A Judgment Dragon Fusion?

[Kizzi]

They should make a Fusion of Judgment Dragoon and Dark Armed Dragon.

 

They should call it "Chaos Emperor Dragon". It would be the un-retrained version of a certain Chaos monster.

 

Or they could call it "Dark and Lightness Dragon".

That would be awesome.

Except...

WHO THE HELL WOULD TRY TO USE JD AND DAD IN THE SAME DECK WHILE THEY'RE STILL LEGAL AND KONAMI ARE STILL IN CHARGE OF BANLISTS?!?!?!!

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Why did Remix change the title to A Judgment Dragon Fusion? That has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

But if we're talking about a Judgment Dragon Fusion: JD + Dogma= Dogmatic Dragoon and it could be all flashy with chaos-ish wings and halve your opponent's LP and destroy all S/Ts on the field when it attacks. ^_^ XD No seriously, I should totally make that. XD

[Kizzi]

Why did Remix change the title to A Judgment Dragon Fusion? That has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

But if we're talking about a Judgment Dragon Fusion: JD + Dogma= Dogmatic Dragoon and it could be all flashy with chaos-ish wings and halve your opponent's LP and destroy all S/Ts on the field when it attacks. ^_^ XD No seriously' date=' I should totally make that. XD

[/quote']

I think "Pay 1000 Life Points. Destroy all cards on the field and in both players' hands. Inflict 300 points of damage to your opponent's Life Points for each card sent to the Graveyard by this effect." would suit it more.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Why did Remix change the title to A Judgment Dragon Fusion? That has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

But if we're talking about a Judgment Dragon Fusion: JD + Dogma= Dogmatic Dragoon and it could be all flashy with chaos-ish wings and halve your opponent's LP and destroy all S/Ts on the field when it attacks. ^_^ XD No seriously' date=' I should totally make that. XD

[/quote']

I think "Pay 1000 Life Points. Destroy all cards on the field and in both players' hands. Inflict 300 points of damage to your opponent's Life Points for each card sent to the Graveyard by this effect." would suit it more.

 

Yes, but that's Chaos Emperor Dragon's effect, and I wouldn't want it banned as CED Envoy was, unless that was sarcasm, in which case disregard this post. XD

[Pharaoh_Atem]

That' date=' and also, if you want this place to get better, you're overlooking one crucial detail.

 

Stop making it so bloody trollable.

 

The only way you stop a troll is by knowing its weakness - its weakness is always a lack of food.

 

You can either stop posting, thereby forcing the troll to move on to another feast...

 

Or you can learn what not to post, so that you don't paint bloody bullseyes on your backs that scream "TROLL ME PLEASE".

 

 

 

This pretty-much boils down to not posting things that give the troll what he wants. For this, you have to learn what the troll wants.

 

 

 

Now, eventually, you'll come across a troll that trolls so well that you don't even know he's trolling. At that point, you're f***ed unless you've got another troll on your end of the situation, working with you and not against you, with the ability to discern whether or not a troll is around, trolling covertly.

 

And then, sometimes, rarely, you'll get a troll who trolls in the most legal of manners - quite literally, you can't touch him with any of the rules. This sort is completely invulnerable to everything, and ironically is often the best member a site could ever hope to have... as he or she will obviously have no restraint in telling the truth, nor any restraint in humor, nor any restraint in logic. He or she will be the most useful person you will come across. He will only be considered a troll because of the biases and other insecurities of the other members.

 

That's when you're REALLY f***ed.

 

 

 

 

So, here's advice for you all:

 

1) STOP CARING SO MUCH ABOUT STUPID THINGS. Care = Troll Delicacies. We eat that s*** up like it's candy that is nutritious and NOT fattening. When you whine or b**** about something that is NOT worth whining and jabroniing about, we sit back, have a good laugh at your own stupidity, and then say "oh lawd he's so misguided, what a pity" and go on with our lives. If you're going to care, do so about s*** that's worth caring about in some sort of objective, unassailable sense. This will cut down troll food.

 

2) STOP POSTING STUPID THINGS. You might not be able to follow this step so much; we as a species are generally stupid. Still, follow it anyway. It's your business to find out how to follow it. This will cut down troll food.

 

 

You'll find these methods to be effective.

[/quote']

 

I think this whole "troll" terminology is stupid.

 

Your understanding of the term and/or terminology definitely might be; the term and/or terminology may operate quite differently from how you see it.

 

Any post can be seen as annoying' date='[/quote']

 

Subjectively, yes.

 

Here's your flaw - subjective thought has no place in the term, nor the terminology.

 

A post, in an OBJECTIVE SENSE, must fit the criteria.

 

The argument that "any post can be seen as annoying" falls short of being objective; what is "annoying to everyone but one member" does not necessarily fit the criteria. As long as the post is not annoying in an objective sense, there's no pretense in the terminology that says "yeah, this post should be dealt with."

 

I'd say that every single post in this thread could be classified as trolling.

 

It'd be incorrect to say.

 

Every time a certain member begrudged by the higher-up members posts' date=' they can just call them a troll and get them temp-banned.

[/quote']

 

This remains unproven to me.

 

I won't deny the possibility; I just haven't seen it done.

 

If it ever WERE done, though, it would show every bit of this site labeled as "something that identifies with being of YCM" to be worthless... and therefore, would make the site deserving of every last assault, attack, slander, libel, et cetera.

 

Namely, your understanding of the matter is stupid and misguided, but only because of the very possible abuses that could come from those who refuse to administer it properly. The use of "trolling" as an excuse to eliminate a member, when not used properly, is how you see it always being used.

 

Your being misguided... stems from your thought that the "improper use of the terminology" is the "only use of the terminology." It's the exact opposite in reality - actual "trolling" is "trolling in an objective sense", and removal on those grounds... is fine. That is the proper use of the term, nay, the only use of the term.

 

Those who would improperly use the term in order to remove another - those folks are instead, in reality, saying that the person just doesn't belong here. This sort of removal is not tolerable when the site's staff condemns it in public yet permits it in private.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

 

I think this whole "troll" terminology is stupid.

