So after that... We ban people for not using capital letters and punctuation in the right places?

maybe they should remove the post button features

At 9/22/04 06:12 PM, Evark wrote:

Wow, you love to sound intelligent. Ok - at the end of the day, all you merely are doing is bringing in tautology and digressing into a realm of semantically-flawed "logic". Please quote to me the point at which my entire "meaningless point" (to summarise what you're saying) was condemned to being null and void.

I did not contradict myself - if I did, quote to me. If you fail to be able to read between the very distinguishable lines of my post, then you are indeed what I am presuming - an English-grad student who thinks his dirt-level basics he picked up at high school are enough to win arguments on a grand scale.

Unfortunately I know well where you're coming from... it seems those that percieve that they have a strong grasp of the English language, often turn to arrogancy as a means of flexing their "intellectual might". Might I add that if you have read Animal Farm - you remind me of Squealer the pig. Except for the intelligence of course... but you really can argue black was white, with your pure circling of the issues at hand, in order to hide your inferiority.

So you see - I can write a few fucked up sentances in Standard English about how much of a ponce you are - but I'd much rather get to the crux of the matter. And that is, your idea is bollocks - you were on the right track until you started talking out of your arse. :')

Oh and by the way - "cookie-based"? Are you serious? Please think ideas through, gain a brief understanding of systems and then come back to me. Do you know why the NG sign-in feature is no longer cookie-based? No, I guess you probably don't...

Never mind, at least you got through a base-level English class, eh? :)

At 9/22/04 06:13 PM, Rextex wrote: So after that... We ban people for not using capital letters and punctuation in the right places?

No, the point of it is mainly to prevent any and all topic that include things such as "depositing WTF?!??!1" and "THIS PALCE IS COLO". It would be to learn how to post intelligently, spelling wouldn't be a real issue. As long as everything is intelligible.

Its not to punish, its to prevent stupidity on the part of those who want to learn the ways of the BBS.

Maybe you could have to have atleast 100 or so posts before you can start a new topic. That's what I'm going to do with my forums.

At 9/22/04 06:24 PM, That-Is-Bull wrote: Maybe you could have to have atleast 100 or so posts before you can start a new topic. That's what I'm going to do with my forums.

Then... erm.... who makes the first posts? If the first people join up, the forum won't run unless they reply to Admin-only topics...

Unless I'm overlooking something here... :S

At 9/22/04 06:19 PM, BazzMann wrote:

At 9/22/04 06:12 PM, Evark wrote:

Wow, you love to sound intelligent.

No, I just prefer it to sounding stupid.

Ok - at the end of the day, all you merely are doing is bringing in tautology and digressing into a realm of semantically-flawed "logic".

No, I'm just pointing out that you have missed my point entirely by choosing to argue something else.

Please quote to me the point at which my entire "meaningless point" (to summarise what you're saying) was condemned to being null and void.

I never nullified your point, I understood it completely, so completely that I was able to argue against it, something you seem to be deeply offended about.

I did not contradict myself - if I did, quote to me.

No, you didn't. You seem to be pretty paranoid about it though as you have defended something unattacked.

If you fail to be able to read between the very distinguishable lines of my post, then you are indeed what I am presuming - an English-grad student who thinks his dirt-level basics he picked up at high school are enough to win arguments on a grand scale.

Ah, yes, us English grad students still in HS... I do not fail to understand the distinguishable lines of your post, you fail in providing them.

Unfortunately I know well where you're coming from... it seems those that percieve that they have a strong grasp of the English language, often turn to arrogancy as a means of flexing their "intellectual might".

I have no need to flex the intellectual might I may have, I simply responded to your point in a clear and concise way, and as a result of your attitude towards me I responded with an attitude towards you.

Might I add that if you have read Animal Farm

I have, excellent book.

- you remind me of Squealer the pig. Except for the intelligence of course...

So... in essence you're saying I'm not like him at all.

but you really can argue black was white, with your pure circling of the issues at hand, in order to hide your inferiority.

You have yet to address the issue at hand in this post.

So you see - I can write a few fucked up sentances in Standard English about how much of a ponce you are - but I'd much rather get to the crux of the matter.

So everything up to this point was an introduction to your outstanding conclusion you will soon deliver.

