Conquer Club

Please help me & the other players with a list of names & words we cannot use so we can stay out of the CC dog house...... I know ASSCLOWNS is not allowed. What are the others???????????????????

"Panties in a wad"

Though "knickers in a twist" is fine

Any use of a word in it's derogatory meaning, including but not limited to: racist words, homophobic statements, insulting and self esteem crushing statements, and any "foul language" directed at someone who can't take it.

Subject: Bill Cosby Vs. Barack Obama

Timminz wrote:

King Berzerker wrote:

God Emperor Q wrote:Its just his nature. He probably lives alone and is filled with such bitterness that he just can't use on anyone else.

i think maybe timmonz is on welfare.

Wow Emperor. Where the fuck did you come from? Did my posts make you feel stupid, or something? Don't be shy little fella. Let it all out. You'll feel much better after a bit of a cry. At least, that's what your whore of a mother tells me.

You definitely can't say that.

I believe the key ingredient is how the word is used.

When it is used in flaming someone, ie an obvious personal attack, than that is flaming, and subject to discipline.

In other words, you can probably say, damn thats a bitch, but you cant say, youre a bitch.

its the personal flaming that will get you into trouble.

My guess is, you can say "panties in wad, and probably get away with it such as, man, these dice get my panties in a wad...but if directed at someone, it would be flaming, and subject to action.

Obviously, a great number of things on CC will have a great number of ideas and opinions, and differing opinions do sometimes lead to personal conflict, but that doesnt mean that the conversations need be stopped of course, only that the personal attacks within them do.

I think its fairly obvious to be honest. Perhaps its not as fun, and perhaps it lacks some flair and even some creativity at times, but its really not that hard to counter someones point without flaming them personally. Unfortunately, it got so out of hand and was so out of hand for so long, that people just got used to such behavior, which is why the change is so difficult for some to accept.

If you really look at the number of threads, the number of posts, and people posting them... the number of warnings and bans seems quite small... and while we cant always know exactly why someone got banned, not everyone is surprised in every case.

The main problem, is the word flaming. I honestly have no outside internet knowledge outside of CC. I never knew what any of the terms were that I use so frequently. So no flaming, is somewhat vague. Myself, have always assumed it meant obvious personal attacks, including vulgarity, severity, and certainly anything in the bigotry category. Its the direct personal attacks that seem to cause the most trouble, and possibly rightfully so, and certainly rightfully so, in the case of bigotry, as nearly everyone on the site agreed with.

So, discuss, argue, argue passionately. Question the ideas and opinions of others, because this is a forum and thats what a forum is for. But, if someone disagrees with you, that doesnt mean you can launch a personal assault in real life, or in here.
Again, theres no way to know exactly what will be banned, and what wont be, but on the other hand, 99.67% seem to be able to post without getting banned.

Its very easy to disagree with an opinion, without personal attacks, and without profanity... so just do that. To my knowlege, no one has been banned for disagreeing... its always the vehement disagreements, accompanied by profanity, personal attacks, or bigotry that get shut down.

Can I say: "I am an ASSCLOWN and MY PANTIES ARE IN A WAD?"

Army of GOD wrote:Can I say: "I am an ASSCLOWN and MY PANTIES ARE IN A WAD?"

CamelToe called himself a cunt on his profile and jpcloet told me it was okay because he posted it about himself. So yes, that should be alright.

Why isn't assclown allowed?

#1_stunna wrote:Why isn't assclown allowed?

Andy didn't like it. (It may be synonomious with modulation but that would only be conjecture on my part)

the.killing.44 wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:Can I say: "I am an ASSCLOWN and MY PANTIES ARE IN A WAD?"

CamelToe called himself a cunt on his profile and jpcloet told me it was okay because he posted it about himself. So yes, that should be alright.

Though interestingly, I was banned for referring to it, and I think quite helpfully, suggesting he changed if from Chaucer's favourite word to one more in keeping with our pc times...like gash, beef curtains or gussett.

Layers within in layers in CC Land you know...

I think someone is being a beslubbering addlepated flap-dragon.

context

AAFitz wrote:I believe the key ingredient is how the word is used.

When it is used in flaming someone, ie an obvious personal attack, than that is flaming, and subject to discipline.

In other words, you can probably say, damn thats a bitch, but you cant say, youre a bitch.

its the personal flaming that will get you into trouble.

My guess is, you can say "panties in wad, and probably get away with it such as, man, these dice get my panties in a wad...but if directed at someone, it would be flaming, and subject to action.

Obviously, a great number of things on CC will have a great number of ideas and opinions, and differing opinions do sometimes lead to personal conflict, but that doesnt mean that the conversations need be stopped of course, only that the personal attacks within them do.

I think its fairly obvious to be honest. Perhaps its not as fun, and perhaps it lacks some flair and even some creativity at times, but its really not that hard to counter someones point without flaming them personally. Unfortunately, it got so out of hand and was so out of hand for so long, that people just got used to such behavior, which is why the change is so difficult for some to accept.

If you really look at the number of threads, the number of posts, and people posting them... the number of warnings and bans seems quite small... and while we cant always know exactly why someone got banned, not everyone is surprised in every case.