 

Your understanding of the term and/or terminology definitely might be; the term and/or terminology may operate quite differently from how you see it.

 

Any post can be seen as annoying' date='[/quote']

 

Subjectively, yes.

 

Here's your flaw - subjective thought has no place in the term, nor the terminology.

 

A post, in an OBJECTIVE SENSE, must fit the criteria.

 

The argument that "any post can be seen as annoying" falls short of being objective; what is "annoying to everyone but one member" does not necessarily fit the criteria. As long as the post is not annoying in an objective sense, there's no pretense in the terminology that says "yeah, this post should be dealt with."

 

I meant any post can be seen as annoying to any certain higher up member who has some sort of issue with the poster.

 

I'd say that every single post in this thread could be classified as trolling.

 

It'd be incorrect to say.

 

Alright' date=' find me a post in this thread that couldn't possibly be made out as an annoying post to an irritable higher-up member.[/b']

 

Every time a certain member begrudged by the higher-up members posts' date=' they can just call them a troll and get them temp-banned.

[/quote']

 

This remains unproven to me.

 

I won't deny the possibility; I just haven't seen it done.

 

hotfoilcard

 

If it ever WERE done, though, it would show every bit of this site labeled as "something that identifies with being of YCM" to be worthless... and therefore, would make the site deserving of every last assault, attack, slander, libel, et cetera.

 

Namely, your understanding of the matter is stupid and misguided, but only because of the very possible abuses that could come from those who refuse to administer it properly. The use of "trolling" as an excuse to eliminate a member, when not used properly, is how you see it always being used.

 

The use of terminology like "trolling" or similar terminology is used to point the accuse someone of being a troll, and that the punishment of one who is "trolling" is necessary, the punishment not always being elimination, but always being a punishment as the result of the accusation of trolling. This makes terminology such as trolling an excuse to punish a member due to issues one may have with them.

 

Your being misguided... stems from your thought that the "improper use of the terminology" is the "only use of the terminology." It's the exact opposite in reality - actual "trolling" is "trolling in an objective sense", and removal on those grounds... is fine. That is the proper use of the term, nay, the only use of the term.

 

But is there any other use for terminology such as "trolling" than to mark the troll as one who is wrong and needs to be dealt with/punished? IThat's the only use of the terminology that I can see. The terminology is has only 1 use, and that use is to mark someone as bad or not up to their standards of what is civil.

 

Those who would improperly use the term in order to remove another - those folks are instead, in reality, saying that the person just doesn't belong here. This sort of removal is not tolerable when the site's staff condemns it in public yet permits it in private.

 

Sure. I think the term's always intolerable. If you don't like what they're doing, neg rep them, no need to start up a campaign on how they're a troll and don't meet the standards of civility within the forum.

 

Replies are in bold in the above quote. ^_^

[Ultimajk]

OMG I was gona cry if the topic of a judgement dragon fusion was true. I envisioned a 3 headed Judgement dragon with 4450 ATK and an effect that blew up only your opponents field for a cost of 500LP

[Orochi]

They should make a Fusion of Judgment Dragoon and Dark Armed Dragon.

 

They should call it "Chaos Emperor Dragon". It would be the un-retrained version of a certain Chaos monster.

 

Or they could call it "Dark and Lightness Dragon".

That would be awesome.

Except...

WHO THE HELL WOULD TRY TO USE JD AND DAD IN THE SAME DECK WHILE THEY'RE STILL LEGAL AND KONAMI ARE STILL IN CHARGE OF BANLISTS?!?!?!!

 

 

why not?? they made rainbow neos...

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Yeah, I really think the thread title should be changed to something that won't mislead those looking for info on an upcoming JD fusion. >_>

[Guest]

hotfoilcard

 

Was temp-banned for posting cards with inappropriate pictures, not trolling. You are using facts of which you are ignorant in a pathetic attempt to prove an equally pathetic point.

 

Your other points are also pathetic, but I'm busy with a flash game right now, and it's more interesting than your lame post.

[Fh-Fh]

im a troll

trolls r bad

trolls suck

screw you

everyone could post spam

so?

everybody trolls

even you

mods can ban people

have a cookie

 

This is giving more more and more reasons to move to Pojo.

 

This site finds any problem and instead of terminating it, spams and rants until it goes away.

[Pharaoh_Atem]

It's time to kill this topic.

 

 

 

 

I think this whole "troll" terminology is stupid.

 

Your understanding of the term and/or terminology definitely might be; the term and/or terminology may operate quite differently from how you see it.

 

Any post can be seen as annoying' date='[/quote']

 

Subjectively, yes.

 

Here's your flaw - subjective thought has no place in the term, nor the terminology.

 

A post, in an OBJECTIVE SENSE, must fit the criteria.

 

The argument that "any post can be seen as annoying" falls short of being objective; what is "annoying to everyone but one member" does not necessarily fit the criteria. As long as the post is not annoying in an objective sense, there's no pretense in the terminology that says "yeah, this post should be dealt with."

 

I meant any post can be seen as annoying to any certain higher up member who has some sort of issue with the poster.

 

You completely misunderstood my post, if you think the above clarification to be of any consequence.

 

I'll simplify:

 

"Trolling" only occurs when a post IS posted for the sole sake of annoying others - both intent to annoy and result of annoyance are required; "intent to annoy" being the premeditated desire to commit an action that would create annoyance, and "result of annoyance" being the aftereffects of said action being annoyance.

 

Saying "anyone higher up that has an issue can see it as annoying, and then do something about it" does NOT FIT THE TERM we are discussing, as I made clear earlier, and am simplifying now.

 

I'd say that every single post in this thread could be classified as trolling.

 

It'd be incorrect to say.

 

Alright' date=' find me a post in this thread that couldn't possibly be made out as an annoying post to an irritable higher-up member.[/b']

 

You obviously don't even know what "trolling" actually IS, as shown both by this section of the quote AND by the previous one.

 

Trolls are not accidental - they do not annoy you by pure circumstance. They are deliberate. They annoy on purpose.

 

To PROVE Trolling, you must show no other feasible logical intent for the post - namely, you must logically prove that the smartest reason FOR the poster to post the message... was to annoy others on purpose.