And that is, your idea is bollocks - you were on the right track until you started talking out of your arse. :')

I got that you disagreed with the idea already, and I responded to that already. Where is the actual part of this that is on topic?

Oh, you had to write another response to make up for this flaw in your first one.

At 9/22/04 06:20 PM, BazzMann wrote: Oh and by the way - "cookie-based"?

That is what I suggested, but I'm open to persuasion, thats why I wanted people to discuss this.

Are you serious?

yes.

Please think ideas through, gain a brief understanding of systems and then come back to me. Do you know why the NG sign-in feature is no longer cookie-based? No, I guess you probably don't...

Why would I care whether or not the log in feature is cookie based? I'm talking about a hypothetical feature to prevent stupid posts by imposing a mandatory lurking period. Once a user has reached that point he would recieve cookies that OK his system as an experienced BBS user, and his username would also recieve those benefits in a more secure way on the NG servers.

Never mind, at least you got through a base-level English class, eh? :)

Base level english, is that kinda like the most advanced English classes available for every year that I've been able to take them? I'm still in High School, read my profile and you can see that quite clearly.

Ooooh, big-boy wants to play. Ok – glove up, I’m ready. Your arguments are far too flawed for me to cut you down every step of the way, I have more important matters at hand. But I’ll do my best with the main points that catch my eye. And now since we are totally off-topic, I’ll gun you down for the pure fun of it.

Last things first I think. The issue of cookies – you are aware of what cookies are? They are stored on your computer, temporarily as a (quite primitive) means of communication back and forth between the web server and yourself. And what if these cookies are deleted? Well, the system won’t work. Cookies are deleted a lot, either manually, automatically, or a lot of the time nowadays they are merely disabled or barred for security reasons.

But reading between the lines, that is irrelevant – you just want a system that works. The point you were making is this: In order to stop new users from spamming without knowing, they should be forced to explore the BBS and get to know what it’s about – but there should be some way of not counting those that already are registered. WELL WHAT IF THEY DON’T STICK TO ONE COMPUTER? A cookie on a home computer will not have any effect on another – if someone forgets their password and needs to resign in, but uses various computers, they’re screwed. And believe me, there will be many people who fit this type of user category. I’ve done my fair share of web-design, I was never that good but I learnt what I learnt. Your idea will be a massive pain in the arse.

The point that you’re so convinced that I’ve missed, I think you’ll find you’ll read if you take your head out of your arse. You became arrogant, and I made a swift rebuttal. But what it comes down to is this: at the end of the day, your idea will not work. It has most probably been thought of already, and if ever it was put into action, it would be drastically flawed. No system is perfect – but that system would be so far from perfect, it would be deducting from the site. The way it works now is good – but can be improved. As I have said, we have new moderators, and those that do their job can and will handle it. I am not an elitist, but I think it’s pointless trying to build a website system around the ignorant that don’t know how to post. It is NOT the job of Newgrounds to train users to operate and coexist in a digital environment. It is merely a place to talk. If you can’t do that already, you should either learn quickly, or find somewhere more welcoming. Simple as.

You have yet to address the issue at hand in this post.

Oh, I was merely having fun with you in this particular post. Since you still aren’t aware of the crux of my other 2 posts, I thought “screw it”. It just goes to show that no amount of English schooling can teach you good ol’ plain common sense.

In regards to the point I made about Squealer, you said this:

So... in essence you're saying I'm not like him at all.

Someone didn’t study their character bios in as great a detail as they should. Squealer had a high level of intelligence and persuasion – however, his logicality wasn’t as clear and well-established as that of the other pigs. He was mainly powerful due to his literacy – this does not make him exceptionally good at decisions, he was good at twisting words, manipulating the truth and making things sound pretty. The leaders were the ones who had the more well-rounded intelligence – whereas Squealer is in effect, the equivalent of today’s National press. My point which you were too thick to understand, my good friend, was that you merely twist and rotate the English Language to make yourself sound and feel intelligent. You are no more intelligent than me – we are the same age, and I have passed the highest level of English throughout my schooling with exceptional grades. I don’t make a deal of it – I’d prefer to say what I mean, and get my point across. But if we’re comparing dick-sizes here, my double A* speaks for itself.

That’s all I have time for at the moment, so kindly STFU.

