Utopia Talk / Politics / OT - Vote For Rule Change

Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 09 22:44:32 I know this will not be taken seriously, but I am a glutton for punishment and I'm going to give it a shot anyway. I hope everyone will vote, and vote just once, and not trot out all of their multis. And please, no long discussions and lets keep it clean. Let's act like adults for a change. I would like to see a rule change that prohibits insults of a members immediate family either dead or alive. The insults really serve no useful purpose beyond pissing people off or to intimidate them to cause them to leave a discussion. It really brings out the worst in the individual making the insults which is totally unnecessary because we know you all by now. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In the matter of changing the rules to prohibit insulting family members, shall the rule be adopted? Yea Nay
Sam Adams Member	Thu Sep 09 22:46:06 nay all is fair in UP. except of course spamming and multiing, which are gay.
Rugian Member	Thu Sep 09 22:55:04 Hot Rod's in full-out troll mode tonight, I see. Anyway, nay.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Sep 09 22:58:28 why is rugians post being deleted?
kargen Member	Thu Sep 09 23:00:21 Because he already voted and is adding nothing but blatent trolling to the thread.
Camaban Moderator	Thu Sep 09 23:00:28 Personally unsure but long story short it wasn't me that did. The other ones were me though.
Camaban Moderator	Thu Sep 09 23:01:27 Ah, fair answer.
kargen Member	Thu Sep 09 23:03:18 We might as well try to have one clean and decent thread just to say we experienced it once. Then when the suggestion is voted down (I am sure it will be) we can go back to normal.
Rugian Member	Thu Sep 09 23:06:59 Fuck you kargen. Just because you delete JB's spam doesn't mean you suddenly have the ability to censor posts for content.
Rugian Member	Thu Sep 09 23:07:22 Anyway, because this is UP and not "let's only post what kargen wants us to"... I WAS GOING TO VOTE YES. BUT THEN I REMEMBERED HOW BAD HR'S MOMMA'S ROTTED AND DRIED OUT CUNT SMELLED WHEN I HAD TO USE MAYONNAISE FOR LUBRICATION. BECAUSE OF THAT, I VOTE NAY.
Cthulhu Tentacle Rapist	Thu Sep 09 23:10:35 I vote no. Go to http://www.ldschat.com/ if you can't handle it here.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Sep 09 23:14:35 ya, thats not spam, it cannot be deleted.
Hot Rod Member	Thu Sep 09 23:14:42 Let him be, he is just doing it to piss me off. I already have his number.
kargen Member	Thu Sep 09 23:22:14 Click on the show deleted posts area. The first three were obviously nothing but spam even by the definition Sam Adams uses. As the handle "Rugian" is often used then what was posted under the name Rugian can stay. Ignorant and petty as it may be. We all know there is no way this idea would pass, but it would have been nice if it at least could have gone to a vote.
kargen Member	Thu Sep 09 23:27:34 and yeah, I should have let it stay the first time it wa posted using the handle "Rugian" It was posted five times in a row though using another name that is obviously just created to troll/spam and I deleted one to many.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Thu Sep 09 23:28:43 nay
miltonfriedman Member	Thu Sep 09 23:36:35 HR tries to pass HR protection act? lulz. Really, the best way to prevent that from happening is to quit being a gigantic fucking a-hole, molester Rod.
Nekran Member	Fri Sep 10 01:50:35 Nay
roland Member	Fri Sep 10 03:07:41 no
Adolf Hitler Member	Fri Sep 10 03:41:07 I think you mean I would like to see a rule change that prohibits repeatedly spamming non answers, lies and insults like "theres your tell...", "^ Liar" etc The non answer insult spam really serves no useful purpose beyond pissing people off or to intimidate them to cause them to leave a discussion. It really brings out the worst in the individual making the lies, insults and non-answer spam which is totally unnecessary because we know you all by now. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In the matter of changing the rules to prohibit spamming insulting non-answers, shall the rule be adopted? Yea Nay
asdasdfasdfasdfasdfa Member	Fri Sep 10 03:48:26 "In the matter of changing the rules to prohibit insulting family members, shall the rule be adopted?" No. HR, do you really have a brother? Didn't you insult him when you pretended to be him and sued him to lie to us?
