No, Raph's point is that people should not be able to talk about their agendas in repeated threads, derailing the threads. Unfortunately, as pointed out in this thread, we would have to ban most of you if we implemented that rule.

It's very important to note here that, barring an event that has never come to pass here, it takes more than one person to derail a thread.

Derailing threads is fun anyway.

I don't know why anyone would want to ban people for it.

I guess it is just the fact that the derailed threads turn into arguments about nationalism and racism. It's just very different from what we normally get.

Personally I am attracted to Mehmets posts like a fly around dog shit. Much like a fly I don't seem to have the brain power to stop myself from landing in the shit and getting caught in its sticky grasp.

As for what Raph is saying, I don't really think it's about changing the rules. Rather just enforcing the ones we have.

(June 1, 2012 at 3:16 pm)Shell B Wrote: No, Raph's point is that people should not be able to talk about their agendas in repeated threads, derailing the threads. Unfortunately, as pointed out in this thread, we would have to ban most of you if we implemented that rule.

Sure thread derails go on all the time, but I guess the central question is, does it matter what that derail turns into? I guess a couple of us got a bit agitated because it was just the same old thing being brought up, and it isn't exactly a pleasant way of derailing threads. But I'm happy to leave it up to the discretion of the mods if they think that is on level par as what the rest of us do.

Quote:It's very important to note here that, barring an event that has never come to pass here, it takes more than one person to derail a thread.

It does take more than one person to derail a thread, true. But can it not only be one person who instigates it?

If I instigate a fight, I don't get arrested for instigation. See what I mean?

No, Raph mentioned a rule change. As for enforcing existing rules, there are no rules to enforce. To be honest, the only warnings we could have doled out were to the people complaining about it. There were several instances of derailing, personal attacks on a member and, as you know, creating a thread about another member. We have to take everything in context and did not hand out any warnings, but I think you get my point.

(June 1, 2012 at 3:54 pm)Shell B Wrote: I think you get my point.

Yes I certainly do.

Well, I hope you actually get my point and aren't inferring something negative that I didn't mean from it.

(June 1, 2012 at 4:03 pm)Shell B Wrote: Well, I hope you actually get my point and aren't inferring something negative that I didn't mean from it.

You really think so little of me

Haha, no. I think very little of my capability of wordings things so I don't sound like I'm being an asshole.

(June 1, 2012 at 4:20 pm)Shell B Wrote: Haha, no. I think very little of my capability of wordings things so I don't sound like I'm being an asshole.

And just what is that supposed to mean?

Its very important to take into account here that until now no-one here has purposely derailed many threads at once to a single subject, at least not to my knowledge.
This is what I suggest should be disallowed as it kills any chance to debate many subjects in favor of forcing one individuals agenda.

... and why am I pink?