 

Further, to PROVE Trolling, someone has to actually be annoyed by the post in the first place. Trolling, by definition, must annoy; there is no such thing as an "unsuccessful Troll," as being unsuccessful at it... would require an utter lack of annoyance, thereby contradicting the word "Troll".

 

Yes, posts could be made out to be annoying. Such is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand here, and frankly, I'm surprised you're still so far off topic. You're really coming off as a rather slow person.

 

Every time a certain member begrudged by the higher-up members posts' date=' they can just call them a troll and get them temp-banned.

[/quote']

 

This remains unproven to me.

 

I won't deny the possibility; I just haven't seen it done.

 

hotfoilcard

 

Who? And why do we care?

 

But on a more serious level, so what? Do remember that I did not deny the possibility.

 

So, let's assume that it's happened.

 

It happening simply means that the entire site is worthless - or, in YCM's own unique case, somehow worth less than something worthless. The site, and anything else that identifies with being of YCM, deserves to be dragged through the mud. If you don't like it, find a place that sucks less, and make sure it doesn't happen there - or stop caring about it and deal with it without whining.

 

Or, do something productive and have the staffer at the center of the matter... dealt with.

 

You're wasting your time dealing with the metaphysics of this when you could instead complain in a way that actually could make a faster, stronger, or otherwise more-effective impact.

 

Stop wasting time and make the site better. Go make it not be worthless, by fixing the staff. Otherwise, all you'll do is let the conditions you're complaining about... continue onward into the future.

 

 

Now, then, we remember that we assumed that it had happened. We now revoke the assumption. We no longer assume hotfoilcard's example to be proof of staff bias against him; you must now prove said case.

 

 

You would be wise to NOT try to prove it here, as frankly, I don't give a good goddamn about what happens, and would shoot the case apart just for the express purpose of exercising my own wit. You would be better suited to trying to prove it to someone ON THE STAFF, who would be able to do SOMETHING about the matter.

 

 

If it ever WERE done' date=' though, it would show every bit of this site labeled as "something that identifies with being of YCM" to be worthless... and therefore, would make the site deserving of every last assault, attack, slander, libel, et cetera.

 

Namely, your understanding of the matter is stupid and misguided, but only because of the very possible abuses that could come from those who refuse to administer it properly. The use of "trolling" as an excuse to eliminate a member, when not used properly, is how you see it always being used.[/quote']

 

The use of terminology like "trolling" or similar terminology is used to point the accuse someone of being a troll, and that the punishment of one who is "trolling" is necessary, the punishment not always being elimination, but always being a punishment as the result of the accusation of trolling. This makes terminology such as trolling an excuse to punish a member due to issues one may have with them.

 

This, simply, shows how misguided you are in the first place. You are way off target. You are so far off target that, frankly, I'm going to go on and explain how far off target you are. Hell, you're so wrong in this case that we're going to have to start calling you John Dorian.

 

The use of the term "trolling" is not to accuse a troll of being a troll, nor to say that the punishment is necessary.

 

The use of the term "trolling" is merely to describe the action that is identical with the term's definition - the term describes itself, nothing else, ever.

 

Improper use of the term is improper staff procedure anywhere on the internet, and improper staff procedure makes sites worthless, drags them through the mud, means that folks should leave, et cetera.

 

The accusations in the matter are COMPLETELY independent from the term "trolling" - namely, if the term were eliminated, NO REALISTIC CHANGE would come forth. Instead of proper staff procedure using the word "trolling" to describe the act of "trolling", it would instead use the phrase "posting with the intentional desire to annoy, and successfully annoying a user or users in doing so".

 

The term describes the term; the term's real-world form is its definition, the above phrase. Saying "I don't like the term", therefore, is stupid, as saying such boils down to nothing more than saying "I don't like being concise."

 

And while the definition of "trolling" IS terminology similar to the term "trolling", it also is not used to accuse. It is used to describe itself - namely, to describe an action. Accusations, again, are seperate - accusations come from a person, and will continue to do so, no matter

 

The REAL consequence of your viewpoint is that, either intentionally or unintentionally, you do not want persons to be able to be accused of Trolling - that is, you do not want trolling to be against forum procedure. You might not know that this is the viewpoint you are supporting; to be frank, I doubt you've thought a damn thing about the matter through, hence why I wouldn't expect you to have realized what the exact logical conclusion of your viewpoint... is.

 

This is why your being so misguided... comes off as something so profoundly stupid that, frankly, I'm not surprised that the other people in the topic are avoiding touching your views with a ten foot pole. The view you hold is so contrary to the facts that you, quite literally, come across as "beyond help." I am inclined to agree with them about that perception, but unlike them, I'm not willing to let a festering pile of stupidity-in-text-form go unaccounted for.

 

The term's purpose, when properly used, is not to punish or eliminate those who the higher-ups don't like because of emotional reasons. It is used to merely DESCRIBE an action that the definition of the term fits. Accusations, punishments, and eliminations are all COMPLETELY independent of the matter.

 

Thus, the term is PERFECTLY FINE, and you have NO reason to dislike it. You are free to dislike how the staff conducts its accusations, punishments, and eliminations; I personally think that what I've seen of the staff (and most other YCMers too) so far is that they're all too goddamn soft to belong ANYWHERE on the internet, and therefore bruise easily even when given a hug. So, yeah, so far, the staff isn't my cup of tea either. However, your outright spouting of unlogic... just has to be dealt with before it goes any further.

 

To sum it all up: your post comes off as a bad conspiracy theory, laden with the scent of rotten fish and congealed milk left to rot out in the sun, next to a dead kitten. It's unpleasing to ALL FIVE SENSES. Kindly just drop this line of discussion before you dig a deeper hole for yourself, because at this point, you're doing yourself no favors.

 

 

Your being misguided... stems from your thought that the "improper use of the terminology" is the "only use of the terminology." It's the exact opposite in reality - actual "trolling" is "trolling in an objective sense"' date=' and removal on those grounds... is fine. That is the proper use of the term, nay, the only use of the term.[/quote']

 

But is there any other use for terminology such as "trolling" than to mark the troll as one who is wrong and needs to be dealt with/punished? IThat's the only use of the terminology that I can see. The terminology is has only 1 use, and that use is to mark someone as bad or not up to their standards of what is civil.

