Jump to content

UKFF AWARD PUNISHMENTS


neil

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Yes.

 

Why change the rules this year of all years!

 

Because Pitcos is up for a negative award.

 

I don't like preferential treatment just because he's one of the main quality posters. That, and the whole "dem wans" thing has really gotten annoying.

 

Maybe a ban isn't what's needed. Pity takes himself so seriously he's a perfect option for a name change and a bit of sig and avatar abuse. Kick his ego into size a bit. I suggest "~CMPUNKCUCKOLD69~" for a username Edited by LEGIT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

The amount of times Pitcos has called himself fat and took the piss out of himself is so frequent, there's zero chance he'd give a single shite about his sig being changed. He's so self deprecating, it makes me uncomfortable for him at times. He's got a fat bloke in a crown in his avatar as it is. What could you possibly change it to for him to have his ego hurt?

Edited by IANdrewDiceClay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The amount of times Pitcos has called himself fat and took the piss out of himself is so frequent, there's zero chance he'd give a single shite about his sig being changed. He's so self deprecating, it makes me uncomfortable for him at times. He's got a fat bloke in a crown in his avatar as it is. What could you possibly change it to for him to have his ego hurt?

 

Any links to this or was it pillow talk? :D

 

It's amusing that the cunt is up for failed comedian award.

It would be even funnier watching the butthurt around here if he got a suspension (which he won't. Ever).

 

But if people didn't get suspended last year, I don't think it's fair to suspend people this year. Even if it is Pity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

 

Yes.

 

Why change the rules this year of all years!

 

Because Pitcos is up for a negative award.

 

I don't like preferential treatment just because he's one of the main quality posters. That, and the whole "dem wans" thing has really gotten annoying.

 

 

Why? Should shit posters get preferential treatment instead? i'm not going to pretend that the shittest is treated the same as the best in my eyes, because I don't, and that's because I'm far more willing to give leeway and the like to someone who consistency brings interesting quality content, which is is knowledgeable, and sparks conversation. For example Maxwell, believe it or not, might get a little more rope from me because his opinion is often to the opposite end of the forum and is (most importantly) interesting. That's the key word. Interesting. If you're interesting you're going to, consciously or not, get treated better by me. And if people don't like it, well, there's no-one saying that if they didn't become interesting themselves they'd also get away with more. I'm not going to reward people for being dull. Dullness chases conversation away from the forum, colour and character invites it on. Of course I'm always going to fall on the side of "Encourage discussion and debate, make forum better" in that exchange. And judging by those results, a higher percentage of the forum agrees with me.

Edited by PowerButchi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

There wasn't even punishments until recently. Literally the only reasons there was negative awards is because the mods didnt like certain posters. Technically that isn't equality, but it was accepted. It was when the forum was devided and everyone hated each other. Punishments arent needed anymore. I dont see much arguing on here anymore. I only see debate. I'd say its best to go back to how it was before.

 

After what Butch went through, it sort of put into perspective that bans shouldn't be handed out unless there are proper rule breaks. I was never in favour of bannings anyway. It was always a laugh when the clowns were still around. I remember getting the option of banning someone and changing their name a few years back. I didnt take it. Pointless really.

Edited by IANdrewDiceClay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's fair enough then, if that's how things go moving forward. I have noticed a bit of a change in the way discussions go down in recent times. A lot less hostile, which is good. For a long time I was hesitant to contribute a whole lot because I was worried about getting blasted- now I've realised it's a bit silly to worry about anonymous people giving you grief on a forum :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...