Adolf Hitler Member	Fri Sep 10 03:54:28 Also, spam posts to fill up threads to get the last word bring nothing to the debate and only cause friction and disruption to the board, like here: http://www...hread=38207&time=1284087965198
Milton Bradley Member	Fri Sep 10 03:55:56 Should lying about ýour identity and multi tags be allowed? yea nay
CrownRoyal Member	Fri Sep 10 03:57:48 "I would like to see a rule change that prohibits insults of a members immediate family either dead or alive. " Your momma.
Borthas Member	Fri Sep 10 06:13:04 nay
NeverWoods Member	Fri Sep 10 07:32:18 nay.
saiko Member	Fri Sep 10 07:40:36 nay
Hot Rod Member	Fri Sep 10 08:06:05 Looks like the Nays have it. It really tells me a lot about your characters. How does it feel to have *ME* looking down on you and seeing you for the sick degenerates you are. Nice to know I am far superior to you after all.
saiko Member	Fri Sep 10 08:15:01 You didn't vote.
CrownRoyal Member	Fri Sep 10 08:17:30 Rod hates democracy.
O U T R A G E Member	Fri Sep 10 08:17:58 "It really tells me a lot about your characters. " Says the person who wants 1 billion people killed.
Hot Rod Member	Fri Sep 10 08:18:46 ^-Lie
O U T R A G E Member	Fri Sep 10 08:19:26 How was it a lie? It was posted in the quote thread verbatim of what you said.
Hot Rod Member	Fri Sep 10 08:21:51 It is a lie because you are a telling a lie. I never said that. You did you bigoted racist.
O U T R A G E Member	Fri Sep 10 08:23:23 It was posted verbatim of what you said in the other thread.
Adolf Hitler Member	Fri Sep 10 08:28:14 Give it up outrage, he's insane.
Hot Rod Member	Fri Sep 10 08:28:50 Learn to read fool.
Hot Rod Member	Fri Sep 10 08:30:21 AH is an even bigger fool, he doesn't even have a clue.
O U T R A G E Member	Fri Sep 10 08:40:51 Hot Rod admits he is lying. There is even a thread of him participating defending of what he said verbatim.
Adolf Hitler Member	Fri Sep 10 08:42:08 of course he does, then he denies, then he admits it, then he denies. he insane. he doesnt give a damn about whether hes caught lying or not.
Adolf Hitler Member	Fri Sep 10 08:43:31 This from another thread explains him very accurately: Thu Sep 09 03:53:31 I like Roddys victimization troll logic, where when he gets called out for something he did, he's allowed to accuse you of the same thing, even though you didnt do it. Example of the world according to Rod (AKA Car Thief): Cop to car theif: "Im arresting you because you just stole a car" Car theif to cop: "No, I'm arresting YOU because YOU just stole a car" Cop: "huh? What are you, nuts? I didnt steal a car" Car thief: "Oh I see, so only you get to accuse me of stealing a car?" Cop: "Wtf are you talking about?" Car thief: "Simple. If you insult and slur my name why shouldnt I be allowed to do the same to you?" Cop: "Because you ARE a thief and I'm NOT?" Car thief: "There you go again. YOU'RE a thief" Cop: "Listen, I didnt steal a car, you did." Car thief: "No, YOU listen. You stole a car and now Im arresting you" Cop: "You fucking idiot" *shoots car thief*
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 10:08:07 CrownRoyal Member Fri Sep 10 08:17:30 Rod hates democracy. "I am only advocating one person make a suicide attack, perhaps two." -American Taliban HR
Rugian Member	Fri Sep 10 10:12:10 kargen: Non-troll threads deserve non-troll posts. This thread, on the other hand, was explicitly created to troll. You'd have to be completely fucking blind not to see that.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 10:18:18 In all seriousness, I am impressed that kargen has stick with his own rules regarding moderation. I think you can agree with me on that, Rugian, after we saw what happened with DS on the other forum. But if kargen can't see what HR has done to invite the vitriol, then I don't know what to say to someone who can be this non-perceptive.
Hot Rod Member	Fri Sep 10 10:21:07 >-Non-troll threads deserve non-troll posts. This thread, on the other hand, was explicitly created to troll. No, it was not. It was a serious attempt to get those with good manners to step forward. They did not. Perhaps your form of intimidation does work, sometimes.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 10:24:30 You can get good manners by changing your behavior. But as you have already said earlier, you expect things to continue and will not change in how you talk to others. Well, you reap what you sow, child molester.
