PDA

View Full Version : Which Insults Are Still Allowed On Here



SimonMac
23rd March 2012, 18:54
Poll To Follow

eek
23rd March 2012, 18:55
Poll To Follow

Where is it?

cretin

TestMangler
23rd March 2012, 18:58
**** isn't allowed i don't think.

Old Greg
23rd March 2012, 18:59
Has something happened?

Are we still allowed to call MF a brainless twat?

SimonMac
23rd March 2012, 18:59
**** isn't allowed i don't think.

I still get away with calling Russell a **** regularly.

TestMangler
23rd March 2012, 19:01
I still get away with calling Russell a <removed> regularly.

Maybe it's allowed if it's a statement of fact, rather than a meaningless insult :eek

MarillionFan
23rd March 2012, 19:51
<removed> isn't allowed i don't think.

2041. :popcorn:

Zippy
23rd March 2012, 20:11
Oh dear. Silly daffodils.

AtW
23rd March 2012, 20:12
tax cheats

TestMangler
23rd March 2012, 20:15
2041. :popcorn:

2042 :popcorn:

eek
23rd March 2012, 20:36
2042 :popcorn:

3000 :popcorn:

Mainly because TM is not a cretin with a tendency for mindless violence.

TestMangler
23rd March 2012, 20:54
3000 :popcorn:

Mainly because TM is not a cretin with a tendency for mindless violence.

Cretin, no, tendency for mindless violence, occasionaly, but thanks anyway eeekster :hug:

shaunbhoy
23rd March 2012, 21:18
I believe moves are afoot to emasculate the cut and thrust of General, making it less of a Roman-style gladiatorial arena and turning it into a fluffy-bunny group-hugging care-bearish lovefest.
Less work for the mods that way.

Old Greg
23rd March 2012, 21:24
I believe moves are afoot to emasculate the cut and thrust of General, making it less of a Roman-style gladiatorial arena and turning it into a fluffy-bunny group-hugging care-bearish lovefest.
Less work for the mods that way.

I can't keep up with this shit. PM me if you need me to put the frighteners on admin again.

BrilloPad
23rd March 2012, 21:42
I believe moves are afoot to emasculate the cut and thrust of General, making it less of a Roman-style gladiatorial arena and turning it into a fluffy-bunny group-hugging care-bearish lovefest.
Less work for the mods that way.

Glenn Close had the right idea on what to do with fluffy-bunnies.

I don't want to be accused of discrimination so I have to say I hate you all equally.

shaunbhoy
23rd March 2012, 21:46
I can't keep up with this tulip. PM me if you need me to put the frighteners on admin again.

http://www.sweetslyrics.com/images/img_gal/3172_Dr_Evil.jpg


:wink

NotAllThere
24th March 2012, 06:42
I believe moves are afoot to emasculate the cut and thrust of General, making it less of a Roman-style gladiatorial arena and turning it into a fluffy-bunny group-hugging care-bearish lovefest.
Less work for the mods that way.No, but moves might be afoot to emasculate you.

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 07:45
No, but moves might be afoot to emasculate you.

Admin needs to wise up pronto and you mods need to stay out of general. Without roughty toughty posters like Shaunbhoy then there'd be less :fight: and more posters would flock to the boards making even more work for the mods. And noone wants that.

BrilloPad
24th March 2012, 08:26
you mods need to stay out of general. :eek

Its bad enough general being a bear pit without turning it in gladiators.

Hang on, you have to like gladiators to join cuk.....

mudskipper
24th March 2012, 11:46
Like the tag on this thread. :laugh

Old Greg
24th March 2012, 11:49
Like the tag on this thread. :laugh

;)

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 11:57
Can we still use the <Insert Name here> + <Insult> format?

<Insult> = 'mother sucks cocks in hell & likes it'
<Insert Name here> = 'Old Gregs '

mudskipper
24th March 2012, 11:59
Can we still use the <Insert Name here> + <Insult> format?

<Insult> = 'mother sucks cocks in hell & likes it'
<Insert Name here> = 'Old Greg's '

FTFY

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 12:01
FTFY

I think you'll find you'll need a CHR$(39) in there somewhere.