The main problem, is the word flaming. I honestly have no outside internet knowledge outside of CC. I never knew what any of the terms were that I use so frequently. So no flaming, is somewhat vague. Myself, have always assumed it meant obvious personal attacks, including vulgarity, severity, and certainly anything in the bigotry category. Its the direct personal attacks that seem to cause the most trouble, and possibly rightfully so, and certainly rightfully so, in the case of bigotry, as nearly everyone on the site agreed with.

So, discuss, argue, argue passionately. Question the ideas and opinions of others, because this is a forum and thats what a forum is for. But, if someone disagrees with you, that doesnt mean you can launch a personal assault in real life, or in here.
Again, theres no way to know exactly what will be banned, and what wont be, but on the other hand, 99.67% seem to be able to post without getting banned.

Its very easy to disagree with an opinion, without personal attacks, and without profanity... so just do that. To my knowlege, no one has been banned for disagreeing... its always the vehement disagreements, accompanied by profanity, personal attacks, or bigotry that get shut down.

This was a bitch to read fitz. I'll be an ugly bastard before reading that much

well the following appears to be allowed,

- Torter_of_Worlds: another fag on my ignore list
- Torter_of_Worlds: enjoy sitting on your dildo

here are the rest of them.

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=5488814

Who doesn't like assclown?

You can use word WTF,when you play Western Front Map

AAFitz wrote:I believe the key ingredient is how the word is used.

When it is used in flaming someone, ie an obvious personal attack, than that is flaming, and subject to discipline.

In other words, you can probably say, damn thats a bitch, but you cant say, youre a bitch.

its the personal flaming that will get you into trouble.

My guess is, you can say "panties in wad, and probably get away with it such as, man, these dice get my panties in a wad...but if directed at someone, it would be flaming, and subject to action.

Obviously, a great number of things on CC will have a great number of ideas and opinions, and differing opinions do sometimes lead to personal conflict, but that doesnt mean that the conversations need be stopped of course, only that the personal attacks within them do.

I think its fairly obvious to be honest. Perhaps its not as fun, and perhaps it lacks some flair and even some creativity at times, but its really not that hard to counter someones point without flaming them personally. Unfortunately, it got so out of hand and was so out of hand for so long, that people just got used to such behavior, which is why the change is so difficult for some to accept.

If you really look at the number of threads, the number of posts, and people posting them... the number of warnings and bans seems quite small... and while we cant always know exactly why someone got banned, not everyone is surprised in every case.

The main problem, is the word flaming. I honestly have no outside internet knowledge outside of CC. I never knew what any of the terms were that I use so frequently. So no flaming, is somewhat vague. Myself, have always assumed it meant obvious personal attacks, including vulgarity, severity, and certainly anything in the bigotry category. Its the direct personal attacks that seem to cause the most trouble, and possibly rightfully so, and certainly rightfully so, in the case of bigotry, as nearly everyone on the site agreed with.

So, discuss, argue, argue passionately. Question the ideas and opinions of others, because this is a forum and thats what a forum is for. But, if someone disagrees with you, that doesnt mean you can launch a personal assault in real life, or in here.
Again, theres no way to know exactly what will be banned, and what wont be, but on the other hand, 99.67% seem to be able to post without getting banned.

Its very easy to disagree with an opinion, without personal attacks, and without profanity... so just do that. To my knowlege, no one has been banned for disagreeing... its always the vehement disagreements, accompanied by profanity, personal attacks, or bigotry that get shut down.

This post soon to appear in paperback form.


Honibaz

Neoteny wrote:Who doesn't like assclown?

Assclowns for everyone!

AAFitz wrote: its always the vehement disagreements, accompanied by profanity, personal attacks, or bigotry that get shut down.

While these definitions (see Fitz's prior post, it's too long to requote entirely) sound reasonable, Fitz, they're not practiced across the board, so I dispute your idea that it's always the vehement disagreements with profanity, attacks, or bigotry that get shut down. Instead, it's SOMETIMES the vehement disagreements with profanity, attacks, or bigotry that get shut down, while sometimes a mild retort that includes a non-vehement disagreement, no profanity, and no bigotry will get shut down with a harder slam than someone who posts vehemently, profanely, and with bigotry.

I'd further propose that it's the lack of rhyme or supportable reason that prompts the majority of complaints -- complaints that are frequently vehement but not profane and not flaming, but are frequently countered with profane, bigoted flames with the rationale, "well, that's what you get for complaining about mods."

ASSCLOWN!!!


There I said it.

neanderpaul14 wrote:ASSCLOWN!!!


There I said it.

And in a very diverse way.

Oh man! If we can't say the CC Classic, "Suck it up cupcake!" I may have to leave!

neanderpaul14 wrote:ASSCLOWN!!!


There I said it.

Since the "rainbow rule" was applied I believe this is completely acceptable.

jefjef wrote:

neanderpaul14 wrote:ASSCLOWN!!!


There I said it.

Since the "rainbow rule" was applied I believe this is completely acceptable.

lol