Conquer Club

I think violet is principled because she is leaving this thread without a response. She did what she did to defend female dignity. The rules don't support what she did. She is moving on.

I think she deserves all our respect.

mpjh wrote:I think violet is principled because she is leaving this thread without a response. She did what she did to defend female dignity. The rules don't support what she did. She is moving on.

I think she deserves all our respect.

owenshooter wrote:

nietzsche wrote:I like Violet and I think her name should be taken off the title.

why? she is the principal party involved that attempted to keep a member out for an avatar that team CC deemed non-offensive long ago...
i understand she is pm'ing her friends to try and end the thread and to stick up for her in the thread, but she did what she did and the community
is discussing it...-the black jesus

to my "judgemental charactere are these 2 remarks kinda contra contradictionary...but ah well wo am i to judge this

Robinette wrote:in a nutshell... some of you need to learn to be a little more tolerant of people who think differently than yourself...

thanks robinette ...since the start of this ïsseu i was looking for the right words....just knew the dutch saying : de pot verwijt de ketel dat ie zwart ziet ..so i really thank u for these words i was puzzling about ....and please note i was not the starter of being intolerant

mpjh wrote:I think violet is principled because she is leaving this thread without a response. She did what she did to defend female dignity. The rules don't support what she did. She is moving on.

I think she deserves all our respect.

thats one way u can look on it....but wenn she is really that person wo stands for her valeus its a pitty she dont even put a remark here , and also i miss an explanation why she prefers woman be looked upon like "rubber play dolls " instead of a singing lady with a cute smile ...but thats just my way of looking at some things brought up here

for the rest i can only say LX was very swift on reacting from the start so my big thanks

So indeed time to move on...just a shame wenn it really comes to a stand certain parties seem to be very quit ....so lets use this topic more for the points wich are spoken of in the last replies...omg.

Robinette wrote:I don't know violet, but after reading all this, i am inclined to want to defend her also...


in a nutshell... some of you need to learn to be a little more tolerant of people who think differently than yourself...

First sentence, ok.

In combination with the second? It blows my mind.

Do you think that Violet had any tolerance for Pascalleke, who thinks differently? Obviously not because she didnt let him play in a tournament just based on an avatar.

Keep in mind, I'm not taking a position so far. I'm just pointing out flawed reasoning.

nagerous wrote:I think alstergren is questioning whether you've fallen out big time with another user on this site but you know the player on the most part to be an honourable player and he hasn't tried to sign up to the tournament to mess with it do you still have the right to not let him join?

Indeed, that was it. I've run a few tourneys during the past 6 months. Have a few players on my foe list for various reasons. In one case, one of them was signed up. I accepted of course, I don't think my own personal foe list is an excuse to deny entry to a tourney run with TO privileges. Would be different of course if the foed player had messed with a tourney in the past or could be reasonable expected to mess with the one signed up for.

Robinette wrote:I don't know violet, but after reading all this, i am inclined to want to defend her also...

in a nutshell... some of you need to learn to be a little more tolerant of people who think differently than yourself...

You mean...like the person you're defending wasn't?

I think that is a false equivalency. Violet was defending dignity, trying to advance the principle of respect. That is a form of intolerance, but one that is not comparable to the intolerance of racism or sexism which is designed to embarrass, degrade, or ridicule.

MNDuke's avatar (let into VioIet's tourney)

pascalleke's avatar (denied entrance to VioIet's tourney)


Which is more offensive to me?

That would be: the top one. The top one. It's just wrong.

Would either of those have been a reason to stop someone from being in one of my tournaments? No.

I don't get this. Most tournaments should have the whole 'foes must be removed for this tourney' rule anyway. So a TO can say none of their foes are allowed to participate in a tourney? That rules out my friend jefjef from ever running a tourney.


Hmm I guess this whole situation doesn't make sense to me. I'd just let it go for the current situation and maybe bring up a different discussion about TOs and how much liberty they have to choose the rules for their tourney, etc.

As far as the discussion about VioIet's tourney, let's just bury it and let it go. Nothing is going to change there. But a discussion about if we should allow these types of things should be brought up, definitely.

Really, red, then you obviously don't know where the second one comes from originally.

mpjh wrote:Really, red, then you obviously don't know where the second one comes from originally.

