what's with all the clowns ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter shayno
  • Start date Start date
Monkey Man said:
You did share a lot of info back in the day.

I removed many posts per your request too, as I'm still happy to do when it comes to your kids, for example.
Click to expand...

I did. Very open and personable person. Didn't realize the huge pile of dog shit I was stepping in at the time.
With all due respect to present company. ?

Thank you in regard to the wife and kids. It's basically impossible for me to defend them without just opening
myself/the forum up to more spam.
 
T.V. said:
You added “implied consent”. That is changing the conditions of the type of consent. You changed the rule. It’s easier than enforcing them around here. You’d never get anything else done. I get it. But it’s still weak.
Click to expand...

I used the term "expressly" loosely and was called out for it, so I made the sentence clearer.

To me, that's not changing the rules. "Permission", express or implied. Simple.

It's about "permission", you know? Forum culture has always viewed divulgence as permission in this context. It's rare to see peeps splitting hairs over it.

Heads-up:
I'm over this. Let's move on.
 
DemNuts said:
I did. Very open and personable person. Didn't realize the huge pile of dog shit I was stepping in at the time.
With all due respect to present company. ?

Thank you in regard to the wife and kids. It's basically impossible for me to defend them without just opening
myself/the forum up to more spam.
Click to expand...
Andy Warhol once said, "In the future everyone will be famous for 15 minutes."

I guess he meant, whether they wanted it or not.

:unsure:
 
Monkey Man said:
I used the term "expressly" loosely and was called out for it, so I made the sentence clearer.

To me, that's not changing the rules. "Permission", express or implied. Simple.

It's about "permission", you know? Forum culture has always viewed divulgence as permission in this context. It's rare to see peeps splitting hairs over it.

Heads-up:
I'm over this. Let's move on.
Click to expand...
You changed it. You know it. We all know it. Obviously, you’re the man. It’s your prerogative. I am all for moving on. But don’t blow smoke and pretend you “clarified”. You added a completely different type of consent to cover behavior that has already been identified and requested that you put a stop to. Instead of noting the behavior violated the rule, you changed the rule.
 
T.V. said:
You changed it. You know it. We all know it. Obviously, you’re the man. It’s your prerogative. I am all for moving on. But don’t blow smoke and pretend you “clarified”. You added a completely different type of consent to cover behavior that has already been identified and requested that you put a stop to. Instead of noting the behavior violated the rule, you changed the rule.
Click to expand...


e.g.; new members vs the old guard

?

I AM NOT T.V.
T.V. IS NOT ME.
NEITHER ARE ALTS
THE END
 
You know, this notion that change/evolution is some negative thing fascinates me.

People grow/change with time. Our understanding evolves with time. Standards and norms change and flex. To do otherwise is stagnation.

We’re constantly trying to “find the line”. The ”line“ is ever moving.

IOW... so what?
 
T.V. said:
You changed it. You know it. We all know it. Obviously, you’re the man. It’s your prerogative. I am all for moving on. But don’t blow smoke and pretend you “clarified”. You added a completely different type of consent to cover behavior that has already been identified and requested that you put a stop to. Instead of noting the behavior violated the rule, you changed the rule.
Click to expand...
Dude, the intention hasn't changed one iota.

I made a mistake by using the term. I could've just said, "permission".

Also, so what if I did knowingly change the rule, which in my mind I did not? I mean, I made the friggin' rule FFS.

It's not like I need a referendum in order to alter The Constitution or anything. I have the ("implied" - just for you) reserved right to change the rules any time I damned-well please.

Disagree all you want. I agree that you've got a point on the minutia, hence my tweak, but as I keep implying, I didn't draft that before lawyers, expecting someone to go through it with a fine-toothed comb and call me out on the exact wording; the whole post was made mostly as a quick communication of the spirit of what we were hoping from OTC.
 
Monkey Man said:
Dude, the intention hasn't changed one iota.