Old Greg
24th March 2012, 12:03
Can we still use the <Insert Name here> + <Insult> format?

<Insult> = 'mother sucks cocks in hell & likes it'
<Insert Name here> = 'Old Gregs '

Only in a poll title.

BrilloPad
24th March 2012, 18:04
Like the tag on this thread. :laugh

been removed now. :mad

Old Greg
24th March 2012, 18:07
been removed now. :mad

I have an infraction for this. Is 1 point a lot?

TestMangler
24th March 2012, 18:30
Welllll.......I think we can safely say that the 'c' word isn't allowed.

Two nice new infractions for me :laugh

The funny thing is, to post for the second one had absolutely no inappropriate language in it. I thing NAT must be a bit of a ****. :laugh

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 18:40
I have an infraction for this. Is 1 point a lot?

Its half of your IQ. So yes in your case that's a lot.

shaunbhoy
24th March 2012, 18:53
Serious question.
I was wondering, when these little spats break out on a thread, as they have been wont to do over the years, why is it that the current crop of mods feel that they have to get so heavily and actively involved and start dishing out infractions and threatening bans?
Such exchanges have happened quite regularly over the many years I have been on here, and provided they stay within General and don't get litigious, or ridiculously out of hand, they have largely been allowed to defuse of their own volition.
The robust nature of some of the debate on here is a very big part of the allure of the forum for many people, and, I thought, the very reason we have corraled off the General part from the other areas, and even labelled it with a warning of sorts.
I have heard it suggested that too much slanging in any given thread ruins it for other people. Hard to accept that really, there are always a gazillion threads on the go on here. If one is not to your liking simply jump into another one.
Frankly speaking, if the whole place is going to get too watered down and nicey-nicey then General might as well be mothballed.

eek
24th March 2012, 18:59
Serious question.
I was wondering, when these little spats break out on a thread, as they have been wont to do over the years, why is it that the current crop of mods feel that they have to get so heavily and actively involved and start dishing out infractions and threatening bans?
Such exchanges have happened quite regularly over the many years I have been on here, and provided they stay within General and don't get litigious, or ridiculously out of hand, they have largely been allowed to defuse of their own volition.
The robust nature of some of the debate on here is a very big part of the allure of the forum for many people, and, I thought, the very reason we have corraled off the General part from the other areas, and even labelled it with a warning of sorts.
I have heard it suggested that too much slanging in any given thread ruins it for other people. Hard to accept that really, there are always a gazillion threads on the go on here. If one is not to your liking simply jump into another one.
Frankly speaking, if the whole place is going to get too watered down and nicey-nicey then General might as well be mothballed.

What dumbo said.

Old Greg
24th March 2012, 19:02
Serious question.
I was wondering, when these little spats break out on a thread, as they have been wont to do over the years, why is it that the current crop of mods feel that they have to get so heavily and actively involved and start dishing out infractions and threatening bans?
Such exchanges have happened quite regularly over the many years I have been on here, and provided they stay within General and don't get litigious, or ridiculously out of hand, they have largely been allowed to defuse of their own volition.
The robust nature of some of the debate on here is a very big part of the allure of the forum for many people, and, I thought, the very reason we have corraled off the General part from the other areas, and even labelled it with a warning of sorts.
I have heard it suggested that too much slanging in any given thread ruins it for other people. Hard to accept that really, there are always a gazillion threads on the go on here. If one is not to your liking simply jump into another one.
Frankly speaking, if the whole place is going to get too watered down and nicey-nicey then General might as well be mothballed.

The problem is that we have allowed them to drive down standards in the professional forum and they are trying to do the same here.

If we don't fight back we'll end up in a ladybags thread ghetto in LR.

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 19:03
The problem is that we have allowed them to drive down standards in the professional forum and they are trying to do the same here.

If we don't fight back we'll end up in a ladybags thread ghetto in LR.

Who is this 'them' you are talking about?

Bolshiebastard? :winker: Ban him.

Nomadd? :winker: Ban him.

Northernladuk? :winker: Ban him and tell immigration about his wife.

eek
24th March 2012, 19:05
Who is this 'them' you are talking about?

Bolshiebastard? :winker: Ban him.

