Sporting Woe
In which we ask a bunch of pasty-faced shut-ins about their exploits on the sports field. How bad was it for you?
Thanks to scarpe for the suggestion.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 13:40)
In which we ask a bunch of pasty-faced shut-ins about their exploits on the sports field. How bad was it for you?
Thanks to scarpe for the suggestion.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 13:40)
« Go Back
Eh? Whut?
I could have sworn that Quentin and I had both risen to Scarpe's bait only a few seconds ago. Have our responses been mod-deleted already?
The words "For fucks's sake" spring to mind.
UPDATE: And now Rory's version of this has gone as well. Are you going to keep this up all week?
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:02, 4 replies)
I could have sworn that Quentin and I had both risen to Scarpe's bait only a few seconds ago. Have our responses been mod-deleted already?
The words "For fucks's sake" spring to mind.
UPDATE: And now Rory's version of this has gone as well. Are you going to keep this up all week?
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:02, 4 replies)
We're sick bastards...
...but not that sick.
Changed the name of the challenge to keep the trolls out
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:04, closed)
...but not that sick.
Changed the name of the challenge to keep the trolls out
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:04, closed)
It's hardly trolling.
I agree that Scarpe's request is the sort of thing that shouldn't have to be made; but it does come across as rather holier-than-thou. It's that public piety that I had in my sights, rather than the events themselves. (I'm assuming that the same goes for Quentin - although I'll admit that I can't say for sure, because he seems to be a bit strange.)
Besides: if it is trolling, there's plenty of scope to be flamed to Ganymede and back in the replies.
I can only assume that the same vetting policy will henceforth be applied to Maddie "jokes", mong "jokes", and all the rest of it? Consistency is important.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:08, closed)
I agree that Scarpe's request is the sort of thing that shouldn't have to be made; but it does come across as rather holier-than-thou. It's that public piety that I had in my sights, rather than the events themselves. (I'm assuming that the same goes for Quentin - although I'll admit that I can't say for sure, because he seems to be a bit strange.)
Besides: if it is trolling, there's plenty of scope to be flamed to Ganymede and back in the replies.
I can only assume that the same vetting policy will henceforth be applied to Maddie "jokes", mong "jokes", and all the rest of it? Consistency is important.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:08, closed)
Did you miss this?
"They are victims of one of the most tragic circumstances, one of the worst events that could befall any person. So please, put yourself in their shoes. What if it were happen to you? What if you had suffered the horror of being born in Liverpool?"
He doesn't appear to be being serious.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:12, closed)
"They are victims of one of the most tragic circumstances, one of the worst events that could befall any person. So please, put yourself in their shoes. What if it were happen to you? What if you had suffered the horror of being born in Liverpool?"
He doesn't appear to be being serious.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:12, closed)
But quite what this has to do with the mods deleting responses that they don't like
is anyone's guess.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:13, closed)
is anyone's guess.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:13, closed)
I'm glad your sense of massive MORAL OUTRAGE has suddenly been dropped when it is pointed out that you totally failed to spot a joke.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:31, closed)
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:31, closed)
This was added later.
The response from me (and Q) was to an earlier version of Scarpe's post that didn't have it.
Sorry to disappoint you, fucko.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:38, closed)
The response from me (and Q) was to an earlier version of Scarpe's post that didn't have it.
Sorry to disappoint you, fucko.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:38, closed)
To be fair, my request was only made because
I suddenly realised just how tedious it would become to read time and time again people thinking they were being funny and original. It wasn't from any sense of moral outrage.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:12, closed)
I suddenly realised just how tedious it would become to read time and time again people thinking they were being funny and original. It wasn't from any sense of moral outrage.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:12, closed)
True.
But this place being what it is, you were far more likely to encourage people to make that kind of response, just to annoy you. (My post was evidence of that - I wouldn't have made it otherwise.) You've been around here long enough to realise that.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:15, closed)
But this place being what it is, you were far more likely to encourage people to make that kind of response, just to annoy you. (My post was evidence of that - I wouldn't have made it otherwise.) You've been around here long enough to realise that.
( , Thu 19 Apr 2012, 14:15, closed)
« Go Back