Wtf

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



A.J
Why was angie banned, being my sock, what bull where is the proof ???

ladygrim
who ??

~Da Moose~
wut?

Syren
Originally posted by A.J
Why was angie banned, being my sock, what bull where is the proof ???

Weren't you banned? Time sure does fly when you're having fun (on a forum free from idiots).

A.J
wee_ang, she is banned as my sock i mean WTF how why ??

SelphieT
when?

SelphieT
Originally posted by A.J
wee_ang, she is banned as my sock i mean WTF how why ??

I'm sorry my dear, that sounds very sucky. I have no idea why.

Syren
Originally posted by A.J
wee_ang, she is banned as my sock i mean WTF how why ??

Well, obviously someone with the means did a sock check and either found you/her guilty of deception or they were just having a bad day. Which do you think is more likely?

~Da Rev~
Originally posted by A.J
wee_ang, she is banned as my sock i mean WTF how why ?? Are you that stupid?


SOCKS ARE NOT ALLOWED


its as simple as that. Now please, leave me to my business.

*kills syren*

evillaugh

The Pict
hey AJ good to see you back. sorry about your pal, maybe there was a mistake.

A.J
well shes not my sock, my mate marvel prince will verify he was talking to both of us !!

i am complaining to raz or whoever

~Da Moose~
Originally posted by Syren
Well, obviously someone with the means did a sock check and either found you/her guilty of deception or they were just having a bad day. Which do you think is more likely?

That monkeys could run nations with a fair amount of success?

Was that one of the options?

A.J
posibly but the mods here seem like monkeys with the bannign for no reason of wee ang

~Da Moose~
Originally posted by A.J
posibly but the mods here seem like monkeys with the bannign for no reason of wee ang

Actually, I wasn't referring to the mods....well, except WD, because, I know for a fact that he is a highly trained chimpanzee. But as for the rest, they are pretty good...and if they banned someone, I assume it was for a good reason.

A.J
good reason, for being my sock when shes not, she spoke on here when i was away for a week, ill ask them to check the ID of the pcs or whatever cause they will see she is not a sock

HellMaster93
WTF!? Ang's your girlfriend, isnt she? AJ'ss on the same time as her LOADS!!!!

Vinny Valentine
Originally posted by HellMaster93
WTF!? Ang's your girlfriend, isnt she? AJ'ss on the same time as her LOADS!!!!

You Can be on at the same time and have a Sock. Two Computers, Thats how I did it when I socked.

FG725
Originally posted by HellMaster93
WTF!? Ang's your girlfriend, isnt she? AJ'ss on the same time as her LOADS!!!!
or is he his own girlfriend but if that was the case he would've been banned as well

Syren
laughing

That's how we all did it Vinny, ah, those were the days...

Syren
Originally posted by HellMaster93
WTF!? Ang's your girlfriend, isnt she? AJ'ss on the same time as her LOADS!!!!

Maybe the Powers That Be don't want conspiratorial partnerships roaming the boards?

JaehSkywalker
Originally posted by A.J
Why was angie banned, being my sock, what bull where is the proof ???

who what when where why??

Syren
READ THE THREAD JAEH stick out tongue

JaehSkywalker
knows the who, the rest not...

>hehehe< i guess i shoulda read it first..

but it's too many and too long!! >,<

Syren
2 pages?? Well, one and a half... lazy bum stick out tongue

A.J
raz is head mod right, i am gonna PM him mad

$noopbert
Originally posted by Vinny Valentine
You Can be on at the same time and have a Sock. Two Computers, Thats how I did it when I socked. laughing You only need two different broswer installs.

Also, it's possible they created it on the same computer.

A.J
lol i tell you she aint a sock, they got no proof, its all crap i tell you

natashia
huh i don't understand what do you mean sock?
like the one a person wears on their foot?
huh????

Scottie
Someone got banned for wearing a SOCK!!!!!!


*quickly takes off socks and hides them down back of sofa*

that was close

Punkyhermy
lol.

Look who decides to show up?

Xavius
I guess Sock Checkers lie now.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
I guess Sock Checkers lie now. I was once blamed for socking by a mod without a sock check actually being performed. ermm

Scottie
ive checked my socks...there real big grin

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
I was once blamed for socking by a mod without a sock check actually being performed. ermm

You were blamed, not banned like AJ's friend here.

