Lurker > SKARDAVNELNATE

Do you mean like it was just a character and he was never actually a rapper?

Judgmenl posted...

Also new dumb question

What does it do if you don't interact with it at all?
Is it not doing stuff until you allow it?
Or is it doing stuff until you indicate not to?

One, which is still there.

I could never figure out what the game expects from me just to mop the floor at the very start.

ConfusedTorchic posted...

you can store candy in the pouches of the white ones

Why only the white ones?

I think Aliens has become more iconic. It has the colonial marines, the queen, the power loader.
They mostly come out at night, mostly.

THEGODDAMNBATMA posted...

But they found out that I am taking one of them on a date.

I'm not seeing the strategy here. Do they want more dates? Or do they want to spend less time with you by equally distributing it?

adjl posted...

Of course, that particular cookie has been offering that particular enhancement for about 30 years now and has absolutely nothing to do with Fandom

Ah, yes, but as far as I know the bar stating it is new.
And I assume the cookies associated with it are new.
While I accept a cookie has enhanced my experience before I don't think this new bar or the new cookies are doing so.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Unless you've been terrible in the past and your MMA is so shit that they've secretly stopped letting you actually mark posts.

Probably this. My first couple years on the site I tried marking violations but never saw them get removed. Then I gave up on marking them altogether. Nothing I posted would get modded either. At least until Hillary called Donald illigitemate. Then everything about ToS enforcement changed.

Foppe posted...

When asked whether the site will ever see anything NEW added

I have a bar at the bottom of my screen saying "This website uses cookies to enhance user experience". I never saw that before. Also, so far it has not enhanced my experience.

HornedLion posted...

Im getting modded for political chat on PotD.

Odd, I've seen a bunch of political statements that haven't been touched.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/3/3665e346.jpg

adjl posted...

Not sure why you're talking about that, though, when the discussion is about why you've been modded.

The discussion is about the ToS and its enforcement. The reason I've been modded is because I believe in what I'm saying and the mods enforce an opposing opinion.

adjl posted...

I've stated the facts which form the basis of my overall opinion

That basis is formed from other conclusions. The "facts" are statements other people can dispute.

adjl posted...

My purpose here is to explain the reasoning behind your moderations, not to engage in a political debate.

I know the reason for my moderations. I've been trying to explain it to you.

adjl posted...

Probably not, just because getting punished for that would mean the community's values are so radically different from my own that participating in said community would just be an exercise in frustration.

That is where we differ. I don't compromise my values.

adjl posted...

In claiming that not expressing certain opinions is necessary to avoid getting modded?

No. That you're right in your opinion.

adjl posted...

Again, this is not a matter of debating these particular political opinions.

I thought you hadn't stated anything that isn't an observable fact. Now you admit your position is subjective.

adjl posted...

If pressed to defend the opinions themselves, I could very easily do so without invoking the ToS or opinions of the moderation team in any way

That's easy when you hold opinions they agree with. Would you still defend your beliefs so staunchly if they didn't agree with you?
If you believe in what you have to say, but know that you'll be punished for saying it, would you still be so quick to say it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukD4PEXvIek

You seem to think that because the mods support you, you're right. And because the mods are against me, I must be wrong. This is an appeal to authority fallacy. It especially doesn't work when the authority isn't trusted.Just because you should be fine isn't the vindication you think it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx2qPhPb5iQ

adjl posted...

"Without going into the merits of either narrative"

Means that it's become against the ToS to do so. Which you just did.

adjl posted...

I am explaining which position is against the ToS

Well, now it's against the ToS to advocate for any political position on this board. You've made statements regarding election integrity twice. I will not discus that subject with you.

adjl posted...

you were modded for supporting the election fraud narrative

And in the 4 years prior I was modded for refuting the election fraud narrative put out by the other side. Without going into the merits of either narrative this shows that enforcement of the ToS was politically biased.

adjl posted...

if you're comparing Jan 6th to BLM protests

Those are not the events I alluded to.

Sufferedphoenix posted...

Hmm. First time I've had a topic of mine derailed that I can recall. But also I usually don't get this many posts in my topics.

We're still sort of discussing the rule changes. I think adjl is demonstrating for us how badly they can abuse the new policy before mods are forced to step in.

adjl posted...

there's zero evidence whatsoever for the claim of...

adjl posted...

you said something in support of the false narrative that...

The subject at hand is the ToS and its enforcement. Due to the new policy I feel unsafe with how you continue to advocate for a position that is of an innately political nature in an attempt to distract me from that. The ToS was enforced one way for the narrative surrounding one event, and it was enforced differently for a similar narrative surrounding a similar event.

Spaghetti Sauce is more similar to a chili than a gravy.

ConfusedTorchic posted...

who wins

One brings about an ice age. The other regularly loses to an Italian in overalls.

Without going into specifics, it wasn't a ToS violation when something of the same nature was posted in support of the other side.

adjl posted...

You don't have to.

I don't believe I violated the ToS. Now that the position on discussing politics has been clarified I can't continue and still make that claim.

adjl posted...

That translates to...

I don't feel safe addressing something of a political nature given the new policy.

That just demonstrates how poorly you understood what I was getting at. Remember, I was posting in that topic to criticize Fox News as insincere.

adjl posted...

