar: 22863 2010-11-15 01:15:51 -0500
14

[7 VIBRATING DOLDOES]

Level 35 Emo Kid

A neverhasbeen

Heirloom can get him to do it.

spacekadt

MODERATOR
Avatar: 16186 2011-11-01 00:02:40 -0400
78

[Brainfreeze]

Level 69 Camwhore

meh

Sergeant Cid Posted:

A smart lawyer knows when to throw himself on the mercy of the court.

Are you insinuating that Merc’s smart? Come on, Cid. You know better than that!

Fingerz Posted:

Heirloom can get him to do it.

There’s a ****ing weird amount of truth here…

MercWithMouth

Avatar: 150029 2009-09-15 13:35:36 -0400
17

[WeChall]

Level 35 Hacker

Verbose and long-winded as always

Sergeant Cid Posted:

Regardless of whether I can provide an example or not

I’m sorry, Sarge. But, from the lawyer’s perspective, (I read your subsequent post where you said it might be a useful exercise to approach this from a ‘legal perspective’ ) this is a CRITICAL point. Moreover, it was the point I was waiting on from you.

And this is why. Precedent. The previous application (and AS importantly, the previous NON-application) of the ‘law’ is very much key.

There are countless instances of charges being overturned by courts when it was determined that certain conduct, though being restricted by statute, had not been enforced in practice. Such charges were frequently overturned so as to combat selective enforcement. One of the best illustrations is the New Jersey “Tenafly” case.

In fact, precedent often carries greater legal weight than statutory text.

Here, I was able to refer to past precedent where continuously questioning a mod was NOT penalized. As right it shouldn’t. And in that instance… the “questioning” lasted far longer and contained a far greater degree of vulgarity than the instance from last night.

Moreover… users on forumwarz are ALWAYS arguing with moderators. I’m quite sure I’ve heard you express yourself that you were sometimes amazed at how… “whiny ****y” they could be (not your words). And in those instances… they WERE very vulgar.

And yet… nothing happened. Nor should have. One of the cornerstones of Forumwarz (for better or worse) is being able to blab off at the mouth at will.

Which is what I was doing (albeit, non-vulgarly).

Moreover, when you cited those rules, you cited them as if to say that mods have a “blank check” (or close to a blank check) for imposing bans etc. Leaving aside the merits of having a rule allowing the mods to have “blank check” abilities…

I’m afraid the nature of the ‘citations’ you provided do not amount to a fully convincing case that mods have a “blank check” (or close to a blank check) for imposing bans etc.

The particular-rules you cited could be interpreted in at LEAST two reasonable lights:

(1)that the mods do have “blank check” abilities (or close to a blank check) for imposing bans etc. (the interpretation you invoked)

or

(2)that in those instances where the rules almost-but-do-not-quite apply to a specific situation, then the mods are allowed to exercise additional discretion to address it — particularly when doing so would prevent an absurd outcome.

Drawing from the legal perspective, since statutory and/or contractual text is to be interpreted AGAINST the drafter (see Uniform Commercial Code, generally), under the legal perspective, the second interpretation would prevail so long as both interpretations might be deemed reasonable even if at odds (i.e., a reasonable doubt exists as to how the rules ought be interpreted).

Similarly with the “two sentences” you cited… while I can “understand” how they could be interpreted as two separate statements, it seems as reasonable (if not more reasonable) to interpret them to mean that the first sentence need apply before the second sentence kick in. After all, the drafter of the statutory/contractual text could have more openly put in the two statements as separate — their current positioning do seem to lend the appearance that they work in tandem.

And besides… I wasn’t even doing anything that bad.

I was disputing with a guy whether he should have banned the other guy or not. It wasn’t swearing off at the mouth with the n-word or “fabulous person” or “****tard”. It wasn’t cramping up the chat-interface with so much text that people couldn’t read what was typed before or afterward. The wording wasn’t terribly rude; a bit long-winded in terms of word-choice, sure, but that was just a way to try to keep the tone civil and better ensure it wouldn’t degrade into ‘f— yer mom’ which it didn’t. And I don’t think we were even talking that long. Maybe a few rounds of incit at the most. The “precedent” I was talking about went on for 45minutes.

Sarge, this is all academic. Which is precisely the point. It’s a useful thought exercise that helps us reflect deeper on our own perspectives and what we believe; the better that we might gain from it (arguably a rarity on the Flamebate RP forums).

Even so, I’m still prepared and would even LIKE to apologize for my actions if you could provide past instances like I requested in my previous post (i.e., cite precedent).

That said, I’m very appreciative that you took time to take me seriously on the underlying matters.

Thanks Sarge. : )

MercWithMouth

Avatar: 150029 2009-09-15 13:35:36 -0400
17

[WeChall]

Level 35 Hacker

Verbose and long-winded as always

Shii Posted:

I don’t get why everyone is trying to argue something with him.

I have never, ever, even once seen someone get Merc to change his mind about something. Not even me.

If he has his mind made up about something, seriously no amount of evidence or number of testimonies to the contrary will sway that. So just accept that from now on he’s going to hate spacekadt for her unfair bans and move on.

I stubbornly dispute that I am contradictory in nature!

Log in to see images!

FunJelly8

Avatar: 178195 2009-10-20 15:57:25 -0400
17

[pizza party]

Level 66 Troll

Raffles, forever and ever and ever and ever :swoon:

lol spacekadt i just noticed your title changed. I WONDER WHO THAT WAS.

also, lol @ the turd**** paying bp for bumhurt revenge.

Internet Delay Chat
Have fun playing!
To chat with other players, you must Join Forumwarz or Log In now!