|
baby animals are useless IMO
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 04:46 |
|
|
The Titanic posted:Now I always feel everybody is entitled to an opinion. Except this one. It's a bad opinion. OFFICIAL STATEMENT I am going to keep this short; though I did consider writing a blog. First of all, I have been around and an Internet Warlord for decades now. I know the drill. I've seen flamewars errupt and evolve from BBS teletype, to badly formatted Usenet postings, to articulate blogs. I am well versed in the ways of online discourse. I do not support, condone, nor engage in Baby Animals. Aside from the fact that the law is very clear on Baby Animals. Back in 2013, I wrote a primer on it in fact. And there are additional resources on specifically this, what is legal, illegal etc. READ: Baby Animals: It’s Like Hacking, But Legal The Problem With “Baby Animals” The Illegal Activity of “Baby Animals”: Revealing “documents or personal information” about a person, without their permission, with the intent to Threaten, Harass, Intimidate, Shame, Humiliate or Place at Risk Basically, the Baby Animals and stalking laws are quote: About doing things which endanger a person's safety or which encourage others to attack a person or their family Pointing out someone's social media page, isn't Baby Animals. Pointing out that person A is really person B under an alias, isn't Baby Animals. Posting material that the person themselves made public, isn't, never was, and never will be, Baby Animals. If the above were Baby Animals, every single person in the media would be guilty of having committed a crime. What MoMa did here months ago, was Baby Animals. And it's 100% legally actionable. He posted that I had a traffic citation. There was no context or reason for it to be here in a forum where we're making fun of grown men buying JPEG space ships. He posted it with malice, and with the intent to harass and harm. The only thing he didn't do, was post the actual citation itself; but anyone incited by his posting, could very well go seek it out for themselves. They never knew about it before he posted it. I didn't dox Deloria (now banned). Though the post has been removed here, it is still on my website (post # 4905) for anyone who cares to go and read it for themselves. All I did was out a scammer using material they themselves posted here (e.g. this post) and on social media. Period. End of story. There are NO rules on SA which prohibit what I did. Not a single one. Don't take my word for it though, here, go read all the rule pages Then A KITTEN, after emerging from what I can only imagine must have been a meltdown recovery process, switched from "Baby Animals" to "helldumping". Which, to me - and anyone with a brain that's in working condition - was hilarious; seeing as the latter isn't even an SA rule. That aside from the fact that the very notion of "helldumping" is so far removed from "Baby Animals", that in and of itself, is NOT a bannable offense. Probation? Yeah, maybe' it depends on the mod. The fact of the matter is that since A KITTEN tried to close down this forum - and failed; he's been gunning for me because not only did I have it brought back, but I was made mod. Heck, we just had yet another spat mere months ago over this same thing. This sub-forum is moderated on a honor system. As a mod, I never had to take any action other than probating some people (4) when they cross the line. Once, after several probates, I probated someone for 30 days. I didn't perma-ban. This sub-forum has never - ever - broken ANY of the SA rules. We encourage off-topic posts (recipes, memes etc) because it breaks from the monotony of making GBS threads on Baby Animal post and Shitizens 24-7. A LOT of people followed me to SA and paid 10 bux to be able read what I post, interact, find the lols etc. That too is a solid fact. Yet, somehow, for some bullshit reason, A KITTEN is of the opinion that I am not a "good" mod. The regulars here and I had a good laugh about that on on Discord, for the sheer hilarity of it. And when pressed, like the absentee landlord, he simply couldn't point out a SINGLE reason WHY he thinks I'm not a "good" mod. Not one. Aside from the fact that I didn't even ask to be a loving mod. In much the same way that Beer4TheBeerGod and Beet Wagon didn't get asked either. He made them mods, then installed an IK buffoon who subsequently shat up my nice sub-forum, while attracting all the rear end-clowns from FYAD and elsewhere - and who otherwise didn't even know we existed here in our niche corner. This is bullshit. What the gently caress is the matter with you people; that a forum with such HIGH TRAFFIC and quality posters who are otherwise behaving themselves and abiding by the rules, can't be left alone?!? The money is going into Lowtax's coffers, so what do you care, and why be salty about it? Look, I am not a stranger to being banned. Heck, I was banned TWICE on FDev for breaking the rules. And in both cases, it was a matter of a "shady" areas in which 1) I was using asterisk to bypass the bad word filter 2) I posted material from here on SA So, if I had somehow