 

Again, the term is NOT PROPERLY USED when used in that manner - hell, there's no way to actually USE it in that manner without funking up bigtime in some sort of logical way.

 

You do not mark the troll as someone who is "wrong" by saying that they were trolling.

 

The FIRST THING THAT YOU DO when you find evidence of trolling is say "hey, looks like we have evidence of trolling. Let's examine it."

 

You examine it.

 

You then discern who did what - the evidence TELLS YOU who did the trolling, and who got trolled.

 

The evidence marks the troll. The evidence is what says "so and so was trolling". The evidence is what makes accusations.

 

The rules then remind you "trolling is bad", and then the staff decides what to do.

 

The staff also examines the evidence.

 

No problems EVER LIE WITHIN THE TERM. WORDS are NEVER to blame. It is always the PEOPLE who exercise what is to be done; ALL blame belongs to people. In this case, stop jabroniing about mere words, and grow the balls to jabroni about actual staffers instead, if you feel like sheet was done wrongly.

 

Those who would improperly use the term in order to remove another - those folks are instead' date=' in reality, saying that the person just doesn't belong here. This sort of removal is not tolerable when the site's staff condemns it in public yet permits it in private.[/quote']

 

Sure. I think the term's always intolerable.

 

You'd think incorrectly.

 

If you don't like what they're doing' date=' neg rep them,[/b']

 

No one smart cares about "rep" on this site. The entire concept of it is silly and obsolete, outside of either trying to give a small pep talk, or trying to give the exact opposite of a small pep talk.

 

A small pep talk is nice enough to recieve, yes, might brighten up someone's day a horribly small amount. All in all, it's of no consequence vs. all other factors to note.

 

Neg rep... no one smart cares when they get one. Neg rep has no real influence, you see, on anything of consequence. All it means is that someone else was butthurt and overemotional about something that they either did or didn't do.

 

That someone else, the person who gave out the neg rep, could have been smarter and instead done something more constructive about the situation. If the situation didn't call for some sort of actual PUNISHMENT for the person who got the rep, the person who gave out the rep most-likely should have just built a bridge and got over whatever was bugging them. If the situation did call for punishment, punishment should be handed out and that would be the end of it. Either way, "neg rep" is not worth anyone's considerations.

 

no need to start up a campaign on how they're a troll and don't meet the standards of civility within the forum.

 

So what? "No need" does not prove that it was wrong to do so.

 

If folks want to have a group jabronifest about someone' date=' let them.

 

If it's stupid for them to want to have a group jabronifest about someone, it's always going to be for some reason other than "we don't need this", as the reason of "we don't need this" never works on online forums. This is because online forums themselves are not needed at all, and nothing in an online forum is needed, either. Saying "we don't need this" applies not only to the group jabronifest, but it also applies to the entire forum, all the users' presence within the forum, et cetera.

 

So, yeah, get a better reason. Oh, wait, I'll give you one.

 

How about "this group jabronifest is exactly what the person you're all jabroniing about... wants you all to do,... WHEN the group jabroniing about him just-so-happens to NOT want to do what he wants them to do?"

 

I'd say that's the best reason.

 

 

Replies are in bold in the above quote. ^_^

 

You have no reason to be happy about your bolded replies. You really have no idea between proper and improper use of the term, and it's really a good time for you to just stop typing in this line of discussion and possibly talk about something much more in your line of thought, like maybe something happy or fun.

 

Lord knows that you've shown me that YCM is a horribly lowly place, just through your one inane post. I definitely have something to be happy about - I'm happy that I can say that I've never been as wrong about anything as you were in the above post.

 

I'm also happy that I'm not you - classic Schadenfreude.

 

Really, it'd only make me happier if you were pretending to be this dense... on purpose. That way, I'd know you weren't this hopeless. Maybe kindahopeless, but not this hopeless.

[Pharaoh_Atem]

im a troll

trolls r bad

trolls suck

screw you

everyone could post spam

so?

everybody trolls

even you

mods can ban people

have a cookie

 

This is giving more more and more reasons to move to Pojo.

 

This site finds any problem and instead of terminating it' date=' spams and rants until it goes away.

[/quote']

 

As someone who trolls Pojo every once in a while, I will remind you that Pojo does the EXACT same thing, except that there's considerably less loud BAWWWing.

 

This is because, frankly, the staff there knows that it's really a stupid waste of time to listen to the BAWWWers when so many people go to the site. The staff knows when REAL problems exist; these real problems exist when the staff itself is perturbed by something.

[Junk Raver]

You have many holes in a pipe and it is leaking' date=' is plugging one of those holes going to help?

[/quote']

 

Are you special or something?

 

Yes, it would help, it stops water coming from that hole, its a step closer to solving the large problem.

[Cyber Altair]

Problem is you can't save the problem by getting star *or whatever he wants his name to be now* and making him make a topic in which we can see that he is asking for popularity and crying at the same time because he is angry of someone. If you mods want to make something make it without making it seem like a publicity stunt for crying out load.

[Junk Raver]

1. This is hardly a public stunt, its Remix being his usual self.

 

2. My point is still valid ^_^

 

3. Why say Mods, only 1 made this topic in the first place, and as much as myself and crab dislike HFC, we are hardly supporting the topic. Im supporting the point, not the initial idea of this topic.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

im a troll

trolls r bad

trolls suck

screw you

everyone could post spam

so?

everybody trolls

even you

mods can ban people

have a cookie

 

This is giving more more and more reasons to move to Pojo.

 

This site finds any problem and instead of terminating it' date=' spams and rants until it goes away.

[/quote']

 

I didn't say any of that. And how are you getting trolls suck from what I said? >_> I'm saying that anyone who's disliked by certain higher up members can be accused of trolling due to how easy it is, what you're saying I'm saying is just wrong, I wasn't saying everyone trolls, I said every post could be made to look like a "trolling" post by a higher up member with a grudge against the poster. I also don't get how you got "everyone could spam." I never said anything close to that. You're quoting me for stuff I didn't say and condescending me for it.

