DeletedUser
Guest
Really? I thought I was making a pretty lowbrow play-on-wordsIf you really think it's subtle though, thanks!
No, I meant the vast majority aren't british and so may not understand.
No, I meant the vast majority aren't british and so may not understand.
DeletedUser55663
Guest
I'm not British, y'know.
Even though Socks keeps accusing me of it.
Even though Socks keeps accusing me of it.
DeletedUser
Guest
I am aware of that.
The Great 1One1
Guest
[20:37:52] The Great 1One1 (Shimobehui / blessdisbling): hey
[20:37:59] The Great 1One1 (Shimobehui / blessdisbling): mind if i ask you a question?
[20:57:34] Daethon/Desmaroth: not at all, go ahead
[20:57:57] The Great 1One1 (Shimobehui / blessdisbling): well
[20:58:00] The Great 1One1 (Shimobehui / blessdisbling): this is a long one
And just as I start asking the question, he goes offline/blocks me
DeletedUser
Guest
Would we be infracted on the forums if we all added Diglett and mass spammed him?
deadsocks
Guest
No, evidence on external chat programs can't be used to incriminate people on TW/forums. Punishing someone on the forums just because they spammed you on SkyPE would be abusing power for personal benefit. However, if you all did that, I think he would be well within his rights to murder your firstborn son.
There is nothing in the TW or TW forum rules against infanticide.
There is nothing in the TW or TW forum rules against infanticide.
DeletedUser54677
Guest
§10) Miscellaneous
Encouraging or tricking others into breaking the rules is strictly prohibited.
deadsocks
Guest
Nice try man, but I didn't encourage or trick anyone
Also, Sully is British.
DeletedUser54677
Guest
Nice try man, but I didn't encourage or trick anyone
Also, Sully is British.
Encouraging would be the saying so of new ideas for ways to break rules, ne?
deadsocks
Guest
I don't think encouraging others to break the rules of SkyPE etiquette is included in that.
Which I'm not, unless you think I assume that Ewok and co are the type to go to all the trouble of having a baby, just for it to be murdered.
Which I'm not, unless you think I assume that Ewok and co are the type to go to all the trouble of having a baby, just for it to be murdered.
DeletedUser
Guest
The rule is clear about this,using skype to annoye a mod would be no way a beak of rule(would be stupid I agree)
So how come socks could encourage someone to break a rule if the action in question is not even a break of rule? and if she does not even encourage him to do it?:icon_idea:
DeletedUser54677
Guest
:icon_neutral:
"However, if you all did that, I think he would be well within his rights to murder your firstborn son.
There is nothing in the TW or TW forum rules against infanticide."
DeletedUser
Guest
mmm,Im now confused,but my main intention was to have fun and to mess around,and not to debate for real:icon_razz:
Yeah I know,*take the door*
DeletedUser54677
Guest
I know, I was quoting the part I was referring to. :icon_redface:
I was not talking about Skype. :3
DeletedUser
Guest
See Kriid, that's where you're mistaken, because KK can't enter a thread without causing mass-debation.
DeletedUser55663
Guest
Good.
And just as I start asking the question, he goes offline/blocks me
He's learning, Angela D:
Only if you were to make a post saying somehthing like 'Would we be infracted on the forums if we all added Diglett and mass spammed him?' right before doing it.
Nice try man, but I didn't encourage or trick anyone
Also, Sully is British.
Liez.