broken an SA rule, and been banned as a result, it won't have been any big deal. I would pay the 10 bux, re-reg, and get right back into the poo poo-posting. As I am 100% certain (and I have high priced attorneys who ensure that I don't do/say stupid poo poo that will get me arrested or sued) that I hadn't broken an SA rule, let alone guilty of Baby Animals, I refused to re-reg on principle alone. And I made that clear to everyone who asked. As the regulars here on my Discord can attest to, I said that I wasn't coming back here unless the ban was reversed. Then a group (7 at last count) of people (one of them being a backer here on SA who I had saved money by helping him get a Baby Animal post refund) offered to pay the 10 bux if I came back. I still refused. Then some made the case that as long as I wasn't the one paying the 10 bux, it won't break my principles and that I should consider it. So I did. And here I am. Nevertheless, seeing as there is a mod actively holding a grudge and who I believe is going to keep finding ways to either get me probated, banned or who I believe wants to see the forum die, I won't be as prolific a poster as I used to be because this is bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
god dammit should have find/replaced mod with cat
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
The Titanic posted:
I am so happy MS word decided A KITTEN should be in all caps because FAU was. Thank you Microsoft first the Xbox one and now this, thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Samizdata posted:Also... still my favorite by far (and relevant for another month) 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 21:37
|
|
says PAAAAAAAAAARP!
|
TheAgent posted:currently slamming flan while sipping $40/shot tequila Slamming flan is an excellent way to describe your posting vs moma. Moma is the flan just to be clear
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Raskolnikov posted:I'm picturing MoMA on the bottom. Or is I think I just picture moma when I look at this thing. Sweet on the outside, poison like death on the inside. Spongy and weak. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
RIP ScruffPuffquote:I don't know what, they want from me http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3748466&pagenumber=1968&perpage=40#post456376155
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Chump run e; the backers will never know because the tracker is total bullshit
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Thoatse posted:The backers will never know. Now you know how Chris feels every time he tries to make a game 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
Beer please post some of your greatest hits including the letter to Sandi which showed that you are a fundamentally bad person
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Hanales in discord said this is the best reator design he's seen since he was a very small child
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Who the gently caress design a reactor with control rods you have to lift between the fuel rods ? This is ''Unshielded Deathstar ventilation port'' level of stupidity. “That is someone who has their preconceived notions and will settle for something that isn't good enough. The first and the third-person, there were a lot of people on the team who said that you cannot do it. They said it wasn't possible. Illfonic [the contractor building Star Marine] said the same thing. The same with the character stuff: I said we need to do it. And the inventory… it happens right now in [version] 2.4. You can put jackets and trousers on, and caps. There's layering with the armour. So everything that that person told you that couldn't happen, it's all in the game now and it's all at the quality [I asked for]. We've got as good or better than what 1886 has. “That is an example of people saying 'No, I can't do it' and fighting that corner. They are the people I don't get on with and they are the people who end up not being at the company… If I was going to be clichéd, if it was an American person I'd say I want an Ameri-can, not an Ameri-can't. I want someone who tries [...] because we absolutely can do it. We’re trying to do something that has the fidelity that you see in The Order, or has the fidelity you see in a first-person shooter but has multiplayer online and this huge universe and I absolutely, to the very fibre of my being, know it can happen. “It's not easy. I think the difference between a great game and an okay game is people that try to do the hard things. It's the JFK speech about going to the moon: We do it because it's hard, not because it's easy. That's what I expect from the team and if the pushback is 'Well, I didn't do this when I was working at this other company', then, well, here we're trying to push it a bit more and if you can't get on board then you're probably not right for the team. I'm sure that I'm not the only game creator who is in that situation occasionally.”
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Beet Wagon posted:I feel like the obvious answer is Chris Roberts...  