I made a mistake by using the term. I could've just said, "permission".

Also, so what if I did knowingly change the rule, which in my mind I did not? I mean, I made the friggin' rule FFS.

It's not like I need a referendum in order to alter The Constitution or anything. I have the ("implied" - just for you) reserved right to change the rules any time I damned-well please.

Disagree all you want. I agree that you've got a point on the minutia, here my tweak, but as I keep implying, I didn't draft that before lawyers, expecting someone to go through it with a fine-toothed comb and call me out on the exact wording; the whole post was made mostly as a quick communication of the spirit of what we were hoping from OTC.
Click to expand...
You had a rule in place. A member complained other members broke the rule and violated his privacy. You changed the rule to accommodate the offenders. Like I said, absolutely your prerogative. But in my opinion, a completely weak and poor way to run a website.
 
Dude, nothing changed apart from the wording for clarity.

Can you not see that? I'm going about things as I always have. Donnie accepts the deal and has just said he's happy. Are you forgetting that he has "received" such posts literally for many months, even years?

FFS.
 
T.V. said:
You had a rule in place. A member complained other members broke the rule and violated his privacy. You changed the rule to accommodate the offenders. Like I said, absolutely your prerogative. But in my opinion, a completely weak and poor way to run a website.
Click to expand...
Okay, you have my actual attention. You have balls and we've finally seen them so I'm impressed.

With that said, think about MM as he has a shitty unpaid job and is doing what he can with ALL us retards. I firmly belive and request that you apologise to MM. You'll be doing the right thing.
 
Monkey Man said:
Dude, nothing changed apart from the wording for clarity.
Click to expand...
The wording is everything in this situation. You know it. You added the one word that made what they are doing acceptable behavior when prior to adding the one word, it was “verboten”. It’s your gig. Run it how you like. It’s still poor form.
 
You're still not getting it mate. Until the wording was questioned, this has been a nothing burger.

Forum's run just-fine since Aug 18, 2021 when I made that post.

YabbaDabbaDoo said:
With that said, think about MM as he has a shitty unpaid job and is doing what he can with ALL us retards. I firmly belive and request that you apologise to MM. You'll be doing the right thing.
Click to expand...
No apology necessary; I can take it.
 
OK, hopefully this puts this to bed:

I only added that sentence days ago, so your accusation that the forum's been running in spite of its own "law" is patently-false.

Forum ran all this time just-fine 'cause peeps were intelligent-enough to interpret a member's posting pics or deets of him or herself as permission to regurgitate them.

As soon as I was alerted to the legalese of the statement, I edited it for clarity.
 
What in Bozo's name is this thread about again?

bozo-the-clown-vintage-kids-shows.gif
 
... and for clarity:

I've always complied with member requests for removal of pics or posts.

In Donnie's case, that ship sailed long ago with regard to stuff about him (not family). Why?
1) 'Cause he's said many times he doesn't GAF.
2) 'Cause it'd be a full-time job to trawl through the thousands of threads and posts in OTC in order to locate and edit them all. I'm thinking several months' 9-5 work.

I'm sure he knows this.
 
Why would anyone want MORE governing over themselves?
They could just hit ignore and start a thread about almost anything they want.
Pretty free to talk about whatever, vulgar or not.
You could even pick from threads more on topic with your interests instead of abusing yourself by snowballing fights.
Instead; "please quiet me to quiet them."
 
Monkey Man said:
For the record, and to practice what I preach:

My name is Nicky. I'm from Melbourne.

I'm aware of the fact that this statement grants implied permission to others to address me using this info.

:dunno:
Click to expand...
Hi, I'm Lisa! I'm from Earth.
People here have problems.
 
Yup, the spirit of the rules has to be acknowledged.

Always been prepared to remove posts upon-request.

Many here will attest to this. Not once have I questioned such a request, usually forwarded to me via PM, which is fine-and-appropriate IMHO, let alone refused it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top