No I don't know where it comes, therefore it doesn't affect me. Is it something bad?

yes

mpjh wrote:yes

elaborate?

mpjh wrote:Really, red, then you obviously don't know where the second one comes from originally.

doesn't matter where it comes from, it is not against CC's avatar rules and as i said before it has stood up in the C&A forum. if there were a nipple showing, he would be violating the rules and his avatar would be offensive. if you have to take an avatar's complete context to deem it offensive, a context which if it exists i doubt many would even know, you are stretching. i seriously doubt Violet took the avatars context as a reason to toss the OP out of her tourney... nice try...-the black jesus

mpjh wrote:I think that is a false equivalency. Violet was defending dignity, trying to advance the principle of respect. That is a form of intolerance, but one that is not comparable to the intolerance of racism or sexism which is designed to embarrass, degrade, or ridicule.

serious ...u also say a lot without even realizing u say nothing at all...how do u call it ....even wenn u got proof thrown for ur feet u just ignore this?

its obvious she measures with 2 standards or its rather normal that a avatar wich compares woman with rubber F**** dolls is less unfriendly to woman then a singing lady with a nice rack

so bfr u go on a stand just think for 2 minutes if u have enough backbone to support ur words

InsomniaRed wrote: MNDuke's avatar (let into VioIet's tourney)

pascalleke's avatar (denied entrance to VioIet's tourney)


Which is more offensive to me?

That would be: the top one. The top one. It's just wrong.

Would either of those have been a reason to stop someone from being in one of my tournaments? No.

I don't get this. Most tournaments should have the whole 'foes must be removed for this tourney' rule anyway. So a TO can say none of their foes are allowed to participate in a tourney? That rules out my friend jefjef from ever running a tourney.


Hmm I guess this whole situation doesn't make sense to me. I'd just let it go for the current situation and maybe bring up a different discussion about TOs and how much liberty they have to choose the rules for their tourney, etc.

As far as the discussion about VioIet's tourney, let's just bury it and let it go. Nothing is going to change there. But a discussion about if we should allow these types of things should be brought up, definitely.

totally agree

mpjh wrote:Really, red, then you obviously don't know where the second one comes from originally.

omg ...prove please bcs ur supposing something .....so i am very curious surprise me .....pleeeeeeeeeeeeease

Can this thread please be locked, the matter has been dealt with. If you want to discuss what TO's can and can't do then make a new thread which doesn't centre around VioIet.

sdh wrote:Can this thread please be locked, the matter has been dealt with. If you want to discuss what TO's can and can't do then make a new thread which doesn't centre around VioIet.

do we live in a dictatorship?
maybee u can tell her she needs to understand that she must live and face the consequences in wich way she acts in life and here

pascalleke wrote:

sdh wrote:Can this thread please be locked, the matter has been dealt with. If you want to discuss what TO's can and can't do then make a new thread which doesn't centre around VioIet.

do we live in a dictatorship?
maybee u can tell her she needs to understand that she must live and face the consequences in wich way she acts in life and here

She is using her own free time to run a tournament for the community. She didn't want you to join because she was offended by your avatar. She was then told she couldn't do this. I think you should be grateful she is still running the tournament.

I like your avatar.

I'm still curious as to where the avatar came from.

pascalleke can tell you if he wants to reveal personal information about where he surfs

mpjh wrote:pascalleke can tell you if he wants to reveal personal information about where he surfs

well i got it from a avatar site ...nothing more or less...maybee u spend to much time urself at some sites u presume i have been at?


Thanks for the big smile

as i said before u say nothing with many words....u can only proof to me that u are the way u are ....

sdh wrote:Can this thread please be locked, the matter has been dealt with. If you want to discuss what TO's can and can't do then make a new thread which doesn't centre around VioIet.

i love violet's friends coming in and attempting to get this thread locked. it is on topic and valid... she did the action, she can handle the discussion...-the black jesus

i have known of the avatar for a very long time as it is an av on another gamesite

btw, i have watched it intently for ages trying to guess at her words, then compared them with my friends, male and female - we still don't agree on what is sung

but this is the first time i have heard that gif is degrading to women

please explain its background so we may understand

afterall most people i know enjoy coffee but if it is pointed out to them the beans come from a rainforest degrading environment they cease to buy that coffee

give us the opportunity to be equally concious of our environment

pascalleke wrote:

mpjh wrote:pascalleke can tell you if he wants to reveal personal information about where he surfs

well i got it from a avatar site ...nothing more or less...maybee u spend to much time urself at some sites u presume i have been at?


Thanks for the big smile

as i said before u say nothing with many words....u can only proof to me that u are the way u are ....

Notice no url reference.

mpjh wrote:

pascalleke wrote:

mpjh wrote:pascalleke can tell you if he wants to reveal personal information about where he surfs

well i got it from a avatar site ...nothing more or less...maybee u spend to much time urself at some sites u presume i have been at?


Thanks for the big smile

as i said before u say nothing with many words....u can only proof to me that u are the way u are ....

Notice no url reference.

bcs i put it on my pc .....really u have a mirror? look at urself and ur weak words wo crumble down more and more ...and i wonder why u still keep on this ?? notice that ....

really u make me laugh more and more so keep up the good work ....

ps i can give u some url of real porn sites if u like? even dutch ones ...love them

there we go truth is out