Nomadd? :winker: Ban him.

Northernladuk? :winker: Ban him and tell immigration about his wife.

Given that type of wife I doubt Northernladuk needs to do much :winker:ing

Old Greg
24th March 2012, 19:06
Who is this 'them' you are talking about?

Bolshiebastard? :winker: Ban him.

Nomadd? :winker: Ban him.

Northernladuk? :winker: Ban him and tell immigration about his wife.

The mods you fool.

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 19:07
Given that type of wife I doubt Northernladuk needs to do much :winker:ing

More downstairs http://www.cristoferdelatorre.com/emoticonosgratis/emoticonos/limpiando_el_suelo.gif if you catch my drift.

Troll
24th March 2012, 19:08
Serious question.
I was wondering, when these little spats break out on a thread, as they have been wont to do over the years, why is it that the current crop of mods feel that they have to get so heavily and actively involved and start dishing out infractions and threatening bans?
Such exchanges have happened quite regularly over the many years I have been on here, and provided they stay within General and don't get litigious, or ridiculously out of hand, they have largely been allowed to defuse of their own volition.
The robust nature of some of the debate on here is a very big part of the allure of the forum for many people, and, I thought, the very reason we have corraled off the General part from the other areas, and even labelled it with a warning of sorts.
I have heard it suggested that too much slanging in any given thread ruins it for other people. Hard to accept that really, there are always a gazillion threads on the go on here. If one is not to your liking simply jump into another one.
Frankly speaking, if the whole place is going to get too watered down and nicey-nicey then General might as well be mothballed.What the fookwit said

AtW
24th March 2012, 19:11
Serious question.

Ban it.

Troll
24th March 2012, 19:12
Ban it.What it said

NotAllThere
24th March 2012, 21:02
Very simple (like some of the members). If you use certain words, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit. If you indulge in :ladybags: like SB and Zoiderman, and you keep on when asked to stop, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit.

Now that's clear, I'll get one with something far more intellectual - Britains Got Talent.

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 21:05
Very simple (like some of the members). If you use certain words, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit. If you indulge in :ladybags: like SB and Zoiderman, and you keep on when asked to stop, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit.

Now that's clear, I'll get one with something far more intellectual - Britains Got Talent.

:spel

Britain's Got Talent.

FFS. :suicide:

northernladyuk
24th March 2012, 21:10
Very simple (like some of the members). If you use certain words, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit. If you indulge in :ladybags: like SB and Zoiderman, and you keep on when asked to stop, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit.

Now that's clear, I'll get one with something far more intellectual - Britains Got Talent.
Is it permitted to call people very simple?

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 21:11
Is it permitted to call people very simple?

Yes, unless it's Brillopad because he has a doctors note.

mudskipper
24th March 2012, 21:13
Yes, unless it's Brillopad because he has a doctors note.

:spel

doctor's note


FFS :suicide:

MarillionFan
24th March 2012, 21:18
:spel

doctor's note


FFS :suicide:

Touché.

Old Greg
24th March 2012, 21:35
:spel

doctor's note


FFS :suicide:

:spel

doctors' note

BrilloPad
24th March 2012, 21:38
Yes, unless it's Brillopad because he is very simple and sensitive

FTFY

oscarose
24th March 2012, 21:40
drive down standards

:wave:

d000hg
24th March 2012, 22:23
Serious question.
I was wondering, when these little spats break out on a thread, as they have been wont to do over the years, why is it that the current crop of mods feel that they have to get so heavily and actively involved and start dishing out infractions and threatening bans?
Such exchanges have happened quite regularly over the many years I have been on here, and provided they stay within General and don't get litigious, or ridiculously out of hand, they have largely been allowed to defuse of their own volition.
The robust nature of some of the debate on here is a very big part of the allure of the forum for many people, and, I thought, the very reason we have corraled off the General part from the other areas, and even labelled it with a warning of sorts.
I have heard it suggested that too much slanging in any given thread ruins it for other people. Hard to accept that really, there are always a gazillion threads on the go on here. If one is not to your liking simply jump into another one.
Frankly speaking, if the whole place is going to get too watered down and nicey-nicey then General might as well be mothballed.Serious answer - probably because then people start spreading their little spats into unrelated threads and chasing their 'targets' around, like the current way every thread ends up as a slanging match about squaddies' IQs. To new members, that must look distasteful.