If you are still blindsided, that's what I mean by learning from your moderations.

So I should learn from my moderations that egalitarianism is not tolerated and it's encouraged to promote discrimination against certain groups of people. I don't think that's a good lesson.

adjl posted...

Saying you believe it attempts to lend it credence.

Only if, in your opinion, I'm a credible judge of reality. If you think I'm some clueless clod then my belief in it takes away credence by association.

adjl posted...

saying you believe the lie is indeed moddable because it amounts to you saying the belief has merit.

So I believe something has merit... Find for me the passage within the terms of service where that is against the site rules.

adjl posted...

what you believe is a lie.

But I do believe it. So I'm not lying.
Plus I was modded for saying I believe it. Not for saying it was unequivocally true.

adjl posted...

That said, you don't exactly have a track record of moderations that can reasonably be called unfair, so it's a bit of a moot point in your case.

A moderator commented that I'm not allowed to lie about a thing. One which I was being entirely truthful about.

Essentially...
Me: I believe X.
Mod: You're lying, you don't actually believe that.

adjl posted...

That said, regardless of the number of people marking, they're a lot more lenient to people with clean moderation histories.

So if you've been unfairly modded before that increases the likelihood that you won't be given the appropriate consideration next time.

So... here's a video from 8 years ago. I thought people had heard of them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWSF-LlrzSY

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Then enough people think you're an asshole

Say, PO, random question. Do you think the world is filled with more assholes or more non-assholes?

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Someone has to mark your posts. If no one marks you you won't get modded.

I wouldn't be surprised if users go around looking for things to report. And when that happens do you suppose the mod will decide a lot of people are marking something that isn't a violation, or jump on the bandwagon them self?

Wikipedia tells me that a Battle Star is an award issued to U.S. Navy ships for participation in battles.

In the show just of it as giving the moniker of star to anything that acts as a carrier ship. Battlestars and basestars.

Ah, no... It's a company. They make rebuilds of classic consoles using FPGA. You can use your old cartridges with a modern video output.

I suspected it was spellcheck but mine changes it to Battledress Galactica.

These are rather hard to get ahold of at a reasonable price. Anyone have any and do you thing they're worth the cost?

You don't have access to this message board at this time.

That... ah... raises a question. If no one believes it that means it's fictional, right?

For the amount I use Amazon the cost of Prime isn't worth it to save on shipping.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lgjPlmeUUU

I never mark people either. Even when they launch into personal attacks I stil look for an argument I can counter and try to stear them back onto the subject at hand. Then I get modded because they responded negatively to me. TOS enforcement is founded on backward logic.

adjl posted...

If you can't refine your own opinions by trying to assail them yourself, you aren't thinking critically about the subject.

I believe I have done so to the extent that I can on my own. I look for the flaws in my own thinking. Make comparisons to other positions I've taken and see if they are contradictory, or if they are drawn from a common value I hold. But other people place importance on aspects of it differently than I do. Or approach it in a way that I hadn't thought of.

My mistake. I underestimated it.
https://www.hasbro.com/common/productimages/en_US/0EC45050D1214B07B96F6AE4345CFDDA/526d7d8434030da2c12aa402dee1c970b9983782.jpg

Not even the laziest design. It's already round. Why does does it need to transform to spin?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZpvYcEMFMY

My guess is that would acceptable but discussion of government policy regarding those things wouldn't be.

agesboy posted...

but it's probably just going to boil down to a difference of sensibilities again

It was probably something like... if X believes Y they should take Z action.
Then you look at it and say by bringing up Z I'm suggesting Y is true.
And I say no, I'm saying if X believes Y is true. Whether I belief in Y is beside the point.

And we'll disagree about that but none of it sheds any light on how the terms of service is enforced.

darkknight109 posted...

I've never seen anyone banned for expressing a political opinion.

I did have some rather lengthy suspensions for that.

darkknight109 posted...

but unless you feel those are political views, that's not what this is about.

I've been suspended for answering this previously.

adjl posted...

It's the only way you're going to avoid another vacation.

Apparently now, no one can discuss the thing that got me modded. So there's little chance of the subject coming up again.

adjl posted...

If you really can't figure it out, PM me the post in question and I'll see if I can spell it out for you.

I wouldn't do that over GameFAQs' PM service. I vaguely recall a notion that someone got modded for sharing a moderation over PM.

adjl posted...

In this case, your consistency is not because you've developed a position so robustly justified as to be unassailable

Well that's just it, isn't it? I have no way of knowing how unassailable it is if I can't discuss it. I thought I did a pretty decent job of supporting my veiws at the time.

I like to debate. I find the pactice useful for finding where my arguments are weak and refining my reasoning. But I wasn't allowed to from the beginning. And now neither is my opponent. So what is there to fight over?

adjl posted...

so I'm afraid you'll have to content yourself with that explanation and take this as an opportunity to reflect on what you did wrong and try to improve

That would be rather pointless at this juncture since whatever people disagreed with, they can't express their perspective now either.

adjl posted...

though given that you've sat on "the mods were defending Fox News!" for nine months, I can't say I'm overly hopeful in that regard

I do take pride in being consistent. Thank you for understanding.