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
Star Citizen: it happens right now in [version] 2.4. You can put jackets and trousers on, and caps
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
Mr Fronts posted:At least spell "reactor" with all its letters. Triggered! Turns out I was right all along and nobody believed me! https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reator 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:Sure.  Hey it's been a while that probation must be almost over. Also on the Sandi thing I was thinking of a post you made in some thread, maybe a couple back, about the potential human consequences of CIGs hilariously predatory marketing. That one brought forth some memorable reddit tantrums, maybe it felt a bit to real to some people
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
That post definitely set the scene for the hilariously unprofessional email exchange. The Roberts want to run a cult without any of the horrifying bits, they just want what they deserve: wealth, power, celebrity, a stage and spotlight, fans chanting their name... it is theirs now because they are a special. Sorry Humility
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
D1E posted:LOL. OFFICIAL STATEMENT get a new gimmick, god drat
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
Agent is 3.0 a total rebuild separate branch deal? Like the 2.0 PU has just been a total sideshow distraction right? And this is the real game that's been secretly worked on for
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
I wonder at what point it becomes the MMO that they sold people. Also what is the funding tracker showing? There's no loving way that figure represents money changing hands
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
This is extremely good
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Wrecked Angle posted:If it's faked then how the hell are they managing to pay for multiple studios, hundreds of staff, mo-cap at imaginarium etc? Debt (secured by actual whale cash flow which is still insanely large). The only scenario that makes sense to me is they smear private borrowing through their system in a quasi-legal manner without actually correcting the notion that this is all freely given money from broken people
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
PS this is probably what Derek's 'gonna get sued 100% end of story' blog was addressing. If they are manipulating this and lying about their actual funding then we got some good times ahead. They say all over their website they are a 100% crowdfunded project, that claim has to be complete bullshit but I have no idea if there is legal standards around the term crowdfunded
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3748466&userid=27157&perpage=40&pagenumber=13#post465274131TheAgent posted:current interesting rumor huh I wonder if this has anything to do with their "Best sale day EVER" from the Polaris and the "Best November total EVER" just last month? Roberts one weird trick for fraudulent inducement
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Wrecked Angle posted:It possible, but I actually doubt it. I think the sad reality is that they've tapped into a demographic who are both sad, lonely people, desperate to live out their fantasies through SC and at a point in their lives where they can commit moderately large sums of money to a project which promises to make that happen. I promise you they are borrowing money on top of whatever they get for free from idiots. 300 employees 4 loving studios across the world. They are borrowing money e; because they can. and because FULL BURN (song is about their business model FYI)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
TheLightPurges posted:This investment group is a large group of normal people. Some could call it a crowd. Bootcha = crowd member State of Colorado = crowd member UK Treasury = crowd member
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:Sure. I'm looking at your email exchange now and request a title change for new thread: Star Citizen: posting as to get a rise out of others in a way not so good as you'd think
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:Yeah, server migration. [Blue-balling Intensifies]
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
Chin posted:I can't tell if this is a joke. Derek's citizen deprogramming team is good, but not that good. Beer with forever carry the burden of the dream
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:Holy poo poo Er_Dova is Sandi. Sandi using Wolf Larson as a mouthpiece IMO. Ditto for Annabelle
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Kakarot posted:More coming soon What the gently caress is wrong with these people watching this happen in that gif
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Ol Cactus Dick posted:Where's that 100% guaranteed to cause legal action blog? He was just talking about it like five pages ago: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3800238&userid=164480#post467049279 This situation is hilarious because if Derek's insane bombastic and doomsaying remarks actually had teeth then it makes sense for him to just (be told to ) shut up about it. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:I always felt it a strange argument to make. It doesn't matter if SM was in 2.6 or not - what matters is that we were teased for over a year with SM gameplay that was suddenly completely scrapped (we're talking weeks, not months...), then SM was cancelled, then Chris said it was already in the game, then it was announced that it was coming back, and then they hacked together the shittiest Minimum Viable Shooter CryMod that the inept team at CIG could hack out over a couple of months - and it has nothing to do with Star Citizen proper. It would humiliate Chris more to release fuckall this year than to release a mediocre shooter nobody wants. Chris must be desperate for the appearance of progress as much as the backers are. The guy is part of his own confidence scam, he absolutely has to believe his will and talent can make this into a billion dollar franchise  It also conveniently moves the topic away from just how much money has been wasted up to this point.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Mordred posted:It's not really that amazing, considering you: 4) aren't asking for money
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
AEGS
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
42 is Sandi's favorite number we know this for a FACT and anybody who thinks otherwise is clueless. It has NOTHING to do with Hitchhiker's Guide -Derek Smart about 10x in row in the last thread as every other poster tried to correct him
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 04:46 |
|
|
TheAgent posted:a good investment Bulls make money, bears make money, whales get slaughtered
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 19:33
|
|