YellowjacketX
-
Posts
83 -
Joined
-
The person below me will mostly die
From the hands of my arm
when I come and fly and
take off your face
with the front of my hatredcopter.
\m/ >.< \m/
-
Eh, if you are paying, and you haven't for a very long time (I'd say 3 years at least of account inactivity) then I don't find it all all inapporpriate that your names get purged. I think though, that you can make a good argument, that anyone who has subscribed in the past two years may likely come back for a month or two, especially to check out new features.
So really, its less about whether a purge is justifiable (this is after all a pay to play service...if you aren't paying, there's no justification for you taking up space in the game) and more about the window of time where a purge should occur, IMHO.
Also, I thought polls were technically against the rules...so IB the eventual TL. -
Quote:Originally Posted by DJ_Shecky
If its that bad, and I don't think so I exemplar plenty, then lets just start with all powers available. no choosing nothing, all of them.
The idea is that the base level of a power would need to be adjusted to allow for powers to be available at all levels.
I find it a neat challenge when I loose powers cause I am exempt, creates a different situation for me and forces me to use different strategies.
Its just my opinion on this, and you can have your opinion also. I'm jsut saying I think its a bad idea. Now if they let you have up to the next 2 powers beyond the current level, I would be down with that.
Opinions? YOU NO CAN HAS!
*Leaps out of the clown car and bodyslams Shecky* -
Quote:Also, Gary Numan is scary, and just WTF is that pyramid thing in this picture?Originally Posted by hypocratic_oath
kill them mr. numan!
-
Imma sick bandicoots with cyborg arms on ya'll!
-
I shall destroy the person below me with mountains of delicious poutine!!!!!!
-
I destroy the person beneath me with the awesome power of Charles Nelson Reilly!!!!!
-
I destroy the person beneath me with the music of Canadian rock sensations Nickeback...
on INFINITE repeat...
-
*floats by in his bubble*
*snaps Shecky on butt with towel*
*floats away again* -
*floats by in a bunny-shaped bubble, grabs a donut*
Good morning! -
*Floats helplessly into this thread, trapped in a bubble*
HELP MEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!! -
*struggles out of the pin before the 3 count*
Not....Friday...here....yet! -
Quote:Originally Posted by DJ_Shecky
*comes out from behings the Chefbot and Chairshots YJ again*
HAHA!!!!!
...mother
*crumples to the mat once again* -
Quote:*eyes the single, ominous crow perched on the barren tree beside them*Originally Posted by BreakneckBecky
Is this the part where we start saying they're doomed?
Yup...time for that part. -
Quote:Your thread is over.Originally Posted by Haetron
stfu, my thread, I say when its over.
Well, until a moderator decides to reinterpret the rules and lock it.
IBTL + 1 -
Quote:Thread over.Originally Posted by Moderator 08
The Rookery is not a violation of Rule #5.
The rookery threads do serve a constructive purpose, and a specifically virtue related purpose at that. They promote socialization within a specific subset of virtue players who desire social interaction of a certain type. While this sort of interaction might not be interesting to those who do not participate, as long as they limit themselves to one single thread per day (which they do in most cases, although occasional confusion or extenuating circumstance arises)There is no issue with them posting in this manner.
As to some of you who contend that the rookery threads push other topics off the front page, that is not due to the prevalence of the rookery threads since they only post one thread daily. If you have your thread view count set at 10, if there are 9 non rookery threads active (that day) they should comprise the other 9 active threads. The fact that there are not active conversations going on is the only thing that allows the rookery to monopolize (so to speak) the active thread real estate.
If you want other active conversations, please start them and participate in them. I personally think that it would be good for the server community to have a greater variety of types of discussion to participate in, however it has to come from the server population. If people are not posting these sorts of threads or participating in them, then they will not find threads to read that meet their interests either.
I personally do not find the rookery threads particularly engaging or interesting, however I respect the rights of all our players to play as they see fit including those who participate in the rookery. Limiting the rookery participants to one thread goes against their stated goals and intent. I highly encourage you all if your desire is to spark more conversation, and suggest you who are interested start a series of conversations you feel reflect your interests and the interests of those like minded.
Why is the rookery genuinely irritating a number of people? I have to read the rookery threads often, and I can overlook them the rest of the time. People who don't have to read the threads go in there and look for reasons to start trouble. It is easy to ignore, so why do people find it bothersome? Simply do not click on any of the rookery threads since they are clearly labeled.
If in the future the situation changes, and there is perceivable harm to the posting community, or if the rookery posters act in a manner that is in actual violation of the forum rules then their posting privileges will be reviewed. Forum rules interpretations do change over time, and at some point in the future this may change. Until then it is highly inappropriate to continue to harass other players for playing a game the way they choose. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Reiraku
Funny you should put it that way. In the same scope we could say that some people like the Rookery and its multiple threads, but their fun is too low of a bar to cause other people the annoyance it does. Group A and Group B in your comparison are interchangeable. Scrolling through an individual thread could be considered just as much of a petty annoyance as going over a list of threads and bypassing the Rookery threads. The difference being that one's annoyance is limited to an individual thread in a server forum versus the server forum as a whole containing that annoyance.
The Rookery, in its content, doesn't bother me. I'd feel the same if Heroid were to post a daily thread talking about the latest chapter of whatever he was writing, or if Nadya made a daily thread on her new child's birth.
So, in that vein, why would you want to limit others' enjoyment of the forum who are not hurting you?