Adolf Hitler Member	Fri Sep 10 10:43:39 It is only decent to treat scum like scum. Therefore, when everyone treats you like scum, they are doing the only decent thing. You wouldnt want genocidal scum to be pampered with and doted on, would you?
Adolf Hitler Member	Fri Sep 10 10:44:50 Wait - of course you would. Decent people dont though.
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 10:45:11 Threadstalkers are just pathetic losers. They use the anonymity of the internet to be the "badass" they cant be in their own life. Its quite sad really.
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 10:45:38 Anyway, I vote no just because it would never be enforced.
Milton Bradley Member	Fri Sep 10 11:29:49 Prove you know sam adams has other tags.
Milton Bradley Member	Fri Sep 10 11:31:14 So really, all you have is baseless accusations? Ok.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 11:38:58 "Threadstalkers are just pathetic losers. They use the anonymity of the internet to be the "badass" they cant be in their own life." I agree. I thought bringing other people's lives into unrelated threads such as discussing Rugian's "breakdown" to be symptomatic of the issue you just described, don't you agree?
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 11:40:13 No, I point to following others around in cyberspace stalking them with personal attacks and trollish nonsense. Basically what you do and have been doing for years.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 11:47:12 That's weird, dakyron. Didn't you follow Rugian around to post something personal about him (I mean you actually posted something personal about the person rather than just straight flaming) in a totally unrelated thread before you told us you will "leave" the forum?
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 11:50:22 "Didn't you follow Rugian around to post something personal about him" No. I did not. He entered a thread addressed to me and began posting personal attacks. Thus, fair game. If he creates an independent thread I do not go into it and begin harassing him. Nor do I stalk him outside of the confines of UP and harass him or his frieds/family. "in a totally unrelated thread before you told us you will "leave" the forum? " The thread was addressed to me. And get your timeline straight, I said I was probably leaving the forum weeks prior to the incident being discussed.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 11:54:27 I see. So when you attacked Rugian (and several others) in this forum yesterday whereby your name is not even mentioned, it is all part of the on-going "fair flaming" and not threadstalking, yes?
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 11:55:57 I attacked no one yesterday, other than possibly JB, but he is not human and thus not subject to the same rules.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 12:02:15 That's interesting. Didn't you try to "separate" AH, Rugian, Renzo, and myself by flaming each one of us when JB accused us to of the same person even though no one mentioned your name? But I am sure that it was all part of an on-going fair flaming.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 12:07:26 Rugian was not included in that flaming exercise. Apologies for the error.
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 12:59:30 "That's interesting. Didn't you try to "separate" AH, Rugian, Renzo, and myself by flaming each one of us when JB accused us to of the same person even though no one mentioned your name? " I did. If this hurt your feelings then I apologize.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 14:12:35 If that's how you go about in justifying your lying and hypocrisy, then that's fine by me. I personally find it funny that you conveniently "forgot" the episode when you went on a moral crusade.
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 14:24:24 I am sorry for your hurt feelings. I caused you emotional pain and will have a terrible time sleeping tonight. Please, someday try to forgive me.
voodooprophet Member	Fri Sep 10 14:26:35 "theres your tell..." anything involving any form or version of "there's your sign" should be considered spam and deleted. That has got to be the worst series of phrases known to man and if all your fucking bickering isn't bad enough, throwing in those phrases actually makes me not like posting here. It's a stupid hatred, but goddamn, i can't even stand it in the stand up routine. Dude's funny till he spouts that shit out. The phrase(s) should be considered a scourge to mankind. It should be made a worse crime to post that phrase than to DDoS the board's servers. ALL of JB's, HR's, KreeL's, RoB's, and the The Children's posts > any post containing "there's your ____". OH! forgot what this thread was about there for a minute. OP Question... Nay.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 14:45:37 Why the false bravado, Bretton Lillie? I thought you don't play the e-macho game and don't do any thread-stalking? But if you like that sorts of game, we can always get renzo to post a certain pic for some riotous laughter. Have fun thread-stalking, Bretton Lillie.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Fri Sep 10 14:50:34 the nays have it.