 

That's like me doing this:

doom raith is homo.

 

You said nothing close to what I made out as what you said' date=' whether it's true or not is my business. XD

 

Pharoah Atem: So? There's no unit of measurement for intention of annoyance in posts, and many posts can be seen as purely intended to annoy others, despite them having a poiint, hence hotfoilcard. And rep is important. Look at pupil, everyone says he's stupid and neg reps him on sight every time he posts. Look at Lazerman, he became totally inactive when Crab negged him 10 times. It effects how you're respected and if you're in the negatives everyone shuns you. Trolling with no point but trolling is called spamming, therefore troll terminology isn't needed. DOn't pretend you don't know the whole hotfoil business, it's the reason this thread was made.

You're wasting your time dealing with the metaphysics of this when you could instead complain in a way that actually could make a faster, stronger, or otherwise more-effective impact.

Exactly. The reason: Because you're making me.

 

Crab Helmet: You and the others involved in this whole thing were whetting your knife for an excuse to ban hotfoilcard. Don't pretend you weren't. I have evidence.

This is a PM conversation I had with JesusofChaos.

Please explain the meaning of this:

 

Would u sign a petition to ban hotfoilcard?

I have few people support atm.

Do not under any circumstances tell hotfoil

 

What did he do?

 

He has been trolling the forums

 

You'll have to give examples of exactly what he's been doing that you dislike before I'm going to be signing any petition to ban anyone. Banning is for serious offenses and to be used as a last resort.

 

 

*hands JesusofChaos a razor*

 

lol @ jesusofchaos neg repping me for "disrespecting crab" and lol @ classtin for calling crab an "excellent member"

 

im the clown i can recognize the freak show when i see it

---------

nope i was just seeing if i could emulate you and your acolytes...you were the one who refused to read my first post analysis of the list remember?....thus it was you who didn't care about the ban list....i was simply putting myself in their shoes so to speak.

 

i did not want an excuse to flame people i only reacted to obv and irrational disrespect and insults.

 

you list was a joke' date=' your responses were a joke, your defenders were a joke.

 

chaos_pudding has admitted it...you nor jesus has denied it...and very few on tcg or pojo were convinced that your banlist was worth the power i used up typing up this response. [/quote']

 

This was back when I knew less of this situation than I do now, and I'm tired of you and your followers flaming me for what I think is corrupt and needs to be changed, just don't do stuff like this. The reason hotfoil was banned wasn't due to images he posted, I've seen worse posted by Spirit of B.M.G/Jspamax, the only reason he was really banned is because you were looking for an excuse to get him banned. The above post by hotfoil quoted by JesusofChaos was not pure trolling, it had several points to his argument, he was saying what he believed. I don't support the way he said it, but it really isn't too much worse than what you and your followers have been saying.

[Pharaoh_Atem]

There's no unit of measurement for intention of annoyance in posts' date=' and many posts can be seen as purely intended to annoy others, despite them having a poiint, hence hotfoilcard.[/quote']

 

It being "seen as" such is not relevant. All that matters is that the post actually WAS posted with the intent to annoy, and that someone was indeed annoyed by it.

 

That is trolling. Anything else is not.

 

And rep is important. Look at pupil' date=' everyone says he's stupid[/quote']

 

So? Nearly every, if not every, poster here on YCM that I've come across so far... seems to be mentally impaired in some way, including the folks whom I encouraged TO come here. He has no reason to be upset; it's a group of mostly-stupid people who're calling him stupid, and he damn well has no reason to let the opinions of a bunch of idiots get to him.

 

and neg reps him on sight every time he posts.

 

And if he lets that stop him from coming here and/or posting' date=' he himself is stupid, for letting himself care about their opinions - he himself is stupid for being overemotional about a bloody internet forum.

 

NEWS FLASH - this forum, and its users, are nothing special, and are entirely replaceable. Therefore, there's no reason to be so emotional about a flock of morons who say "we don't like you."

 

Look at Lazerman, he became totally inactive when Crab negged him 10 times.

 

If he lets that stop him from coming here and/or posting, he's stupid for being so overemotional about the matter.

 

However, you seem to be assuming that he stopped coming because Crab neg-rep'd him. Are you sure that it's the reason why he stopped coming?

 

It effects how you're respected

 

No one smart cares about "respect" over the internet.

 

You're all just a bunch of names and batches of text attached. You deserve no more respect than anyone else' date=' IRL or not. If you're stupid, you deserve to be told so, just because it's the truth. If you're smart, you deserve to be told so, just because it's the truth.

 

Any "respect" beyond telling people the truth is a foolish thing to have.

 

Further, if there's one thing dumber than blindly respecting someone across the internet, it's being blindly respected by someone else across the internet.

 

Internet fellatio from randomass nobodies who worship your words and deeds... It's by far the most funking annoying thing online. Last Measure doesn't even compare.

 

and if you're in the negatives everyone shuns you.

 

Their loss. No, really. If someone's going to ignore someone else JUST because some useless, obviously biasladen system says "other people don't like this guy"... that someone who ignores the someone else... is an utter moron whose reproductive rights should be put into question.

 

Yes, you heard me right - those who would do such a thing do not deserve to have kids until they stop doing it, because humans honestly would be better off without that much stupidity being passed along into the future.

 

Trolling with no point but trolling is called spamming' date=' therefore troll terminology isn't needed.[/quote']

 

"Trolling with no point" does not exist, as by definition, trolling requires the intent to annoy - annoyance is the point. The intent is the point.

 

You can troll by spamming. You can spam by trolling. In both of these cases, we call both of those cases by both terms, as both terms have indeed been fulfilled.

 

You can also spam without trolling. We call this "spamming".

 

You can also troll without spamming. We call this "trolling".

 

So, because you can troll w/o breaking other rules, the term is needed.

 

DOn't pretend you don't know the whole hotfoil business' date=' it's the reason this thread was made. [/quote']

 

This thread is not "the whole hotfoil business." The prior posts that inspired the thread creator to MAKE the thread... THAT is part of "the whole hotfoil business."

