Conquer Club

Posted: **Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:05 pm**

wcaclimbing wrote:Just thought it'd be good to point out that NO has almost twice as many votes as YES.

just thought i'd point out that at this point there aren't even 75 vote... however, this is obviously a clear cut majority of the forum users on CC :roll:

...-0

Posted: **Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:30 pm**

It would be nice if there was a thread where you could say whatever you want. It could be called, "say whatever you want". Very creative I know, I thought of it myself. Anyway, until that happens I'll have to amuse myself by complaining about it. Once we get it I probably won't have anything to say though. Wait... what does that mean. Is there no meaning to life? What about marvin...

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:33 am**

Georgerx7di wrote:Is there no meaning to life?

What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:48 am**

Optimus Prime wrote:
GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:
The Neon Peon wrote:
GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:What we want is to be able to have a thread, where we can voice our outrage at players and even about moderators who seem too sensitive to criticism.

If that is what you want, then make a usergroup.

We don't want a "usergroup," we want FLAME WARS back!

Well, GENERAL STONEHAM, that is not going to happen. It doesn't matter how much you stomp your feet or raise your voice, Flame Wars is gone for good. The atmosphere as well as the encouragement it provided for trolls and abusive users is not worth having continue. It really is that simple.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:56 am**

I posted regularly in FW. I'm sad to see it go. If the site wants to get rid of it that's fair enough and I have no grumble with that.

However, at the top of where I'm writing it says "Please read the community guidelines before posting." What community? Is that how a community works - just removing the forum with no discussion? It is the arbitrariness of the move that has upset me. I now have no faith in "the community", as it is obviously not going to give me a chance to express myself. I certainly won't recommend this site to other people I know. What does an explanation cost? It's the lack of basic courtesy that I rail against.

xela

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:18 am**

Georgerx7di wrote:It would be nice if there was a thread where you could say whatever you want. It could be called, "say whatever you want". Very creative I know, I thought of it myself. Anyway, until that happens I'll have to amuse myself by complaining about it. Once we get it I probably won't have anything to say though. Wait... what does that mean. Is there no meaning to life? What about marvin...

You can say whatever you want now. The real issue is how you say it. Just be polite, use english, and use words you would use in an interview on television that you mother was watching.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:58 am**

xelabale wrote:What does an explanation cost?

One click on announcements.

hyasri wrote:We have given this a lot of thought and consideration and agree that Flame Wars no longer fits into the future vision for the site. It was becoming more clear that the flames were spilling out of that forum and taking up more moderation time to sort out.

We were also concerned about the unfriendly atmosphere this was generating for new people. I realise this will be an unpopular move with some of you, but I can assure you a lot of thought has gone into this.

xelabale wrote:It is obviously not going to give me a chance to express myself.

It doesn't appear that the difficulty expressing yourself has been manifested yet.

xelabale wrote:If the site wants to get rid of it that's fair enough and I have no grumble with that. [...] I certainly won't recommend this site to other people I know.

Fair enough indeed... flame wars certainly wasn't a reason to recommend this site to anyone.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:02 am**

ovo, they got rid of flame wars and only bothered to give us an explanation 5 days later.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:07 am**

Yup, they sure did.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:09 am**

which is exactly his complaint, they got rid of flame wars without discussing it with any of us and only told us about it 5 days later

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:16 am**

FredVIII wrote:they got rid of flame wars and only bothered to give us an explanation 5 days later.

In that case, I declare the removal of Flame Wars to be null, and/or void.

Carry on.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:18 am**

Timminz wrote:
FredVIII wrote:they got rid of flame wars and only bothered to give us an explanation 5 days later.

In that case, I declare the removal of Flame Wars to be null, and/or void.

Carry on.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:19 am**

FW was down to a few regular posters, and I have no evidence that the admins did not talk to some or all of those poster before eliminating FW.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:25 am**

xelabale wrote:I posted regularly in FW. I'm sad to see it go. If the site wants to get rid of it that's fair enough and I have no grumble with that.

However, at the top of where I'm writing it says "Please read the community guidelines before posting." What community? Is that how a community works - just removing the forum with no discussion? It is the arbitrariness of the move that has upset me. I now have no faith in "the community", as it is obviously not going to give me a chance to express myself. I certainly won't recommend this site to other people I know. What does an explanation cost? It's the lack of basic courtesy that I rail against.

xela

I would never have recommended this site to anyone while the Flamer Wars forum was still here.

Now that it's gone, I might.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:43 am**

FredVIII wrote:which is exactly his complaint, they got rid of flame wars and only told us about it 5 days later

Um Fred... his complaint is exactly one week after an explaination was posted.

FredVIII wrote:They got rid of flame wars without discussing it with any of us.

I doubt they discussed creating this site with you (plural) before going online. So I'm not all that surprised by the lack of debate before this decision was made.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:55 am**

oVo wrote:
FredVIII wrote:which is exactly his complaint, they got rid of flame wars and only told us about it 5 days later

Um Fred... his complaint is exactly one week after an explaination was posted.
Irrelevant - if there'd been a discussion then I'd complained after that would be relevant. The point is not that it was done, rather the way it was done. An explanation 5 days after is not sufficient. This is supposed to be a community. It shows lack of respect and disregard for the users who are ultimately the reason the owners are making money.

FredVIII wrote:They got rid of flame wars without discussing it with any of us.

I doubt they discussed creating this site with you (plural) before going online. So I'm not all that surprised by the lack of debate before this decision was made.

I hadn't paid $25 at that point. Or joined the community.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:07 pm**

Do you think maybe they thought it would not be missed if nothing was said?

Thing is this is a community and not a democracy. But in the event of an election for a new Grand Poobah the fans of FlameWars can cast the appropriate ballot to make all desenting opinions known.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:28 pm**

Why is is this debate still raging? See my last post for information on why this thread is full of moot points.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:28 pm**

There is no debate raging, the diehards are just getting their just ending.

Posted: **Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:38 pm**

Here we go with same the same posters, saying it's over...over and over and over and over again.

Still here after my third banning, by people who are way too sensitive to any type of criticism.

Posted: **Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:47 pm**

GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Here we go with same the same posters, saying it's over...over and over and over and over again.

I finally get it. You're a parody. It's genius. I can't believe it took me so long to see it. Bravo! =D>

Posted: **Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:51 pm**

I need FW back
mod edit

Posted: **Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:57 am**

Gerazan wrote:I need FW back

I still have lots of Muslims and Gays to denegrate

Why? That seems very wrong. I think you missed the point. Nowhere was more equal than FW - everyone was insulted, with their consent. You wouldn't've been welcome in FW with that attitude, and you're not welcome here. What if my kids see this...?

Posted: **Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:13 am**

Timminz wrote:
GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:Here we go with same the same posters, saying it's over...over and over and over and over again.

I finally get it. You're a parody. It's genius. I can't believe it took me so long to see it. Bravo!

The parody is this...if I posted the above post, the administrators would ban me AGAIN. You on the other hand, think in lockstep with the authorities, so you can FLAME ME and others.

This is quite absurd, that you can stalk anyone who professes any love for the ole Flame Wars. It's called baiting!

This sickening and unfair.

Back from my third banning.

Posted: **Wed Apr 15, 2009 7:33 am**

I think he was trying to compliment you.

Conquer Club

Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: You're too sexy for your shirt.

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: The Lack of Debate... heh!

Re: The Lack of Debate... heh!

Re: Lack of Debate?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?

Re: Should we revive the Flame wars?