You doofus.

Troll
24th March 2012, 22:33
. To new members, that must look distasteful.

You doofus.fook the noobs

mudskipper
25th March 2012, 01:50
:spel

doctors' note

I would suggest that a note would normally be signed by one doctor. Therefore a doctor's note. (Although, in Brillo's case, perhaps it does require a whole team.)

BrilloPad
25th March 2012, 07:04
(Although, in Brillo's case, perhaps it does require a whole team.)

:yay:

I bet I require more doctors than any of the other loonies on here.

Old Greg
25th March 2012, 09:38
I would suggest that a note would normally be signed by one doctor. Therefore a doctor's note. (Although, in Brillo's case, perhaps it does require a whole team.)


:yay:

I bet I require more doctors than any of the other loonies on here.

I can confirm multiple doctors are involved.

eek
25th March 2012, 09:46
I can confirm multiple doctors are involved.

And still no diagnosis.

MarillionFan
25th March 2012, 09:54
And still no diagnosis.

Twuntitis.

He's now after a second opinion.

shaunbhoy
25th March 2012, 09:54
Is it permitted to call people very simple?

Only where double standards are being applied.

HTH

MarillionFan
25th March 2012, 09:56
Only where double helpings are being applied.

HTH

ftfy fat lad. :wink

shaunbhoy
25th March 2012, 10:16
Very simple (like some of the members). If you use certain words, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit. If you indulge in :ladybags: like SB and Zoiderman, and you keep on when asked to stop, you'll get infractions or banned for a bit.



Never happened that way when we had proper mods.
:eyes

shaunbhoy
25th March 2012, 10:23
Serious answer - probably because then people start spreading their little spats into unrelated threads and chasing their 'targets' around, like the current way every thread ends up as a slanging match about squaddies' IQs.

I've told you a million times, don't exaggerate.
I think, if you care to check, you will find that these "arguments" tend to be largely contained within a small number of threads.
Seemingly the ones where the Play-Nicely Police spend most of their time, desperately looking to be offended.
:eyes




To new members, that must look distasteful.

You doofus.

With the best will in the world, I very much doubt the overwhelming majority of new members come to General with anything less in mind than enjoying the bunfights amongst other things. So that notion doesn't really stack up either.
Although I suspect you proferred it with your tongue in your cheek.
:wink

All that said, being banned from somewhere that is rapidly going downhill to a bland grave, is hardly that punitive a punishment.

minestrone
25th March 2012, 10:35
If you cannot survive general you cannot survive contracting.

Look at suity, failed projects, failed poster.

Churchill
25th March 2012, 11:06
If you cannot survive general you cannot survive contracting.

Look at suity, failed projects, failed poster.

He should take a leaf out of your book. Although I doubt he could afford the vinegar.

minestrone
25th March 2012, 11:11
He should take a leaf out of your book. Although I doubt he could afford the vinegar.

I'm not one for the homoerotic hard man pish like yourself.

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 11:56
Never happened that way when we had proper mods.
:eyes


...Seemingly the ones where the Play-Nicely Police spend most of their time, desperately looking to be offended.
:eyes
...It's really getting to you isn't. It's all so unfair. :ohwell

MarillionFan
25th March 2012, 13:06
It's really getting to you isn't. It's all so unfair. :ohwell

Fook off Nat. Treat the man with some respect. He fought in two world wars so the likes of you could have your say! :mad

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 13:10
Fook off Nat. Treat the man with some respect. He fought in two world wars so the likes of you could have your say! :mad
:rollin:

shaunbhoy
25th March 2012, 14:25
It's really getting to you isn't. It's all so unfair. :ohwell

Not at all. I don't rely on moderator powers to get erections.

HTH

:winker:

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 14:48
Such rapier wit. Any sharper and you might cut yourself.

So long as you don't :cry1::cry2::cry3:

shaunbhoy
25th March 2012, 14:50
Such rapier wit. Any sharper and you might cut yourself.