Unless they banned his friend without sock checking and did it on suspicion.

Somehow . . . I doubt that.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
You were blamed, not banned like AJ's friend here.

Unless they banned his friend without sock checking and did it on suspicion.

Somehow . . . I doubt that. I was already banned at the time.

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
I was already banned at the time.

Yeah, well then you pretty much got pwnt.

And it must've been damn apparent if they banned you without checking.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
Yeah, well then you pretty much got pwnt.

And it must've been damn apparent if they banned you without checking. No dipshit, I had been permenantly banned for a year before. I was blamed for socking by a global who didnt make a sock check rather openly, and it almost got me banned on another forum, an example of a moderator taking action before thinking it through. Clear enough for you?

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
No dipshit, I had been permenantly banned for a year before. I was blamed for socking by a global who didnt make a sock check rather openly, and it almost got me banned on another forum, an example of a moderator taking action before thinking it through. Clear enough for you?


Are you a complete moron, Snoopbert?

I just said it must've BEEN APPARENT because you were banned without a SOCK CHECK.

^ Don't just look at it this time, see it and learn it.

LanceWindu
Originally posted by A.J
Why was angie banned, being my sock, what bull where is the proof ???

Very original thread title. roll eyes (sarcastic)

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
Are you a complete moron, Snoopbert?

I just said it must've BEEN APPARENT because you were banned without a SOCK CHECK.

^ Don't just look at it this time, see it and learn it.

Oh jesus christ. Are you a complete moron Xavius? How hard is it to get it through your head that the moderator accused it of being me without any evidence, and a sock check later turned out that it had nothing to do with my long-banned account? eek! Hey, genius, maybe that means I wasn't him! eek! eek!

Bloigen
Originally posted by natashia
huh i don't understand what do you mean sock?
like the one a person wears on their foot?
huh????

http://www.picpop.com/gallery/albums/userpics/Stupid/bobs-stupid.jpg

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
Oh jesus christ. Are you a complete moron Xavius? How hard is it to get it through your head that the moderator accused it of being me without any evidence, and a sock check later turned out that it had nothing to do with my long-banned account? eek! Hey, genius, maybe that means I wasn't him! eek! eek!

Okay, it's become obvious I'm going to have to tattoo it backwards onto your forward so you can look at it everytime you glance at your ugly face in the mirror . . .

READ THE FOLLOWING POST VERY CAREFULLY:

Originally posted by Xavius
Yeah, well then you pretty much got pwnt.

And it must've been damn apparent if they banned you without checking.

Let me expand this for you:

- The Mod pwned you because you were banned without reassurance.
- It was apparent the Mod THOUGHT you were a sock.
- I said they banned you without checking.

Did I ever say the Mod accused you WITH Evidence?

Did I ever blame you FOR being a sock?


DO YOU GET IT YET?

TOH
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/gay5.jpg

Bloigen
Originally posted by TOH
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/gay5.jpg

Where does that milk come from? sick

Xavius
Originally posted by TOH
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/gay5.jpg

Sorry, I only drink 2%.


eek!

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
Okay, it's become obvious I'm going to have to tattoo it backwards onto your forward so you can look at it everytime you glance at your ugly face in the mirror . . .

READ THE FOLLOWING POST VERY CAREFULLY:



Let me expand this for you:

- The Mod pwned you because you were banned without reassurance.
- It was apparent the Mod THOUGHT you were a sock.
- I said they banned you without checking.

Did I ever say the Mod accused you WITH Evidence?

Did I ever blame you FOR being a sock?


DO YOU GET IT YET? lol

LanceWindu
Originally posted by Xavius
Sorry, I only drink 2%.


eek!

Where does the other 98% Homo go?

$noopbert
Originally posted by LanceWindu
Where does the other 98% Homo go? laughing

TOH
Originally posted by Bloigen
Where does that milk come from? sick
herbwank

Xavius
Originally posted by LanceWindu
Where does the other 98% Homo go?

Onto you! eek! laughing

TOH
Originally posted by LanceWindu
Where does the other 98% Homo go?
laughing out loud

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
lol

Originally posted by Xavius
"In message boards, a reply with emotions only usually results in that person having limited intelligence, zero creativity and honestly nothing better to say for a comeback"

Bloigen
Originally posted by LanceWindu
Where does the other 98% Homo go?