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 14:50:36 Slurping down some more Hamilton sauce, I see. Good for you. A villain always needs some henchmen and you make the perfect yes-man.
miltonfriedman Member	Fri Sep 10 15:33:39 But you make an good rape victim. Really, Breton Lillie, more power to you if you like thread-stalking, but your foolhardy bravado on the internet is pretty immature.
Dakyron Member	Fri Sep 10 15:46:40 Bravado? You poor, sad, pathetic little man. Run along now before I make you cry again.
Canadian Member	Fri Sep 10 16:00:39 I vote nay. Freedom of speech includes freedom of stupidity. Take J.B. as an example.
MrPresident07 Member	Fri Sep 10 16:49:02 Just for icing on the cake: NO.
Troll Rod Member	Fri Sep 10 22:15:20 Hot Rod on different strokes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSAj2q_xHzU&feature=related
Milton Bradley Member	Sat Sep 11 00:48:01 hotrod makes the best threads. Not. They start with a troll OP and just continue in the same vein all the way
Adolf Hitler Member	Sat Sep 11 01:50:28 So Roddy was all alone in wanting to pass a speech censor law at UP? What a shocker.
KreeL Member	Sat Sep 11 02:10:13 O - D - Fuckin - Nay "We reserve the right to talk anyway we want about anyone's momma whenever we want to -- EVEN if it has nothing to do with the thread." I believe that's rule #8 in the non-existant rulebook.
roland Member	Wed Sep 22 03:09:31 I am topping this to demonstrate how Hot Rod violate other people's "first amendment rights" as defined by the present Hot Rod by coercing people to vote for a rule change that will place limitation on other's right to free speech.
jergul Member	Wed Sep 22 03:15:02 Nay
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 06:32:36 roland - I am topping this to demonstrate how Hot Rod violate other people's "first amendment rights" as defined by the present Hot Rod by coercing people to vote for a rule change that will place limitation on other's right to free speech. roland, this is a private forum that belongs to Turtle Crawler. He wrote the code and he maintains it. I know you have a limited education, but the vast majority of private organizations can and do set the rules that the membership must abide by in order to join or remain a member. That being the general rule of a civilized society TC has been and can be influenced by the wishes and desires of the membership. As with just about *ANY* private organization rule changes can be proposed by any member. The membership then votes on the proposal and if the *majority* approves the rule change it is applied to everyone in the organization. IT IS CALLED APPLYING DEMOCRACY TO A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION. In Nazi Germany or The USSR if you proposed a rule the leadership found anathema then you were either shot or disappeared into a Gulag. I proposed a rule change, it was defeated. End of story.
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 06:42:21 roland - as defined by the present Hot Rod by coercing people to vote for a rule change... Precisely *HOW* did I coerce (force) anyone to vote for the above rule change. Don't run away, answer the question.
roland Member	Wed Sep 22 07:25:58 ".... IT IS CALLED APPLYING DEMOCRACY TO A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION." Sigh... you are really dumb, let me break it down for you, no one question this forum is a private entity and should be managed according the will of the site owner, or maybe to some extend to the ISP or the government on some specifics. No one question that. No one questioned a radio station owner cannot hire or fire or not fire its own employees for whatever reasons within the legal limits? You claimed if a third party tried to influence the owner to hire/fire/not fire its employees because of what the employees have said, this is a violation of the "employees' first amendment rights". The act of proposing such poll is to coerce people into voting for your new rule, so that you can tell TC the members want that feature, and he should provide it. I mean what kind of f*cking idiot draw up a poll on a rule change if he doesn't want to use the result to change the rule. The result doesn't go your way, and people either laugh at you or ignore you doesn't mean you aren't coercing others to join you. "Don't run away, answer the question. " Oh, I am not, you better don't, lol.
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 07:47:08 What question? That is the stupidest response I have read in a long time. "The act of proposing such poll is to coerce people into voting for your new rule..." The people had a *CHOICE.* They could vote yea, Nay or, like most did, NOT VOTE AT ALL. The proposal was put forth in a democratic manner. HOW IN THE FUCK DID I FORCE THEM TO DO ANYTHING? As usual you are brain dead and wasting my time unless you can exhibit exactly *HOW I FORCED THEM TO VOTE.*
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 07:52:33 If you see a commercial on TV asking you to eat at One Hung Low's Eating Emporium is that *FORCING* yo to go eat there? Damn man, you sound l;ike Paramount or Kreel.