At 9/22/04 06:58 PM, BazzMann wrote:
The issue of cookies – you are aware of what cookies are?

fully and completely. Since I was 8.

(uneccesary explanation of what cookies are)

uh huh, looks like you need some lurking time to read the topic you are posting in. I have already addressed this issue with another user. If they are disabled or barred it wouldn't affect my system IN THE SLIGHTEST.

WELL WHAT IF THEY DON’T STICK TO ONE COMPUTER? A cookie on a home computer will not have any effect on another – if someone forgets their password and needs to resign in, but uses various computers, they’re screwed.

Well, I happen to be particularly good at web design. You talk down to me like I have no idea what I am talking about. For a running count of about 5 times you've completely failed at arguing with me by ignoring things I've already dealt with and bringing them up again. I trust you'll find this answer satisfactory:

At 9/22/04 06:38 PM, Evark wrote:

Why would I care whether or not the log in feature is cookie
based? I'm talking about a hypothetical feature to prevent
stupid posts by imposing a mandatory lurking period. Once a
user has reached that point he would recieve cookies that OK
his system as an experienced BBS user, and his username
would also recieve those benefits in a more secure way on the
NG servers.

The point that you’re so convinced that I’ve missed, I think you’ll find you’ll read if you take your head out of your arse. You became arrogant, and I made a swift rebuttal.

I became "arrogant" about the time you stopped reading anything I had to say. Because you hadn't read what I posted, you misinterpreted my labeling of previously stated information as obvious as arrogance, and now you're doing the same thing. You are the arrogant one, you seem to think that you can effectively argue this point with me without having actually read what I respond with.

your idea will not work.

As soon as someone says the word "probably" they're arguement is completely pointless. At that point they've based something on conjecture, which, as you may know since you are so much smarter than myself, does not ever hold up without fact.

No system is perfect – but that system would be so far from perfect, it would be deducting from the site. The way it works now is good – but can be improved.

That was what I was suggesting, an improvement to the site. My job here was simply to push the minds of the administrators in a direction they may not have thought of yet. I am not responsible for the site however, so I have no real input and would leave the real problem solving to the genius's behind Newgrounds.

(moderator bit and if you can't learn then find another place)

The entire point of this system is so that these users can "learn quickly" as you have stated it is imperative that they do. It is simply a system for the willing to learn faster.

Oh, I was merely having fun with you in this particular post. Since you still aren’t aware of the crux of my other 2 posts, I thought “screw it”. It just goes to show that no amount of English schooling can teach you good ol’ plain common sense.

I am fully aware of what you are saying. You have said my system is flawed because you have not read my answers to these proposed flaws. You have downplayed the need for such a system in the first place because you don't think people need the help and that they should just figure it out for themselves because thats how you did it and you think everyone else should have to. I'm just suggesting making it more simple, and also less of a headache to those who have to deal with it. I'm sure Moderators absolutely love dealing with all the topics started every day by some new user who has no idea what to say and what is acceptable.

Someone didn’t study their character bios (goes into pointlessly great detail about Squealer)

Why would I study character bios? Reading the book is enough for me to gain a full understanding of its contents. You said I was like Squealer minus the intelligence. If you were calling me stupid and saying Squealer was intelligent then you cannot compare me to him, as that would make it a contrast.

My point which you were too thick to understand, my good friend, was that you merely twist and rotate the English Language to make yourself sound and feel intelligent. You are no more intelligent than me – we are the same age, and I have passed the highest level of English throughout my schooling with exceptional grades.

Grades, and level of schooling have nothing to do with intelligence, it is all about work ethic. I am more intelligent than you because I read every aspect of what I reply to, and have a working memory of everything I've read in the thread. You, however, are content to ignore my responses and belittle me as much as possible. What pissed you off enough to want to respond in a scathing manor was the fact that I was nonplussed by your arguement, and even more upsetting was the fact that I offered no insults in my return arguement.

I don’t make a deal of it – I’d prefer to say what I mean, and get my point across. But if we’re comparing dick-sizes here, my double A* speaks for itself.

Double A* sized dick? Sounds an awful lot like the measurements for breast size, in which case you just said you have the smallest size possible.

That’s all I have time for at the moment, so kindly STFU.

