1  2  |   Order by default

Dec 21, 2001, 8:16pm

[View Quote] > Banned, check out his AW history page.
> http://tnlc.com/eep/history.html (I *think*)

http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/history.html

Dec 21, 2001, 4:54pm

[View Quote] > Come on, you can't seriously want Eep to come back to the newsgroups, do
> you? All he did was make fun of posts on just about any topic and put down
> newbies. I had thought that he was still posting here as I filtered him
> months ago because of his obnoxious attitude.
>
> A few months back, there was a big stink where Flagg tried to get rid of Eep
> and some people for some reason or another wanted him to stay. I find it
> ironic that he would eventually get fed up with bugs and leave when he
> stated earlier that he wanted nothing to improve AW (by making it more like
> a game, in his opinion).


Actually, Facter was the one to hold the EepVote. I'm not trying to be an ass here, just trying to keep Flagg's image right :)

--
Shred

Dec 28, 2001, 6:37pm

[View Quote] > The guy has a point. I mean, english teachers are rolling over their grave
> because kids (of course) can't distinguish what's slang and unacceptable in
> good american business culture and what's "proper". Don't go rolling over
> your grave either, but for god sakes, I have to chuckle every time my
> teachers rip out hairs because a kid writes "cuz" instead of "because" or
> even use "cool" in a report!! Yeesh, there's a time for certain things, but
> using cool in a report or paper is not the right time. It's not only
> disrespectful to teachers who try to teach the english language as it was
> and is, Noah Webster would die in your arms. I must admit, I'm guilty of a
> slip, you'd be surprise how many computer-addicted mistakes go into your
> paper without proper proofreading. ;) I say Moff has every right to kick you
> in the brain for using cuz in a world. hehe. You are, after all, the one
> breaking the english rules for the sake of quick conversationalism.

/begin sarcasm
Ahh! I am blinded by Nornny's perfect glowing light! Please, mighty one, forgive the children's grammatical errors. Have mercy on their souls! Your continued perfection has made me a believer, mighty one!
/end sarcasm

As long as I can understand the message that is communicated, perfect or not, I keep my mouth shut. I think that it is rude to do otherwise.

Just for your information, Nornny, we kids often show more grammatical precision than our elders. =P

--
Shred
"Bah..."

Dec 29, 2001, 9:19pm

[View Quote] > I don't support it, but you're limiting amendment rights, which is by law,
> extremly illegal. You're not the Supreme Court so if you choose to limit
> these freedoms, AW and yourself could face severe criminal punishment, if
> one were to take it that far.

Ejecting someone for saying GD is not inhibiting their right to believe what they want to. Furthermore, if you own a private world, you can eject anyone you want to for whatever reason you wish. And last but not least, not everyone is from the United States.

> The "n word" is illegal by Amendment 15 of the U.S. constitution.. abridging
> a right an accountance of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
> This is a loose interpretation of that Amendment.. I don't believe in
> following it strictly.

--
Amendment 15
(March 30, 1870)

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude--

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
--

How, exactly, does calling someone a derogatory term based on race deny them their rights as United States citizens?

> Now as for "god damn." This is strictly a religious matter as you
> suggested. You cannot punish someone for saying that as they may not have
> the same beliefs you have. Not all religions believe "god" is the god.. or
> there is a god. Then there's the Atheist side. By punishing someone
> because you find it offensive being a christian is imposing your beliefs
> onto that person, which is prohibited by the First Amendment of the
> Constitution. The fact that you find offense to "god damn" does not mean
> anyone else in that area does.. thus you should mute the offending person.

Ejecting an atheist because you're a Christian? I think not. 'GD' is offensive to most Christians, and most people know that. Whether *you* find it offensive or not, it's still a worthless thing to say. Constant cursing is completely un-necessary.

> Nazi propaganda would be imposing the above "you're not my religion so I'm
> banning you" banning and allowing of the "n word" which I do not agree with.
> "God damn" is a figure of speech and should be treated as such. Not
> everyone in this world is Christian.

No one in this world is exactly alike; however, the world would be a *much* nicer place if each individual would take some simple steps to try and consider other people's beliefs and race. That would solve the entire problem altogether.

> An to the "F word" now. That is offensive to everyone and should not be
> prohibited in a G rated world. Damn is G rated material, last I checked it
> always has been since according to the Christian faith, in example, the
> preacher has the ability to say damn.. while children are present. As
> unfortunate as this is.. the Christian society rules the way our society is
> "monitored" and since it is so in the Christian faith.. it is true in our
> society.

Hmm... I'll borrow this from you.

Not everyone finds the "F" word offensive, which was one of your theme points to begin with.

--
Shred
Bah... assumptions.

Dec 30, 2001, 2:12am

[View Quote] > AW is a company owned and operated in the US. Thus all laws apply to it and
> everyone whom uses it. And yes, if you're ejecting based on "god damn"
> because it's offensive to you, that is being biased to your religion, not
> respecting that someone else might not believe in Christianity.