So long as you don't :cry1::cry2::cry3:

Fat chance. It would take more than a power-drunk c0ck like you to do that.
Now go on, ban me you dreary twunt. See if my give-a-sh1t meter even flickers.

AtW
25th March 2012, 14:51
Fat chance. It would take more than a power-drunk c0ck like you to do that.
Now go on, ban me you dreary twunt. See if my give-a-sh1t meter even flickers.

:eek:

shaunbhoy
25th March 2012, 14:53
:eek:

Now this is NAT's big chance to show whether or not he deserves his uptight humourless reputation or not.
Whether or not he can take it as well as dish it.
I know where my money is going.

Watch this space...................

mudskipper
25th March 2012, 14:56
Now this is NAT's big chance to show whether or not he deserves his uptight humourless reputation or not.
Whether or not he can take it as well as dish it.
I know where my money is going.

Watch this space...................


Oh dear, did your team lose?

AtW
25th March 2012, 14:56
Now this is NAT's big chance to show whether or not he deserves his uptight humourless reputation or not.

Are you saying that NAT should go and ban herself?

AtW
25th March 2012, 14:57
Oh dear, did your team lose?

He is playing with NAT now, we'll see in a bit if he is going to lose this one ...

shaunbhoy
25th March 2012, 14:58
Are you saying that NAT should go and ban herself?

Worse things could happen.
:wink

AtW
25th March 2012, 15:05
Worse things could happen.
:wink

14,572

Troll
25th March 2012, 15:16
Fat chance. It would take more than a power-drunk c0ck like you to do that.
Now go on, ban me you dreary twunt. See if my give-a-sh1t meter even flickers.:popcorn:

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 15:31
Fat chance. It would take more than a power-drunk c0ck like you to do that.
Now go on, ban me you dreary twunt. See if my give-a-sh1t meter even flickers.

I think it's already pretty well established that the "...go on, ban me if your hard enough..." line only ever has one outcome. Feel free to think I'm humourless and uptight, I really don't care.

SimonMac
25th March 2012, 15:32
I think it's already pretty well established that the "...go on, ban me if your hard enough..." line only ever has one outcome. Feel free to think I'm humourless and uptight, I really don't care.

Will you two stop flirting and either ban him or STFU :laugh

eek
25th March 2012, 15:34
Will you two stop flirting and either ban him or STFU :laugh

+1. all talk and no action results in no one taking future threats seriously.

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 15:37
Banned, just for a day for:
...Now go on, ban me...

SimonMac
25th March 2012, 15:40
Banned, just for a day for:

So back to my original question, which insults are still allowed?

AtW
25th March 2012, 15:52
So back to my original question, which insults are still allowed?

You can only find that out experimentally.

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 15:52
There's a few banned words, but if I told you what they were, I'd have to ban myself. Other than that, pretty much anything goes.

Problems arise when people get too much into :ladybags: or every other post is slagging someone off, or, and particulary relavent at the moment, when you're told to pack it in and you keep going on and on and on and on. That's when you're likely to get a smack on the wrist.

Also, if you continually flirt with what's acceptable and what isn't, eventually, you'll do something requiring action. I've noticed that people who do that are the first to complain about megalomania and favouritism. As though the power of being able to stop someone posting on a site for a few days would go to anyone's head. I just find it incredible that certain individuals think their contribution is soooooo important.

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 15:53
You can only find that out experimentally.

It's a dice roll, so you won't.

Old Greg
25th March 2012, 15:55
So back to my original question, which insults are still allowed?

In what context?

SimonMac
25th March 2012, 15:55
There's a few banned words, but if I told you what they were, I'd have to ban myself. Other than that, pretty much anything goes.

Problems arise when people get too much into :ladybags: or every other post is slagging someone off, or, and particulary relavent at the moment, when you're told to pack it in and you keep going on and on and on and on. That's when you're likely to get a smack on the wrist.

Also, if you continually flirt with what's acceptable and what isn't, eventually, you'll do something requiring action. I've noticed that people who do that are the first to complain about megalomania and favouritism. As though the power of being able to stop someone posting on a site for a few days would go to anyone's head. I just find it incredible that certain individuals think their contribution is soooooo important.