Hollywood?

ZING!

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
Would you prefer it if I posted *Cannot help but find your innate stupidity amusing, so decides to laugh out loud*?

LanceWindu
Originally posted by Xavius
Onto you! eek! laughing

Oh yes, you owned me there.

Xavius
Originally posted by LanceWindu
Oh yes, you owned me there.

I didn't try to . . .

My purpose is only to state the facts.

LanceWindu
Originally posted by Xavius
I didn't try to . . .

My purpose is only to state the facts.

To state the facts of which you did no research on? You're beginning to sound like a politician.

Xavius
Originally posted by LanceWindu
To state the facts of which you did no research on? You're beginning to sound like a politician.

The facts are visually apparent.


laughing

Storm
Originally posted by A.J
well shes not my sock, my mate marvel prince will verify he was talking to both of us !!

i am complaining to raz or whoever
Originally posted by A.J
posibly but the mods here seem like monkeys with the bannign for no reason of wee ang
It was Raz who banned her, so you can take this into account when you bring your grievance to him, and have a word with him.


Ceterum censeo OTF esse delendam.

Lana
Actually, Xavius, Snoopbert's situation is quite complex and you do have no understanding of it whatsoever stick out tongue

TOH
Originally posted by Storm
It was Raz who banned her, so you can take this into account when you bring your grievance to him, and have a word with him.


Ceterum censeo OTF esse delendam.
STORM! eek!

$noopbert
Originally posted by Lana
Actually, Xavius, Snoopbert's situation is quite complex and you do have no understanding of it whatsoever stick out tongue eek!

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
Actually, Xavius, Snoopbert's situation is quite complex and you do have no understanding of it whatsoever stick out tongue

LOL!

I'm sorry, when did I try to understand the situation?

Let me explain this to you as well. This is getting boring . . .



^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

LanceWindu
Originally posted by Xavius
LOL!

I'm sorry, when did I try to understand the situation?

Let me explain this to you as well. This is getting boring . . .



^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

eek! And they were wrong! eek!

I don't see why it's any of your business anyways.

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
LOL!

I'm sorry, when did I try to understand the situation?

Let me explain this to you as well. This is getting boring . . .



^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

And....that's not all of the story by half!

You don't know what happened, you weren't even a member when it all started. Okay?

$noopbert
^ If they banned him without sock checking, it was apparent to them that he was a sock.

I was already banned, they couldn't ban me for being a sock in the first place.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
And....that's not all of the story by half!

You don't know what happened, you weren't even a member when it all started. Okay?

I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. stick out tongue

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. smile

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. stick out tongue

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. smile

He wasn't banned for something he didn't do. He was nearly banned for something he didn't do.

The initial ban had nothing to do with that at all. Which was said already a few times.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. stick out tongue

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. smile Your lifeboat seems to be... sinking. ermm

LanceWindu
Originally posted by Xavius
I wouldn't want to be a member if I was being banned for something I didn't do. stick out tongue

The whole story wasn't given to me. I just elaborated on what I was given. smile

Then don't read into things if you don't have the full story. Simple as that.

Xavius
Originally posted by LanceWindu
Then don't read into things if you don't have the full story. Simple as that.

Everyone makes their mistakes. You've done the same before, I'm sure.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
He wasn't banned for something he didn't do. He was nearly banned for something he didn't do.

The initial ban had nothing to do with that at all. Which was said already a few times.

Ah, well he said previously he was permanently banned from the forums.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
Ah, well he said previously he was permanently banned from the forums. These forums.

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
Ah, well he said previously he was permanently banned from the forums.

Yes, but the socking incident had nothing to do with it at all.

Xavius
Oh, damn . . . I misunderstood.

But yeah, I basically said if a Moderator had banned you for socking and didn't do a sock check under fair, unbiased circumstance, then it would be apparent that you WERE a sock.

My point still stands.

TOH
offtobed

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
Oh, damn . . . I misunderstood.

But yeah, I basically said if a Moderator had banned you for socking and didn't do a sock check under fair, unbiased circumstance, then it would be apparent that you WERE a sock.

My point still stands.

