All posts by Riolu777

A reply to Alemas2005

Riolu777·3/28/2017

<div class="quote">EveryOpenEye wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Slicer Vorzakh wrote: BBB sixth try's a charm </p> </div>didn't you literally run for administration man to expose such loopholes and aim to get them closed or something </div> <p>looks like he still wants to take advantage of it </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Alemas2005

Riolu777·3/27/2017

yes to all

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to KnightoftheLight

Riolu777·3/7/2017

<div class="quote">TheShadowAssassin wrote:
<div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
How will a mutual endorsement work if we have more lenient rules than LMBE?</div>I'd imagine something along the lines of what Astrokid mentioned above </div> <p>d </p><p>next time ill read the thread and then vote </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to KnightoftheLight

Riolu777·3/6/2017

How will a mutual endorsement work if we have more lenient rules than LMBE?

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Veralann

Riolu777·3/4/2017

<div class="quote">Brick425 wrote:
<div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
"I think that whatever is chosen will end up being reversed in the next year or two, so I'm neutral." <p>- me, 04:23, October 16, 2016 </p><p>lol, neutral again, because this will also be reversed in less than a year </p> </div>This terrible logic can be applied to anything. <p>"Who are you voting for in 2020?" </p><p>"lol neutral again, because we'll have the opposite party member as president in the next election." </p> </div> <p>the point was that this wiki is very reactive and finicky </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Johnyjo

Riolu777·3/4/2017

<p>ideally, delete everything </p><p>but I must settle on B </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Legoanimals750

Riolu777·3/4/2017

<p>uh, other, I want a new census first </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Veralann

Riolu777·3/1/2017

<p>"I think that whatever is chosen will end up being reversed in the next year or two, so I'm neutral." </p><p>- me, 04:23, October 16, 2016 </p><p>lol, neutral again, because this will also be reversed in less than a year </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Riolu777

Riolu777·1/31/2017

<p>three votes are enough? and this is just an excuse for you to not vote, Alemas, I see you. </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Riolu777

Riolu777·1/31/2017

BUMP ADMINS PLEASE REPLY TO THIS

(Edited by Riolu777)

Riolu777·1/21/2017 in Community Discussions

Admin Vote - Unblocking the word "douche"

<p>I don't see why we need to this be blocked anymore. It's a yellowx, I've heard from many that they want it unblocked, and as always if it's used to attack someone that would be handled by moderators on at the time. I want to be able to say that some guy I saw the other day was a "douchenozzle" and whatnot. Or be able to call a certain hairstyle "douchey." Doesn't seem like a bad word to me. Let's vote on it. (I vote unblock.) </p> <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Votes">Votes</span></h2> <p>Unblock: 5 </p><p>Keep blocked: </p><p>Neutral: 1 </p> <h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Result">Result</span></h2> <p>Unblock </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Riolu777

Riolu777·1/21/2017

Wallflower by Maribou State

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Riolu777

Riolu777·1/19/2017

<p>Driving a Car While Listening to Bill Burr's Podcast by dné </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to AmazingPythor

Riolu777·1/7/2017

<div class="quote">Jerry Seinfeld wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Riolu777 wrote: I'm in favor of scrapping this vote and having an entire overhaul of the closure rules. I've had to ask people on chat and get different answers in the past when wanting to find out when to close RfRs. </p> </div>Is that actually allowed? If so, then ditto. </div> <p>AP could just close this and then we figure out a new system for RfR closures and put forth a vote on it. </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to AmazingPythor

Riolu777·1/6/2017

I'm in favor of scrapping this vote and having an entire overhaul of the closure rules. I've had to ask people on chat and get different answers in the past when wanting to find out when to close RfRs.

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to Keplers

Riolu777·12/23/2016

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to BraveNewRoyalty

Riolu777·12/22/2016

<div class="quote">BraveNewRoyalty wrote:
<div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
<div class="quote">BraveNewRoyalty wrote:
<div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
And I vote A, but I agree with Roddy, and Rome's offer is a good one too. Roddy's right in that if people abuse the existence of a list by going to every length to say words on chat that aren't yet on the list, that should be punishable as trolling. Common sense should still exist in that sense. And I also think the list should be a group effort, and Rome and others should be able to help with that.</div>It is intended to be a whole system that everyone who chooses to could contribute to.</div>Just curious, what's the safeguard for people who want to say that words such as "Christian" or "Muslim" or "communism" are not offensive words to them? Is it safe to assume they're trolling or would we have to seriously cater to those requests? Or does common sense fill in the gaps and apply in those cases? Because I do want everyone to contribute to such a list but there would have to be some arbiter, whether that be the admins or common sense or both, to be able to determine whether or not the requested words to be added are of a legitimately offensive or inappropriate nature or not.
</div>People would be able to decide on the list what is offensive or not by majority. <p>I expect to see "I am a Muslim" allowed, but not "All Muslims blow up stuff" </p> </div> <p>But that means holding a vote on every sentence with the word "Muslim" in it, and the level of offensiveness of said sentences, right? You'd be kidding yourself if that didn't sound cumbersome. Common sense and admin involvement has to be here to some degree, I would think... </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to BraveNewRoyalty

Riolu777·12/22/2016

<div class="quote">BraveNewRoyalty wrote:
<div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
And I vote A, but I agree with Roddy, and Rome's offer is a good one too. Roddy's right in that if people abuse the existence of a list by going to every length to say words on chat that aren't yet on the list, that should be punishable as trolling. Common sense should still exist in that sense. And I also think the list should be a group effort, and Rome and others should be able to help with that.</div>It is intended to be a whole system that everyone who chooses to could contribute to. </div> <p>Just curious, what's the safeguard for people who want to say that words such as "Christian" or "Muslim" or "communism" are not offensive words to them? Is it safe to assume they're trolling or would we have to seriously cater to those requests? Or does common sense fill in the gaps and apply in those cases? Because I do want everyone to contribute to such a list but there would have to be some arbiter, whether that be the admins or common sense or both, to be able to determine whether or not the requested words to be added are of a legitimately offensive or inappropriate nature or not.
</p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to BraveNewRoyalty

Riolu777·12/22/2016

<p>And I vote A, but I agree with Roddy, and Rome's offer is a good one too. Roddy's right in that if people abuse the existence of a list by going to every length to say words on chat that aren't yet on the list, that should be punishable as trolling. Common sense should still exist in that sense. And I also think the list should be a group effort, and Rome and others should be able to help with that. </p>

(Edited by Riolu777)

A reply to BraveNewRoyalty

Riolu777·12/22/2016

<div class="quote">Slicer Vorzakh wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Loney 97 wrote: B) Implementation of this would be a nightmare as others have said, and I personally trust our CMs and admin's situation-by-situation digression in this type of thing - this is why we have real people moderating and not just a bot. </p> </div>i quite literally got banned for saying i like men, i dont trust them at all anymore </div> <p>That was one mod acting on their own, and we made sure that the ban was reversed shortly after.
</p>

(Edited by Riolu777)