So I am ok to call you a humourless power crazy stasi-esque megalomaniac with a small willy and massive chip on you shoulder, as long as I dont repeat it too often? Speaking hypothetically though, I love all the mods really.

realityhack
25th March 2012, 16:02
Banned, just for a day for:
Damn, you beat me to it.

As to the original question - it's not an objective science. It has more to do with context & attitude than anything else. Clearly there are some words which will earn a slap or a ban, as has been demonstrated, but you should know what appropriate behaviour is here by now. I'm not drawing a line for people to flirt with just to test 'the system'. Who really wants a long list of rules, anyway? That's the sort of thing that would really kill a board, not the odd slap on the wrist.

As for the eternal 'it's not like the old days' refrain. Well, it never is, is it. However in days of yore the language was more moderated and the behaviour marginally less so. Admin lifted a lot of the syntax restrictions that existed on the old General forum, but that doesn't mean that persistent idiocy will be tolerated - with the exception of a few who can't help it, bless their cotton socks.

SimonMac
25th March 2012, 16:03
....but that doesn't mean that persistent idiocy will be tolerated - with the exception of a few who can't help it, bless their cotton socks.

Well admin should stop making them Mods then :tongue

realityhack
25th March 2012, 16:05
continually flirt with what's acceptable and what isn't... ...people who do that are the first to complain about megalomania and favouritism.
Ain't that the truth. Also, the first to report (harmless) posts are the first to accuse people of being a 'bedwetter', generally.

realityhack
25th March 2012, 16:05
Well admin should stop making them Mods then :tongue
:laugh

I'm special, me.

MarillionFan
25th March 2012, 16:18
Ain't that the truth. Also, the first to report (harmless) posts are the first to accuse people of being a 'bedwetter', generally.

Bedwetter.

administrator
25th March 2012, 16:19
:laugh

I'm special, me.

WHS :D

MarillionFan
25th March 2012, 16:21
:laugh

I'm special, me.


WHS :D

Special as in a Brillopad kind of way?

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 16:44
So I am ok to call you a humourless power crazy stasi-esque megalomaniac with a small willy and massive chip on you shoulder, as long as I dont repeat it too often?...Of course. However, in the interests of accuracy, I should point out that I'm very well balanced, as I have two massive chips - one on each shoulder.

SimonMac
25th March 2012, 16:45
Of course. However, in the interests of accuracy, I should point out that I'm very well balanced, as I have two massive chips - one on each shoulder.

Thats the thing you want to clarify from the statement as inaccurate :laugh

fullyautomatix
25th March 2012, 16:46
Is there a difference between Libya under Gaddafi and CUK governed by the Mods ?

SimonMac
25th March 2012, 16:47
Is there a difference between Libya under Gaddafi and CUK governed by the Mods ?

Libya had oil

mudskipper
25th March 2012, 16:47
Is there a difference between Libya under Gaddafi and CUK governed by the Mods ?

Gadaffi's dead.

NotAllThere
25th March 2012, 16:48
We don't fart in the presence of John Simpson.

MarillionFan
25th March 2012, 16:49
Is there a difference between Libya under Gaddafi and CUK governed by the Mods ?

You could reason with Gaddafi.

AtW
25th March 2012, 16:58
Is there a difference between Libya under Gaddafi and CUK governed by the Mods ?

There is - NATO won't protect you here...

mudskipper
25th March 2012, 16:59
There is - NATO won't protect you here...

But Old Greg will. He's the man.

Old Greg
25th March 2012, 17:41
But Old Greg will. He's the man.

I'll certainly cheer you along from the sidelines.

AtW
25th March 2012, 17:42
Can't we just all be nice to each other?

:hug:

Old Greg
25th March 2012, 17:43
Can't we just all be nice to each other?

:hug:

Even twatface?

cojak
25th March 2012, 18:13
We don't fart in the presence of John Simpson.

You might not...

Moscow Mule
25th March 2012, 18:15
Can't we just all be nice to each other?

:hug:

Of course we can.

You chuntering old babushka.

BrilloPad
25th March 2012, 19:21
Can't we just all be nice to each other?

:hug:

Then general would be as empty as sas's brain within days.