Because you are the ones seeking to limit. Why don't you implement the tools at your disposal to simply ignore what you view as extraneous or fluff? Having to move that mousewheel one more tick is not at all like telling people that can only have one thread ever.
I said it once before but your annoyance is too low of a bar to limit someone else's enjoyment. If they were insulting your mother in Rookery, you'd have a legitimate beef, but since they aren't YOU CAN JUST IGNORE IT.
So your hypothetical situation, not even close.
Thanks for playing though. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Haetron
And yet you're still grinding an axe over Sorah threads, so it's hilarious seeing you leap to the defense of the Rookery.
Sorah hasn't played or posted in, what, 2 years?
I didn't have a problem with Sorah's threads either frankly, because I did what I do to Rookery most of the time to those threads. I ignored them.
So, not grinding an axe, merely pointing out your hypocrisy and what this whole debate is really about Haet. And I am not the only person pointing it out, either. -
Quote:'zactly, only with less ancient, Asian monks.Originally Posted by Elysienne
The Zen Fluff-Thread.
-
Quote:See, file this under nature abhorrs a vaccuum and all that jazz...Originally Posted by Eikochan
That depends entirely upon how many threads in the forum would be Rookery-style fluff without the Rookery around. If that number is 15% or more, than the Rookery is at least a neutral influence, if not a good one. If the number is less than 15%, then the Rookery likely contributes to a degradation of the forum.
For the record, from my experiences, the Rookery is about 20% RP, 80% fluff.
If there wasn't a Rookery, there'd be something else, filling that spot up. There would be those that love it and those who think it's lame.
My suspicion is that the Rookery neither hurts or improves the forums. It merely is. -
Quote:Originally Posted by BouncingBeatnik
*attempts to intercept the chefbot to prevent interference, again turning his back on the proceedings in the ring*
*sniffs*
*smells donuts*'
*returns to the ring for donuts* -
Quote:I think this "debate" has been framed in the most petty and myopic terms. What this is really about is limiting people's fun because some other people are annoyed by that fun.Originally Posted by Flea_Mark_Evil
Curious. I may do a count later tonight myself to see the fluctuation....but for now I require sleep.
And a Rookery thread can be termed as 'Rookery', much like creature categories in random CCGs and RPGs with their terminology - so generally Rookery 'themed'.
Of course this then leads to the question of what is termed Fluff?
Honest answers?
LFG/New Team/ New SG Threads - Not fluff. Someone looking for a group, forming a new group etc. is very much what these forums were intended for.
New To Server Threads - Can be seen as similar to the LFG threads, someone introducing themself to a new server is very similar...these do tend to degenerate quickly though if not really allowed to die.
RP/Fiction - Again, not really Fluff. Pseudo fluff as it could be seen as not really necessary but it fits in better than discussions about breakfast.
General CoX Queries - If we're calling this Fluff we're going about this wrong.
Fluff is generally non-CoX related, non-server related discussion. Book and film reviews. Birthday posts. Forum games. Fairly easy to see what is what here.
Grey areas do crop up - Grats on 50 posts, duplicate posts, cross posts....depends on who's looking at it.
Food for thought.
OK, so a lot of people don't like the Rookery. Those people who want it put in one thread are advocating limits on people's fun because they are annoyed with multiple threads. I am sorry, but your annoyance is too low of a bar to limit people's fun.
The Rookery is harmless. It's fluff and zany light-hearted intra-day banter that some people enjoy. Since there is no giant flamewar going on in the Rookery, or anything that is outright hurtful or illegal going on there, then the mods should leave it alone. That they have let it exist in peace for so long signals to me that they have decided they are cool with the Rookery in its current, daily incarnation.
If we examine this through that lens, what then, is left of this "discussion" or debate? All that remains is that a certain group of individuals don't like the Rookery and want their will imposed on how those threads progress. That is a limitation on the fun of those who /do/ enjoy it. No matter how you slice this, this debate is about how group A wants to limit the fun of group B over something that is, at its absolute worst, a petty annoyance.
The tools currently exist for people who are annoyed by the Rookery or don't like it or whatever, to completely ignore its existence. Those tools merely need to be implemented by those people who wish not to partake of it. That they choose not to implement those tools is very telling of the attitudes of those people who have vented all this Rookery hate (or hate for "fluff" in general). Sometimes you don't get what you want in life. Sometimes that is for a very good reason.
I would think that if there is anything approaching irony about this whole thread it's that individuals who were so deeply criticized for their fluff are now on some crusade to limit other people's fluff. Absolutely hilarious. What is it about the Internet that turns otherwise intelligent people into such a petty bunch of *******? Why do you want to limit the fun of other people who are not hurting you?
Think on that for a bit. -
Quote:Originally Posted by Eikochan
18, plus (at least) 3 anti-Rookery threads.
And that's counting the Rookery static team thread as one, as well as the short "guide" thread that was created.
So 18 of the 125 threads on those 5 pages, which is slightly less than 15%.
So clearly the Rookery is destroying the entire community.
Amirite? -
*flees while no one is looking*
-
Quote:Wait Ely, I'm confused.Originally Posted by Elysienne
Well, that's what all the cool kids are doing these days.
Even me, apparently, seeing as I have no stake in either side of the argument and am just sitting on the sidelines taking pot-shots at any target I like.
I mean seriously.. completely disingenuous, anti-pop, wannabe edgy contrary nonsense is the new pop culture. Its hip to hate! Apathy is the new zest!
I thought it was cool to be not cool. So what you are saying is that being not cool, is cool. Well if that is the case then we're not being cool by being cool. OMFG *stabs out his own mind*