A
Using a substitute for the word is pretty much saying it anyways. People know what you mean.
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
Loney 97 wrote:
Madkatmaximus wrote: How about we unblock all the words and dish out punishment for people that abuse them! :D
So to answer your question, it's words that the Bible doesn't want us to like, and thus makes it words I don't like. And that should be every Christian's perspective.
But then again, I could say the same to you, and ask what your concept of immorality is, and whatever your answer, you can use that as a counter weight towards ours/mine, and make it seem so high a stranded, that it's laughable.
Also, I hope we don't go off-topic anymore then we have to, as I needed to say all that for the question, but that doesn't mean I want to start a debate. If you want to, you can message me.
@TA: Like I said, I think you are thinking about the Rome's kidnaping and raping of the Sabine women.
As for the swears, one verse that mentions language is Colossians 3:8. Now I'm ignoring the "using God's name in vain" swears because God spoke clearly against them. But back on the topic of the verse, the question is who defines the filthiness of the words? If it's the person then it's all up to their opinion. If it's up to the culture, then it's all up to it's opinion. Is it one of those, "If it causes someone to stumble avoid doing it around that person" rules or "Whatever is right, pure, noble, think on these things."
Anyways, I guess I'll vote neutral to both since I haven't made a clear decesion.
-Alemas2005
So much for leaving the subject alone. xD
Hindsight is funny like that. How many MLP emotes do we have anyways? Five? Whoop de do.
I also find it funny how you put the limit of "none" even though people voted against such already.
Edit: no one noticed my derp of thinking that a vote of "none" means the person votes that there should be no more MLP emotes...
"If "No" wins, I shall leave the subject alone, alright? "
-Alemas2005
So much for leaving the subject alone. xD
Disable it.
The way I see it, once someone has already made a comment there's not much you can do. If they swear or put in explicit stuff then yeah edit it since it goes against the policy or whatever, but if it was mean or whatever it's already been said. It's like having someone say something mean in a crowd and someone recorded the whole thing. You could delete the recording and stuff, but the people there already heard it.
As for photos, I'm not sure what the use would be. Making new file names and deleting repetative ones or unused ones? They could delete bad photos tho.
Keplers wrote:
Damastermind wrote:
Can't disprove it without proof, can you? Links, anyone?
Note: This is said to in jest. I could be one of Nashtrons users, so why would I care if EN also had access?
Why can't we just test out having no censors for half a week? And then continue to punish swearing or inappropriate discussions as normal, with kicks and bans, just as if little emotes blocking certain words were still there.
If there were to be a test of that sort it'd have to be decided on by the Admins so that users couldn't use it to their advantage.
Examples of using the knowledge of what days the unblocking would be trialed on:
"Hey, they're unblocking swears for a week. Let's swear more so those words stay blocked. End justifies means, right?"
"Hey, they might let us use these swears if we don't use them heavily this week. Let's be on our best behaviour so that the words get unblocked."
So the latter.
So you're saying that having a bunch of articles that are all pretty much carbon copies of each other is better than having articles that actually give you more useful information?
...
If that's the case, enjoy thousands of carbon copies as there are probably thousands of LMB users who fit the carbon copy bill.
...#confusion
What I think people are thinking is this: if we have a bunch of articles of rank two that aren't very detailed, why do we need more undetailed articles?
...I think they just take it off of Youtube or something by stealing the audio.
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
LegoSuperBowser wrote:
I'm at rank two, and have 50 some posts.
Mesa thinks LSB is worried that his page here might get deleted, though I thought someone already said that wiki users could make a page no matter their rank or something like that.
/s , 0s, USA
Meh, I was going to suggest trying to put them in fewer pages if there were fewer of them, but that's a lot. :{P
I'm neutral on the matter.
And push it somewhere else
Was!
Personally, I don't see why Brickimedia can't just take the pages related to the LMBs and the LMBW community just stays here. Why do people feel like they would be forced to move? Meh, off topic I know.
I HATE THIS WHY WOULD YOU EVEN-
Yeah sure I'm fine with it.