And your point is wrong.

Someone had created an account and was spamming the forums, and due to certain actions, Snoopbert was accused with no evidence. However, it wasn't him.

You can be accused of socking and NOT be a sock, and you can be banned for it without actually being one.

And he wasn't banned for socking.

Barker
Originally posted by A.J
Why was angie banned, being my sock, what bull where is the proof ???
No one cares.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
And your point is wrong.

Someone had created an account and was spamming the forums, and due to certain actions, Snoopbert was accused with no evidence. However, it wasn't him.

You can be accused of socking and NOT be a sock, and you can be banned for it without actually being one.

And he wasn't banned for socking.

How can you say my point is wrong? What you're explaining is irrelevant . . . Again.

I already said I misunderstood. I changed the topic, if that wasn't apparent to you.

I said

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
How can you say my point is wrong? What you're explaining is irrelevant . . . Again.

I already said I misunderstood. I changed the topic, if that wasn't apparent to you.

I said

And that point is wrong. Getting banned because you were accused of being a sock yet it was never checked does NOT mean you are a sock.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
And that point is wrong. Getting banned because you were accused of being a sock yet it was never checked does NOT mean you are a sock.

Oh my god . . . You did it again. My point is far from wrong.

Read, please:



^ Let me explain. I never said you were 100% definitely a sock if a Moderator banned you without sock checking. I said it would be APPARENT that you were.

Do you understand yet?

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
Oh my god . . . You did it again. My point is far from wrong.

Read, please:



^ Let me explain. I never said you were 100% definitely a sock if a Moderator banned you without sock checking. I said it would be APPARENT that you were.

Do you understand yet?

How is it apparent that you are a sock?

It's not at all.

$noopbert
I bet Xavius is a sock of LTA.

Lana
Originally posted by $noopbert
I bet Xavius is a sock of LTA.

laughing

$noopbert
Originally posted by Lana
laughing ermm Just an unbiased guesstimate. It must be tr000!!

TOH
Originally posted by $noopbert
I bet Xavius is a sock of LTA.
4 dollars say he is Akilla's sock pimp

$noopbert
Originally posted by TOH
4 dollars say he is Akilla's sock pimp I think you might be right.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
How is it apparent that you are a sock?

It's not at all.

You've got to be kidding me . . .


Okay:

If a Moderator bans you without sock checking and the circumstances are unbiased by that Moderator, it is apparent TO HIM that YOU ARE a sock.

DO YOU get it YET?

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
You've got to be kidding me . . .


Okay:

If a Moderator bans you without sock checking and the circumstances are unbiased by that Moderator, it is apparent TO HIM that YOU ARE a sock.

DO YOU get it YET?

What if it's a biased situation?

$noopbert
Originally posted by Lana
What if it's a biased situation? We both know that the moderator is perfect in everyway.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
What if it's a biased situation?

From the post I made and repeated a hundred times, I was making it clear that usually Moderators ban someone without sock checking when they are almost exactly sure that the member is indeed a sock.

And I wasn't referring to unbiased situations.

If it biased, then what a naughty Mod. If not, who cares. That wasn't what I was talking about.

$noopbert
"usually Moderators ban someone without sock checking when they are almost exactly sure that the member is indeed a sock."

Wrong. They don't. They get proof first, and I'm pretty certain every ban is discussed in the lair first.

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
From the post I made and repeated a hundred times, I was making it clear that usually Moderators ban someone without sock checking when they are almost exactly sure that the member is indeed a sock.

And I wasn't referring to unbiased situations.

If it biased, then what a naughty Mod. If not, who cares. That wasn't what I was talking about.

Well, even when it IS apparent that someone is a sock we are not supposed to take any action unless the sock check comes up positive. Someone is not to be banned as a sock unless there is proof.

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
usually Moderators ban someone without sock checking when they are almost exactly sure that the member is indeed a sock.

Wrong. They don't. They get proof first, and I'm pretty certain every ban is discussed in the lair first.


I'm game.


They get proof to make sure that they're almost exactly sure that the member is indeed a sock.

If they had proof then . . . *GASP* They wouldn't need to sock check and they would almost be exactly sure that the member was indeed a sock.

Getting proof would be a part of what I stated . . .


G'job.

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
I'm game.


