Active Users:746 Time:25/11/2024 06:19:48 AM
True, but the same principles apply to people surfing at work or college. Joel Send a noteboard - 23/11/2010 09:16:30 PM
Mainly I'm just very leery of anything that even slightly complicates adding new members. If you recall the "taking five minutes to dl and install a small piece of software and then register a SN is too HARD111 *stamps foot*" discussions you should understand why. :P Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think RAFO can endure as a primarily wotmaniac site. Ignoring those who've left and will never return, there's too much bad blood and bitterness still, and too many people with too many real world responsibilities to spend the time online they did when they were pillars of the community. The ranks of the latter will grow, and unless there's a substantial influx of people who never knew about wotmania the site will stagnate and die: Those pillars are needed lest the whole thing collapse. Consequently, ANYTHING that prejudices that influx even slightly requires a great deal of justification to seem wise to me.

Yet, once again, I have neither the qualifications, the access nor the desire to make those kinds of decisions, and I've stated my position quite clearly, at great length, so, as noted in my Journal Entry, continuing to do feels ungrateful, disloyal and even hypocritical. The issue is settled, whether I like it or not. Anyway, I LIKE being a user free of any responsibilities save to a Code of Conduct I can't even be ACCUSED of violating since it's unstated (which will make the first siteban hard to explain... ). ;)
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
Can we swear at RAFO? - 22/11/2010 04:57:59 AM 957 Views
Fuck no. Are you shitting me? There's no damn chance we can swear. - 22/11/2010 05:01:48 AM 578 Views
You DARE presume to assault my delicate ears with your nasty coarse sailor talk??? - 22/11/2010 05:05:23 AM 612 Views
Delicate? *NM* - 22/11/2010 05:06:19 AM 339 Views
Yes? - 22/11/2010 05:37:36 AM 462 Views
I don't know, can you? *NM* - 22/11/2010 05:54:20 AM 359 Views
Why not try it an find out. *NM* - 22/11/2010 06:05:35 AM 318 Views
hell to the fuck yes! *NM* - 22/11/2010 10:51:07 AM 309 Views
I can't think of underage users - 22/11/2010 11:32:40 AM 662 Views
Well - 22/11/2010 11:47:13 AM 672 Views
That's a good point of course - 22/11/2010 11:58:37 AM 577 Views
Re: That's a good point of course - 22/11/2010 12:11:25 PM 703 Views
THANK YOU! *hugs* - 22/11/2010 12:28:38 PM 521 Views
Back off! - 22/11/2010 12:31:13 PM 573 Views
'SOK: I hugged a man (in public)... - 22/11/2010 12:35:16 PM 452 Views
I never had that issue. - 22/11/2010 05:38:59 PM 594 Views
*NM* - 22/11/2010 05:53:24 PM 371 Views
The difference is webbrowsers can't be set to automatically exlude the former from web searches. - 22/11/2010 12:01:05 PM 622 Views
How many posts have there been with swear words in titles? - 22/11/2010 12:45:49 PM 502 Views
Are you telling me monitors are THAT horribly inefficient? - 22/11/2010 02:55:43 PM 654 Views
Scanning a CoC requires a human (or significantly improved parsing), whereas spidering can be dumb - 22/11/2010 03:06:19 PM 582 Views
I figured,but checking for filter subroutines seems like it would be pretty easy. - 22/11/2010 04:18:01 PM 692 Views
Subroutines such as what? - 22/11/2010 04:33:05 PM 892 Views
Well, honestly, I don't know, but I expect language filter subroutines are pretty standardized now. - 22/11/2010 08:01:07 PM 872 Views
The point is that there is nothing that a browser* will see of such a filter unless... - 23/11/2010 08:56:37 AM 567 Views
OK, but even then preventing such posts covers the contingencies while censoring none. - 23/11/2010 01:49:15 PM 609 Views
well... - 23/11/2010 04:14:51 PM 618 Views
Re: well... - 23/11/2010 05:26:14 PM 586 Views
Re: well... - 23/11/2010 06:42:43 PM 561 Views
Yes, a lot of people don't seem to want RAFO "invaded" by new people. - 23/11/2010 07:03:14 PM 647 Views
new people is not the same as children. *NM* - 23/11/2010 08:30:43 PM 306 Views
True, but the same principles apply to people surfing at work or college. - 23/11/2010 09:16:30 PM 606 Views
Please. - 23/11/2010 09:40:16 PM 615 Views
I resent that. - 23/11/2010 10:09:36 PM 474 Views
Sadface. *NM* - 23/11/2010 10:12:31 PM 316 Views
... and later additions like Ghavrel? - 23/11/2010 10:24:28 PM 664 Views
188 f-bombs dropped in titles, $hit's used 142 times in titles - 22/11/2010 05:01:02 PM 588 Views
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck - 22/11/2010 06:27:59 PM 574 Views
Yea, you're helping exclude dozens, if not hundreds of potential RAFOlk. - 22/11/2010 07:42:58 PM 729 Views
Watch out. The CIA is watching you post that. And then they're going to arrest EVERYONE. - 22/11/2010 08:09:07 PM 613 Views
*NM* - 22/11/2010 09:36:20 PM 592 Views
Who said anything about regulation? - 23/11/2010 01:45:21 AM 627 Views
I love how you made Adam into a positive - 22/11/2010 05:40:33 PM 634 Views
For good or ill, Adam was very much a part of wotmania. - 22/11/2010 07:40:03 PM 627 Views
*waves* Hi! *NM* - 22/11/2010 10:17:52 PM 316 Views
Hey there! - 22/11/2010 10:30:24 PM 755 Views
A few honest answers. - 22/11/2010 10:54:30 PM 512 Views
Thanks - 22/11/2010 11:07:00 PM 524 Views
Perfectly alright. *NM* - 22/11/2010 11:12:43 PM 196 Views
A great deal of us were underage, though. - 23/11/2010 01:11:58 AM 653 Views
And look what a dirty mouth you got even without our help *NM* - 23/11/2010 08:04:06 AM 289 Views
All I can say to that is that people who think cursing on RAFO/WoTmania corrupts the youth - 23/11/2010 10:13:26 PM 551 Views
Who cares about the cursing. In other ways wotmania did probably corrupt me, though. - 23/11/2010 10:25:37 PM 601 Views
*sniggers* - 24/11/2010 02:27:22 PM 458 Views
Has anyone actually voiced that concern? - 24/11/2010 02:28:23 PM 570 Views
yes. - 22/11/2010 12:05:23 PM 506 Views
True. - 22/11/2010 06:45:58 PM 566 Views
I love how the original poster hasn't responded to any of this. - 23/11/2010 03:11:58 AM 583 Views
Probably still in shock. - 23/11/2010 01:52:01 PM 589 Views

Reply to Message