 

I only know about this thread, and that's only out of the mere whim of clicking on it and reading it. To be blunt, there's a chance that hotfoil hasn't been trolling, and that those who think he has been... are just morons. There's also a chance that hotfoil has been trolling.

 

Whether he is or not... is not what has shown you to be so misguided and foolish when it comes to this matter of discussion. It's your own lack of logic in prosecuting this crusade against the word "trolling" that has shown you to be such a waste of space.

 

To be honest, if he actually WERE trolling, chances are I'd have noticed by now and have seen the evidence, and have since said to Crab "lol, this idiot can't troll worth sheet, and those other morons are STILL getting sand in their vaginas over the situation," at which point Crab would lol with me, as he regularly does whenever I comment on the idiocy of other YCMers.

 

Exactly. The reason: Because you're making me.

 

No, I'm not. You're the person in control of your computer, hands, mind, emotions, et cetera.

 

If you can't bring yourself to simply walk away from something you don't want to do, when no one is physically forcing you to do it, you have mental disorders... and it would behoove you to go get professional assistance.

[Lazer Yoshi]

I dont think HFC is that mean, but he does post innapropiate things and says things that shouldnt be said.

I am not saying Crab Helmet is a Troll, but some of his replies in this forum say "You fail." And that's pretty much it. Ive seen at least 20 people with neg reps on here from Crab where he says "You suck at this game". Trolling?

Now, many people do troll here, with just posting the Epic Fail pictures when a newbie makes a deck. It's truly mean.

And Atem, if you read in the Leaving/Return Thread, I said I actually left because of real life bullies. And when I Negged Crab, it was because he's harsh towards some members. He kept on erasing his neg reps, which is ridicously insane. A Mod should not be able to get rid of his own neg reps. I was very upset with life at the time, and Im sorry if you thought I was being a jerk. Ive stopped myself from Repping harshly. I dont know why we have to argue, its the internet. And Yes, I know Ive argued with members in the past. But dont

act like you never argued on these forums as well.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

@Pharoah_Atem: If trolling has to be purely trolling to be trolling and its only purpose is to annoy someone and not to have any other kind of point, then the pointlessness and off-topicness of it makes it spamming. Stop contradicting yourself.

 

I totally agree with you about the whole rep thing, and I try to defend those who are shunned due to low rep as much as I can, but it remains the case, and recognizing that it's bad won't change it. Why even go to a forum if anything you do, even if what you're doing is of merit, goes completely ignored because of everyone hating you?

 

Lazerman's status was "away" and if you went to his profile, the reeason was "if you miss me, blame Crab for rep-spamming. ANd he's not being over-emotional, being in negs seriously effects the way you're treated by many, this is bad, but there's nothing that can be done, it's a cancer throughout the forum and we'll never be able to totally stop it.

 

How can people truely tell if a was made only to annoy? And if it was made only to annoy then it has no other point, is off-topic, and is therefore spam.

 

Everything I've been saying was based on the hotfoil incident. If you still don't know the details of it after all I've posted, that's your problem, not mine.

 

Walking away from things isn't how I do things, I don't leave unfinished business unfinished, and if that means I have a mental illness than so be it, because I'm not about to get myself cured of that mental illness any time soon.

[Lazer Yoshi]

Hotfoil was always treated like crap because he made one mean joke, which got him... about 5 Reps for Negative. But, when Crab Helmet insults someone like a Comedy Central Roast, everyone laughs with him and gives him good reps for being funny. Not funny, not cool. If you are here to troll and argue and annoy members, go to your Grandparent's house and put Rage Against the Machine on your Stereo Full Blast. Trust me, you'll annoy people.

But thanks for being on my side Wraith.

For Atem, calling someone stupid due to Neg Reps is the Stupidest thing you can do on this website. Blacks were disrespected for being colored different. You are doing the same with Reputation. Hotfoilcard is a friend of mine on here, and you shouldnt disrespect him for his Reputation. He's an awesome card maker. He may be spammish, but is that a reason to think someone sucks?

Pupil may not be a "good" member, but he doesnt deserve 30+ Negative Reps. The only people on here who should have a Negative Reputation are ones who are rude and unkind. Ones who only care for themselves. Enter contests and lose just to mouth off to the Contest Judges/Creator(s). Pupil might have done these things before I saw him or over a PM, but, still, that many neg reps?

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Hotfoil was always treated like crap because he made one mean joke' date=' which got him... about 5 Reps for Negative. But, when Crab Helmet insults someone like a Comedy Central Roast, everyone laughs with him and gives him good reps for being funny. Not funny, not cool. If you are here to troll and argue and annoy members, go to your Grandparent's house and put Rage Against the Machine on your Stereo Full Blast. Trust me, you'll annoy people.

But thanks for being on my side Wraith.

For Atem, calling someone stupid due to Neg Reps is the Stupidest thing you can do on this website. Blacks were disrespected for being colored different. You are doing the same with Reputation. Hotfoilcard is a friend of mine on here, and you shouldnt disrespect him for his Reputation. He's an awesome card maker. He may be spammish, but is that a reason to think someone sucks?

Pupil may not be a "good" member, but he doesnt deserve 30+ Negative Reps. The only people on here who should have a Negative Reputation are ones who are rude and unkind. Ones who only care for themselves. Enter contests and lose just to mouth off to the Contest Judges/Creator(s). Pupil might have done these things before I saw him or over a PM, but, still, that many neg reps?

[/quote']

Exactly. I've only ever given 1 rep. It was removed once the incident that provoked the rep was resolved. Neg reps can be extremely damaging, and should only be used for those who would destroy any sense of order and justice within the forum. It's good to see there are people who understand this. Neg reps for spamming, double-posting, etc are pointless. Those who jump on the bandwagon and neg-rep a member just to watch their neg-rep grow have no reason to be here.

Those who laugh when people get flamed and quote the flamer in their sigs also have no reason to be here.

[Pharaoh_Atem]

if you read in the Leaving/Return Thread' date=' I said I actually left because of real life bullies.[/quote']

 

Wouldn't have known. I never bother with Leave/Return threads, as frankly I have no reason to bother with them.