That can be reversed. They are assuming that no one else in the room/channel/world finds that kind of language offensive. Thus, being considerate of *all* beliefs and keeping a place non-offensive to everyone is the only viable option. Follow your own advice to follow your own advice :)


> Loose interpretation of the Constitution would provide that if you were to
> resort to derogitory name calling, you are abridging the right of that
> person to be in that area to hear that offensive material. Note I stated
> that I follow a looser intrpretation of the constitution then what is
> stated. My reason for this is that our founding fathers wouldn't have
> anticpated some of the future problems that may have risen.. such as this.


Even your loose interpretation has *nothing* to do with the fifteenth amendment... it does not anyone them *any* rights.

> Not only Atheists.. Jewish people do not believe "god" is their diety..
> Johava is the god, not god. So the equal statement would be "Johava damn."
> The same goes for Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Shintoists, etc al.. The fact
> that someone else would eject on basis that "god" is the only diety is
> strictly inposting your religion on them. Not all Christians find "god
> damn" offensive. Yes, constant use of saying "god damn" would be
> inappropriate.. but one time isn't anything to be especially "moody"
> towards. Mute them if you find it offensive and no one else does.

That does not combat my point. A public place (AW GZ, AWGate and the like) should be kept non-offensive for *everyone*.

> Yes it would, but it also goes the opposite way, you must also take into
> respect that not everyone follows YOUR beliefs. That comes before someone
> else can take in your situation. Which is a paradox :) because in that
> you'd be following what you said first. The.. "follow your own advice"
> cliche comes to mind.


Did you not understand any of my post? I *agreed* with you on that.

> No it wasn't, it was not everyone finds "damn" or "god damn" offensive. And
> if you do, the simple mute feature takes care of that. But Brant brought in
> new points which needed to be pointed out were not in the same context.


Yes, it was one of your *theme* points. Your point was to consider that some people don't have the same views as you do, and here you are saying that *all* people find 'the F word' offensive. That's hypocrytical.

Dec 30, 2001, 2:23am

> They find it offensive.. but they'll use it. I find it offensive but I
> still use it, it's meant as such a word as to be offensive hence why it's
> considered a "cuss" word. Any other representation of it is falsified and
> doesn't conform to G rated regulations. It's a sementic argument. Just
> because someone uses a word doesn't actually mean they don't find it
> offensive :). The good majority how is that? I tend to generalize on the
> English language use but I forgot to take in the fact that it's being
> blundered. Sorry for the generalization that the "F word" is offensive to
> everyone.


I see no purpose for cursing in the first place (unless you slam your finger in the car, you are angry beyond control, etc); however, I am not offended when people do so. You are correct that some people would not people offended by words such as 'GD', but many others would. Therefore, I think that any public international place such as AW should be kept non-offensive for everyone and keep a standard rule set for everyone to follow, such as it is.

--
Shred

Dec 31, 2001, 10:37pm

[View Quote] "Go die in a hole" and then, "No offence". Am I the only one who sees
something hypocritical there? =P

--
Shred
Universal answer: Shaddap!

Jan 2, 2002, 8:46pm

[View Quote] I'm not paying that... I've been a citizen here for four years, and I won't
pay $100 dollars a year for a chat/building program. If worse comes to
worse, I'll leave.

Jan 2, 2002, 9:57pm

Jan 3, 2002, 1:58am

Well said, Jude.

<snipped>

Jan 3, 2002, 4:57pm

<sigh>

Jan 3, 2002, 5:24pm

[View Quote] If true, that's absolutely outrageous. Those buildings are a historical part
of a miniature society, ours.

Jan 3, 2002, 6:16pm

[View Quote] All I can say is good luck. You'll need it... maybe they'll consider your
plan.

Feb 23, 2002, 2:03am

<snipped>

Goodbye, Agent1.

--
Shred
What would you like on your Tombstone?

Feb 24, 2002, 5:59am

[View Quote] I find it offensive that you stereotype all fourteen-seventeen year old
males in this manner. Everyone is a child at one point in their life, and
they should be given the understanding and guidance needed to grow up, not
stereotypical criticism. I doubt that your insulting is going to help anyone
to mature. In fact, all it's going to do is provoke the majority of the
aforementioned to act as immaturely as possible towards you. Perhaps you
expect that to happen and count on it in order to prove your point.

Hypocritical.

--
Shred

Feb 24, 2002, 8:13am

[View Quote] You know quite well that adults can be just as immature as children.
Stereotyping is illogical, in any sense, and often incorrect. As a mature
adult, you should know that.

They need criticism and discipline? That's your opinion. I've been raised in
a family of love and understanding, and I would like to think that I've come
out quite well for it.

Since when is ignorance a crime? Should people be shot for not knowing what
you do? Arrogance is a childish attitude, sir.

It is my belief that one should not be presumptiously judged by gender,
race, age, or nationality.

> As far as what you find offensive... really doesn't matter now does it?
> At least not to me anyway.

What was the point of that comment other than to show that you place no
value on my opinions? None.

I suggest that you stop posting these pointless insults before making even
more of an ass out of yourself. However, if you continue to do so you will
be welcomed to my message filter. Reason: close-minded stupidity.