When your arguement is a total failure, just resort to fake kindness and tell someone they should shut the fuck up. I guarentee it works every time.

Now to summarize what I posted there, since you never seem to read: You are wrong.

My system would compose of both a cookie based system simply for the convenience of the user who wants alternate accounts on the same system, but would hinge mainly on information stored in the NG server that tells when someone has already lurked long enough. The cookies would simply be a convenience so that users could have alternate accounts that wouldn't have the mandatory lurking period. The problems with them would be circumvented by the fact that whenever someone logged in on another computer the info would be stored in NG servers and would send more cookies to that computer to make that one also alternate account friendly.

If you can't understand this after this post then I cannot help you.

The point you quoted to explain yourself was not explanitory. As I have already BEEN OVER like, 3 times... you have said that the "NG user's account will recieve more secure similar benefits". Did you not hear what I had to say about that before? As I asked - WHAT IF SOMEONE LOSES THEIR ACCOUNT DETAILS AND CREATES A NEW ONE?? This has not been addressed by you in any way at all, whatsoever.

And therefore, your system is flawed. You have not covered all angles, as much as you try and tell me you have in previous posts. You honestly are the stupidest person I know

At 9/22/04 04:59 PM, scruffyhawk wrote: sounds like a pain in the ass to me. i lurked for about a year before posting.

Sorry, but I couldn't help but check up on that. You posted twice within three days of signing up!

If there was a mandatory waiting period before a new user would be able to post, they'd probably make new topics once they're able to asking why they weren't able to post before. I don't think there'll ever be a clean solution to this problem. As long as there are stupid people, there will always be stupid posts.

Please note - I am not posting any more on this matter, rereading your last post it is clear that you are not only egotistical and very overconfident with your in reality, very limited abilities, but you are also ignorant and very stupid when it comes to the point in hand. You say I've failed to see your points, and yet you fail to see the points I've clearly laid out EVEN NOW!! It's ridiculous that you subscribe to a BBS and yet cannot read what others write, and it's in a topic that YOU made about lurking!

The reason I "quit"? Not through loss or cowardice, but merely the fact that I actually read through your last post, and the amount of ignorance overwhelmed me... I read the part where you told me I could not compare you to squealer due to the lack of intelligence I said you had - this gave me a very big headache. It's OBVIOUS what my point was, just like it's obvious that you actually in fact CAN compare 2 things without having EVERY property being the same. A comparison can be made with 2 totally opposing things if that is your wish, and yet you say I cant' as it contrasts? Pure ignorance. If that was the case, every single worldwide physicist would be out of a job... they compare models to reality, even if not every factor matches up...

Look, let's settle this now. You clearly cannot argue with me on this BBS because you fail to read my posts as carefully as perhaps it takes you to absorb information... if you want to continue this argument, add me to MSN. My email address is available if you choose Contact Author; maybe I will be able to explain to you very clearly in a real-time converastion, beacuse you don't seem to be able to understand things post-by-post. Otherwise, I'm going to drop this topic now - and the fact is, you have made no real point for why your system is any good, you have not addressed mine. Add me if you want to continue this argument and I'll happily oblige.

At 9/23/04 10:28 AM, BazzMann wrote: The point you quoted to explain yourself was not explanitory. As I have already BEEN OVER like, 3 times... you have said that the "NG user's account will recieve more secure similar benefits". Did you not hear what I had to say about that before? As I asked - WHAT IF SOMEONE LOSES THEIR ACCOUNT DETAILS AND CREATES A NEW ONE?? This has not been addressed by you in any way at all, whatsoever.

And therefore, your system is flawed. You have not covered all angles, as much as you try and tell me you have in previous posts. You honestly are the stupidest person I know

Then they're shit outta luck. Why would my system have to be more foolproof than all the systems currently in place for tracking things such as postcount and other stuff? if the person wanted to have a new account the cookies on their computer would allow for that. If they lose their other account, and the original computer they first signed in on then they are just have to do it over. BIG DEAL. Its the same thing when old members lose their password and have to deposit and gain levels again.

The angles I haven't covered didn't need to be. You are trying to say that my system wouldn't work when in fact it would work for the most part. You say NG has no responsibility to new users who don't know how to do things, but I say that NG has no responsibility to old users who can't keep their passwords and such in order.