 

I also don't bother with profiles. I'm really the sort that walks in, posts, walks out. There's never a need for me to do otherwise.

 

Anyway, I would hope that your RL situation gets better, but why'd you even bother telling anyone on here why you'd left anyway? Are you actually essential to anything around here?

 

And when I Negged Crab' date=' it was because he's harsh towards some members.[/quote']

 

No one smart cares.

 

Also, irony and lulz; I've been posrepped for the same thing. Granted, no one smart cares about those reps, either; the rep points are really quite useless. The messages attached to the rep points were nice, though.

 

Remember, kiddies, rep points don't really matter. The messages attached are a different story, mostly because reps are not messages, and messages are not reps. They sometimes come in a package deal, but they are not interchangeable.

 

That, and the irony and lulz for folks getting pos'd and neg'd for the same stuff... is also worth caring about, as lulz are innately good things.

 

He kept on erasing his neg reps' date=' which is ridicously insane.[/quote']

 

He obviously cares.

 

A Mod should not be able to get rid of his own neg reps.

 

That is correct.

 

I was very upset with life at the time' date=' and Im sorry if you thought I was being a jerk.[/quote']

 

Again, no one smart cares about neg reps, because smart people realize the uselessness behind such a system, never we mind the ways such a system may be used to mislead people.

 

Ive stopped myself from Repping harshly.

 

Good' date=' that means you're wasting less time. Enjoy the time you're not wasting.

 

I dont know why we have to argue, its the internet.

 

The problem here is that you're assigning a bad connotation, either intentionally or unintentionally, to the word "argue."

 

To argue in and of itself is never a bad thing - arguing is nothing more than to bring evidence, convict, prove, indicate. All you're doing when you're arguing is saying "hey, this is what we know," and listing off what we know.

 

To argue, in fact, is an innately good action - it gets folks closer to the truth, even if someone tries to argue in support of something that is false. (When arguing for something false, the argument posed for that false thing... must explain itself. In explaining itself, the flaws of that argument are indeed exposed.)

 

It is always the CONTENTS of an argument that decides what is good or bad about the argument.

 

When you're telling someone "this is good, and here's why," you are arguing about something. Does that seem so bad?

 

And Yes' date=' I know Ive argued with members in the past. But dont

act like you never argued on these forums as well.

[/quote']

 

Again, don't feel like it's bad to argue.

 

If you should ever feel bad, it's either because

 

you argued about something that didn't need argument (and therefore you should feel bad not for arguing, but for wasting time)

 

-OR-

 

you handled the argument poorly (and therefore you should feel bad not for arguing, but for the poor handling).

 

 

If trolling has to be purely trolling to be trolling and its only purpose is to annoy someone and not to have any other kind of point' date=' then the pointlessness and off-topicness of it makes it spamming.[/quote']

 

No, it doesn't. Looking up the term "spamming" shows spamming to be completely unrelated to both the point or topicality of the spammed message.

 

Try the OED. It'll help you out in regard to making a case, as frankly, not using it lets you misuse a lot of sheet.

 

Stop contradicting yourself.

 

There is no contradiction in the above. You might be contradictory' date=' yes. The rules of the site might be contradictory and/or using the wrong terms to define crimes, yes. However, there is no contradiction in what I've put down.

 

I totally agree with you about the whole rep thing, and I try to defend those who are shunned due to low rep as much as I can, but it remains the case, and recognizing that it's bad won't change it. Why even go to a forum if anything you do, even if what you're doing is of merit, goes completely ignored because of everyone hating you?

 

Your own enjoyment. No, really.

 

If you have to have others enjoy your presence in order to keep going someplace, and you can't do it just because you yourself enjoy it, your priorities are in extreme distress, and I reccomend you sort them the funk out.

 

For what reason should I care about what any of you folks think of any other user, myself included? The only justified reason to come here is one's own enjoyment.

 

This, of course, leaves ONE caveat - the person who must have their presence be enjoyed by others in a place, in order to enjoy their own presence in that place. Persons like this often have no logical reason to be like this, and therefore either need a logical reason to be such, or need to reconsider being such.

 

When you are correct, though, you need never subjugate anything to that. If people have a problem with your being correct, that is their problem alone, and they need to get over that bridge on their own.

 

When you are wrong, your view should indeed be subjugated to everything else. Being wrong invalidates the view.

 

So, the real question is, do you want to be right as often as you can be, or not? If you do, you'll find that going somewhere solely for your own enjoyment is indeed good, and you'll also find that other people who want to be right as often as they can be... will support you.

 

And if you're alone, you're still right, so you can laugh all the way to the bank, mocking wrong people for being wrong. And if you don't want to be alone, you can either try to make someone else be right, or you can go to another place.

 

There's really a lot he can do in his position, but only if he's right - if he's wrong, he deserved to be figuratively trampled, solely because that's what happens to incorrect views.

 

Lazerman's status was "away" and if you went to his profile' date=' the reeason was "if you miss me, blame Crab for rep-spamming.[/quote']

 

Oh, so it's either both what you said AND what he said, or one of you is a dirty, stupid liar, and should be smacked.

 

ANd he's not being over-emotional' date=' being in negs seriously effects the way you're treated by many,[/quote']

 

Again, it's their loss if they ignore someone who is neg-repped just for being neg-repped. The same goes for folks who treat neg-repped people badly just for being neg-repped.

 

The person neg-repped can just sit back in the comfort that is being correct, IF he or she is correct - in fact, that's exactly what such a person SHOULD do. Obviously, a correct person that gets slandered for being correct... is dangerously close to changing the mind of some random person who certain other users would prefer have an unchanged mind.

 

If he or she is wrong, though, he gets trampled and deserves it as long as he or she is wrong.

 

this is bad' date=' but there's nothing that can be done, it's a cancer throughout the forum and we'll never be able to totally stop it.[/quote']

 

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

Remove the Rep System.

 

How can people truely tell if a was made only to annoy?

 

It's their job to prove it' date=' not ours. If they can't prove it, they're up sheet creek w/o a paddle.

 

And if it was made only to annoy then it has no other point, is off-topic, and is therefore spam.

 

I already answered this, so I'll just post the same thing again.