They get proof to make sure that they're almost exactly sure that the member is indeed a sock.

If they had proof then . . . *GASP* They wouldn't need to sock check and they would almost be exactly sure that the member was indeed a sock.

Getting proof would be a part of what I stated . . .


G'job.

There are only TWO things allowed as proof.

- A confession from the member who is believed to be a sock
- A positive sock check.

That is IT. Nothing else.

I am a mod. I know what I'm talking about, even though I myself do not have the power to ban people, I still can catch socks.

$noopbert
No amount of posting the same nonsensical BS will make it true. She's the mod. I'm pretty certain she knows what she is talking about. eek!

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
Well, even when it IS apparent that someone is a sock we are not supposed to take any action unless the sock check comes up positive. Someone is not to be banned as a sock unless there is proof.

But some people don't sock check because they think that they're sure, but they should check, of course.

I don't know what that had to do with it . . . confused

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
There are only TWO things allowed as proof.

- A confession from the member who is believed to be a sock
- A positive sock check.

That is IT. Nothing else.

I am a mod. I know what I'm talking about, even though I myself do not have the power to ban people, I still can catch socks.

Okay, I'm game again.



Who said there was more proof than that? Hell, who said that wasn't the only proof?

You just stated the obvious.

TOH
Originally posted by $noopbert
No amount of posting the same onsensical BS will make it true. She's the mod. I'm pretty certain she knows what she is talking about. eek!
it's a mantra eek!

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
No amount of posting the same nonsensical BS will make it true. She's the mod. I'm pretty certain she knows what she is talking about. eek!

Make what true? Holy jesus . . .

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
Okay, I'm game again.



Who said there was more proof than that? Hell, who said that wasn't the only proof?

You just stated the obvious.

You're saying that it's okay to ban someone if the mod is sure that they're a sock but has no proof. Without one - or both - of those things, there is no proof and thus that person cannot be banned. Even if they are acting exactly like a banned member, they cannot be banned unless there is proof - in the form of a confession or positive sock check - that they are indeed a sock.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
Make what true? Holy jesus . . . The nonsensical bullshit you constantly post. Duh.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
You're saying that it's okay to ban someone if the mod is sure that they're a sock but has no proof. Without one - or both - of those things, there is no proof and thus that person cannot be banned. Even if they are acting exactly like a banned member, they cannot be banned because there is no proof that they are indeed a sock.

I said it was okay to ban someone if the mod is sure that they're a sock but they have no proof?

Where did I say that? Show me the post that I said it was okay to ban someone if they thought they were a sock but didn't sock check.

And yes, you've managed to state the obvious again.

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
The nonsensical bullshit you constantly post. Duh.

It's funny watching people when they have no idea what they're talking about.


*Stares at Snoopbert.*

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
It's funny watching people when they have no idea what they're talking about.


*Stares at Snoopbert.* Oh the irony.

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
Oh the irony.

And . . .

Originally posted by Xavius
It's funny watching people when they have no idea what they're talking about.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
And . . . It's ironic because you keep spewing bullshit about things you have no clue about. It's actually rather humorous.

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
I said it was okay to ban someone if the mod is sure that they're a sock but they have no proof?

Where did I say that? Show me the post that I said it was okay to ban someone if they thought they were a sock but didn't sock check.

And yes, you've managed to state the obvious again.



Which is not true at all. Sock check or confession is the only proof that can be allowed. Being 'sure' is not acceptable.

As I said -- I am a moderator and I do know what I'm talking about.

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
Which is not true at all. Sock check or confession is the only proof that can be allowed. Being 'sure' is not acceptable.

As I said -- I am a moderator and I do know what I'm talking about.

I did not say it was okay to ban someone if they didn't sock check and thought they were sure.

I didn't say that at all, actually. The words "Okay" were never there.

Hell, I didn't say it was right to do that, either. I said that's usually what happens. You've misinterpreted.

I said usually Mods ban a member they're sure it's a sock. Through confessions, suspicion . . . Whatever.

I've seen it happen before. I'm an Admin/Mod too, y'know. stick out tongue

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
It's ironic because you keep spewing bullshit about things you have no clue about. It's actually rather humorous.

I find it humorous when people can't think for themselves and have no sense for OR of debate.