--
Shred
I'm fifteen years old, and I'm not afraid to admit it =P

Feb 24, 2002, 4:26pm

[View Quote] > I don't like to do this, but I can't stand seeing AWians eat each other
> alive, much less in what used to be a CIVILIZED discussion group.
>
> First of all, I'd like to make the assertion that you are ALL immature and
> know NOTHING of the way the world works. Look up innocence in a
dictionary,
> you are all the essense of the word. What is love? What does it feel like?
> How are you supposed to conduct yourselves in public? How are you supposed
> to act when a friend or colleague makes a blindingly obvious mistake? How
do
> you respond to an insult? How many of you have ever made a "Your mom"
> comment? How do you MORALLY promote a buisiness? I want you ALL to think
> LONG and HARD about all of this. NONE of you know all the answers, nor do
I.
> So stop acting like you do.

Those are some pretty big questions, and I doubt that there's one single
answer to all of them. I would say that love is a different concept to
everyone, but maybe not.

What does love feel like? Hrm... my mother tells me that there's no greater
love than that for your child, so I don't know.

How do you conduct yourself in public? A pretty old rule is to treat others
the way you would want to be treated. Everyone forgets that rule at some
point or another - some moreso than others :)

When a friend makes a mistake, I would either point is out jokingly or tell
them in private. IE: a few friends of mine and I have a competition going on
of who can correct the other's spelling the most times. Probably a product
of boredom.

How do you respond to an insult? That has a personal answer, too. Ideally
one could just ignore it, but it's pretty darn hard sometimes. I didn't
respond very well to Bodhitah's posts, which I regret, but that kind of an
insult makes me too angry to think clearly. That's a problem with a lot of
people, but it could be rectified by admitting the mistake (at least to
yourself).

I've never made a 'your mom' comment that I can remember, because I don't
think they make much sense (and what's the point of insulting some poor
faceless mom?). It usually seems like a last-resort insult when somebody
can't think of a 'good' one.

How do you morally promote a business? Hrm. Well, avoid: corporate
espionage, murder, lies, slander, genocide, and other such things :)

>Second, how many of you twits (Eep's terminology is only fitting)
understand
>a single ounce of AWC's financial situation? How many of you know exactly
>WHY they raised prices? How many of you think AWC is profitable? How many
of
>you would enjoy working there? How many of you try to make their buisiness
>decisions for them? I know the answer to the last one, most of you.

I don't know about their financial situation. I would probably enjoy working
there :)

When they raised the prices I was suprised, but I tried to be civil about
it. I did call AWC HQ once and talk to one of the staff, just to get some
information. I was polite about it - no sense in attacking an innocent
staffer. I don't even remember what they said, but I remember that they were
sincere in the statement that they didn't really want to have to force any
users off of AW. Seriously, I don't think that they would raise prices just
to be evil to us. AWC's staff is comprised of good people. Yes, they've made
some business mistakes, but so has every other business.

The whole spiderbot ordeal was silly. I agree that AWC should've given us a
tad bit of warning so that we don't have a heart attack when some suspicious
looking bot pops into our world, but no harm was done and MrGrimm was kind
enough to give an explanation. It was just a beta run, anyway. I don't
believe that AWC wants to go around and horde our secretive world
information on a public website just to spite us.

Alright, I'm out of breath now. Thanks for reading my longwinded post :)

--
Shred
Disclaimer: This human being may be an ass at some times, read his ramblings
at your own risk.

Feb 26, 2002, 9:18pm

[View Quote] No, it derives from friendly competition. It's the product of evil ACE
English teachers.

--
Shred
Keep useless comments to yourselves, please...

Feb 27, 2002, 10:36pm

I'm not trying to be a troll here, but please put this kind of thing in
general.discussion next time :)

Thanks.

--
Shred

[View Quote] <snip>

Mar 1, 2002, 10:37pm

Hey guys, please remember to snip insanely long quotes...

[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2002, 2:55pm

Due to:

1) Childish arguements on a public forum
2) NEVER snipping 16kb worth of quotes
3) Being stone deaf
4) Pointless flaming

These two people have been added to my killfile:
BinaryBud
SunofSolaris

My point? This is the proper way to deal with people who won't listen to
reason and continue to disrupt a public forum, because flaming them will
only make the matter worse.

PLEASE don't attack me about this message, because you will:

1) Get no response
2) End up in my killfile (I don't care who you are.)

--
Shred

Mar 2, 2002, 8:23pm

[View Quote] E-mail sent to tom at activeworlds.com

Mar 10, 2002, 2:31pm

[View Quote] I don't like the arrogant moron any more than you do, but what he does in
his private time is his business and no one else's.

Mar 12, 2002, 2:03pm

[View Quote] Don't judge a person by his or her nationality. That prejudice is just as
bad as the racial prejudices that still thrive in many parts of the world
today.

Yes, many of us do see beyond our own country.
No, some of us don't.

The majority of us are just ordinary people trying to live good lives.

But it's easy to attack a nation of faceless people, isn't it?

1  2  |   Order by default