 

Looking up the term "spamming" shows spamming to be completely unrelated to both the point or topicality of the spammed message.

 

Try the OED. It'll help you out in regard to making a case, as frankly, not using it lets you misuse a lot of sheet.

 

Everything I've been saying was based on the hotfoil incident. If you still don't know the details of it after all I've posted' date=' that's your problem, not mine.[/quote']

 

It would be, except that it's not a problem.

 

Walking away from things isn't how I do things' date=' I don't leave unfinished business unfinished, and if that means I have a mental illness than so be it, because I'm not about to get myself cured of that mental illness any time soon.[/quote']

 

You're quite misguided and otherwise of poor judgment, if you believe the above to be evidence that I am "making you" stay here and discuss the matter.

 

If anything, it is evidence that you are making yourself do so.

 

So, yeah, thanks for proving the following point:

 

No' date=' I'm not. You're the person in control of your computer, hands, mind, emotions, et cetera.

 

If you can't bring yourself to simply walk away from something you don't want to do, when no one is physically forcing you to do it, you have mental disorders... and it would behoove you to go get professional assistance.[/quote']

 

 

For Atem' date=' calling someone stupid due to Neg Reps is the Stupidest thing you can do on this website. Blacks were disrespected for being colored different. You are doing the same with Reputation. Hotfoilcard is a friend of mine on here, and you shouldnt disrespect him for his Reputation.[/quote']

 

The above shows that

1) you somehow managed to take my very clear explanations above, and misunderstand them, and

2) you grossly disrespect the trials and tribulations that Blacks have been through and continue to go through.

 

Read what I said again. I'm not saying he deserves to be called stupid for recieving neg-reps. I'm saying that he's stupid if he's going to let the neg-reps stop him from coming here, especially when those who gave him the neg-reps are probably as dumb as a box of rocks.

 

Namely, he should not care about the opinions of others, and he's only hurting himself by letting himself care about their opinions. He is not stupid for having neg-reps; he is stupid for seemingly being upset about it, when he damn well could do better things with his time, like possibly continue to post the cards that you like so much.

 

He's shooting himself in the foot by caring so much about the neg-reps. That's the source of the stupidity.

 

I'm disrespecting your friend NOT because of his reputation, but because he seems to care about his reputation to a point that impairs his enjoyment of a place, when there's no reason for him to care at all.

 

My reason for saying "he's misguided" is the exact opposite of what you think it is. I really think you have trouble understanding things sometimes.

 

I mean, hell, I may not be neg-repped, but I've been here not a month, and I'm already known to demonize anyone I come across. I obviously don't give a damn about it. He shouldn't care about his reputation, either.

 

After all, who gives a damn about rep points when those rep points are managed by a legion of idiots? There's no reason to care about whether idiots like you or not, as idiots are idiots, and hold views invalidated by their idiocy.

 

He's an awesome card maker.

 

This is very doubtable. It is also irrelevant. Whether he's awesome or not' date=' reputation should not decide treatment.

 

Again, reread what I typed.

 

He may be spammish, but is that a reason to think someone sucks?

 

Yes.

 

It's still no reason to outright ignore someone, though, or to speak ill of them - not unless they're actually spamming, at which point they deserve punishment, not ignorance. After the punishment, they should not have ill spoken of them.

 

Basic Ethics 101. God, I can't believe I actually have to explain this sheet. Folks on this site really DO seem backward.

 

Pupil may not be a "good" member' date=' but he doesnt deserve 30+ Negative Reps.[/quote']

 

It's possible that he does. It's possible that he doesn't. Just saying it won't help you make any points.

 

The only people on here who should have a Negative Reputation are ones who are rude and unkind.

 

Not necessarily. Remember that YCM is mostly filled with idiots who take offense to the slightest disagreement. Folks can easily choose to believe that someone is being rude and/or unkind; it doesn't make them truly guilty of it.

 

Ones who only care for themselves.

 

Who are you to pass judgment on others? To be abrupt' date=' you're no better than they. Whether or not you'd WANT a neg-rep bandwagon to form, the fact that YCM's majority would generally agree with you... would cause the bandwagon to form.

 

The end result would simply mean that someone ELSE would be in hotfoilcard's same problem right now, someone who YOU just-so-happen to like less.

 

You don't want the problem solved completely, you just want it passed on to someone else who you like less.

 

Enter contests and lose just to mouth off to the Contest Judges/Creator(s).

 

No, that doesn't call for neg-repping, either. It calls for rule creation and administration.

 

Again, smart people don't care about rep points. Any smart person who would challenge the judges or creators... would damn well continue to do so right after being neg-repped.

 

If anything, they could see the new neg-rep and feel that the neg-rep was undeserved, and then say "well, they can't judge cards worth sheet, and the fact that they neg-repped me when I was right... only PROVES it."

 

If a contest's creators or judges do not want to put up with any challenges or complaints, they can simply say "we don't want that sheet" at the start of a contest.

 

Anyone who disobeys the requests of the creators or judges... can get punished for it.

 

It's simple, and it's effective. There's no need for the negrep system to ever even enter into it.

 

 

 

 

It should be obvious to anyone of smarts by now... that there is no need for a Neg Rep system at all, and all it does is permit idiots to be even more idiotic. Pos Rep has similar problems; those with it tend to get listened to, no matter what, according to the reports I've recieved.

 

I will make personal note that Crab Helmet has a high pos rep, and I will also make personal note that I damn well correct him on a lot of sheet all the time. He's a lot better than a lot of the idiots here, but he's still nothing special. Pos Rep whores tend to listen to him much faster than they do to me, though. It could be for any number of factors. However, the mere possibility that Pos Rep causes it... makes the problem possible, as well.

[Lazer Yoshi]

Apparently, you havent been here too long.

People with a negative reputation are ignored, spoken to badly, disrespected, never get a reply with their posts with a question or such, and, most importantly, are trolled. And if they leave, so what? One less member to watch.

Hotfoilcard may not be that good of a card maker, but give him some credit. Spamminess does not make a person bad, their personality does. So, to end this, lets forget it happened, and get back to our card making and what else we do.