*Not referring to anything.*

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
I did not say it was okay to ban someone if they didn't sock check and thought they were sure.

I didn't say that at all, actually. The words "Okay" were never there.

Hell, I didn't say it was right to do that, either. I said that's usually what happens. You've misinterpreted.

I said usually Mods ban a member they're sure it's a sock. Through confessions, suspicion . . . Whatever.

I've seen it happen before. I'm an Admin/Mod too, y'know. stick out tongue

However, suspicion does not cut it. As I have said.

The entire site can suspect you're a sock but without proof nothing can be done.

Originally posted by Xavius
I find it humorous when people can't think for themselves and have no sense for OR of debate.


*Not referring to anything.*

I would say he knows what he's talking about much more than you do.

Dusty
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/denmah/16h7mnm1vx3.jpg

TOH
Originally posted by Dusty
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/denmah/16h7mnm1vx3.jpg
No.. not again Dustin.. erm

Xavius
Originally posted by Lana
However, suspicion does not cut it. As I have said.

The entire site can suspect you're a sock but without proof nothing can be done.



I would say he knows what he's talking about much more than you do.

You did not answer my question:

Where does it say that I said it was okay for Mods to ban someone if they have not sock-checked and just THINK that the member is a sock?

I'd love to see the post where I said that.


Oh, of course. But I've seen it before where bans have happened without sock checks. Alot of Moderators sometimes do that without checking. It's bullshit, though, because they could be making a mistake.

$noopbert
Originally posted by Xavius
I find it humorous when people can't think for themselves and have no sense for OR of debate.


*Not referring to anything.* I do think for myself, I butt heads with Lana all the time. Well, occasionally. I'd rather not think for myself and have a smart person thinking for me then think on my own and be a dumbass.

Xavius
Originally posted by $noopbert
I do think for myself, I butt heads with Lana all the time. Well, occasionally. I'd rather not think for myself and have a smart person thinking for me then think on my own and be a dumbass.

Or . . . You could have others think for you because you *ARE* a dumbass. That sounds more logically correct to me! eek!

Still not referring to anything . . . .


laughing

A.J
LOL this is good, somone argueing with a mod about what mods are and arent allowed to do laughing

Xavius
Originally posted by A.J
LOL this is good, somone argueing with a mod about what mods are and arent allowed to do laughing

You know what? I think you need to rendered into restriction again.

Lana was just being argumentive. I didn't say anything to argue against a Mod. I said sometimes Mods ban people without sock checking.


"Sometimes, Mods ban people without sock checking because they think it's obviously a sock."

^ If you don't think that's ever happened, you're an idiot.

If you DO think it's happened, you're still an idiot.

DarkC
Originally posted by $noopbert
No dipshit, I had been permenantly banned for a year before. I was blamed for socking by a global who didnt make a sock check rather openly, and it almost got me banned on another forum, an example of a moderator taking action before thinking it through. Clear enough for you?
Must we offend the sensibilities of more cultured people here by random, unprecedented name-calling?

Lana
Originally posted by Xavius
You know what? I think you need to rendered into restriction again.

Lana was just being argumentive. I didn't say anything to argue against a Mod. I said sometimes Mods ban people without sock checking.


"Sometimes, Mods ban people without sock checking because they think it's obviously a sock."

^ If you don't think that's ever happened, you're an idiot.

If you DO think it's happened, you're still an idiot.

And I was saying that on here, that DOESN'T happen.

Maybe other sites, but not here.

Okay?

DarkC
Originally posted by Lana
And I was saying that on here, that DOESN'T happen.
Well, I thought Team Mir's socks were pretty obvious, back in the summer of '05...

$noopbert
What about Team Rims?

RogerRamjet
Originally posted by Dusty
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/denmah/16h7mnm1vx3.jpg

that's a russian fridge...no expression

DarkC
Originally posted by $noopbert
What about Team Rims?
Never heard of them.




Also, when Sorgo was making all those socks of his before he retired from KMC...I actually would be surprised if the mods did feel the necessity to use a sock check.

$noopbert
Team Rim... eh... nevermind.

Raz
Originally posted by A.J
Why was angie banned, being my sock, what bull where is the proof ??? We have tools to figure this out.

You can only blame yourself for misbehaving and making us do these checks.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.