Dictionary Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 07:59:05 Him "The act of proposing such poll is to coerce people into voting for your new rule..." You "HOW IN THE FUCK DID I FORCE THEM TO DO ANYTHING? " Coerce: http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/coerce Main Entry: co·erce: to compel to an act or choice <was coerced into agreeing> Force: http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/force Main Entry: 1force: violence, compulsion, or constraint exerted upon or against a person or thing
Semantic Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 08:00:44 Why do I play semantics when a dictionary is just a click away on the internet? Why did I turn roland's coerce into force and then spam in capslock?
roland Member	Wed Sep 22 08:01:02 "HOW I FORCED THEM TO VOTE" YOU INTRODUCED THE POLL, A POLL THAT WOULD BE USED BY YOU TO INFLUENCE THE SITE OWNER'S DECISION OVER THE PURPOSED CHANGES? So were you setting a poll so that people can laugh at you, or you created the poll so that you can vote for your vote change?
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 08:18:55 One last word and then I leave you to wallow in your stupidity. "The people had a *CHOICE.* They could vote yea, Nay or, like most did, NOT VOTE AT ALL."
roland Member	Wed Sep 22 08:30:12 The purpose of holding a vote is to force a change in the forum rule, is it not? of course, preferably you'd want people to agree with you, but despite your view was not accepted, this doesn't change the fact you try to get them to vote for it by having the poll in the first place. "One last word and then I leave you to wallow in your stupidity. " ZZzzz.... running away again, Hahahaha...
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 08:57:06 On November 2, The United States Government will violate it's own Constitution by *FORCEING THE VOTERS* to vote on new representatives. What a dictatorship that we live in where the government *FORCES* us to vote for people to represent us. LOL, and still you don't see how asinine your position is.
roland Member	Wed Sep 22 09:06:04 Of course you are right, this position IS asinine, because your definition of what constituite as a violation of the first amendment is stupid. Good that you finally notice.
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 09:11:38 The 1st Amendment is not the subject of this thread. A DEMOCRATIC VOTE IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS THREAD. Ever heard of democracy?
roland Member	Wed Sep 22 09:12:50 "roland Member Wed Sep 22 03:09:31 I am topping this to demonstrate how Hot Rod violate other people's "first amendment rights" as defined by the present Hot Rod by coercing people to vote for a rule change that will place limitation on other's right to free speech. "
Firestorm Phoenix Member	Wed Sep 22 09:15:19 Excellent troll, HR. Great job.
Hot Troll Member	Wed Sep 22 09:25:34 I know it's easy to mistake me for a troll but I am actually dumb enough to believe what I am saying and I am dishonest enough to lie constantly too.
Rugian Member	Wed Sep 22 09:29:46 From my first post here: "Hot Rod's in full-out troll mode tonight, I see." I seriously need to remember that he is always in full-out troll mode. By the way Rod, maybe if your mother wasn't such a failure at raising her bastard children like yourself, we wouldn't be having this problem where you constantly drive UPers to the point of insulting your town whore of a mother.
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 09:33:39 "roland Member Wed Sep 22 03:09:31 I am topping this to demonstrate how Hot Rod violate other people's "first amendment rights" as defined by the present Hot Rod by coercing people to vote for a rule change that will place limitation on other's right to free speech. " You fucking moron, that is *NOT THE FUCKING SUBJECT* of the thread. The subject of the thread is a democratically proposed rule change. That is you hijacking the thread to suit your purpose which is a piss poor attempt to cover your ass for not having the brains to comprehend the 'opinion' I expressed in another thread.
Dickhead UPer Member	Wed Sep 22 09:35:57 Why do you want to trample roland's first amendment right?
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 09:41:49 Why does he want to trample mine? He started it.
roland Member	Wed Sep 22 10:00:04 I would trample on your first amendment right if I have such dumbf*ck definition of it, but I don't, so I am clear. You however need to reconcile with your hypocrisy.
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 10:05:28 I have no idea what that means?
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 22 10:05:47 Do you?
	show deleted posts