Have you seen her posts? A squiggle, a smiley, a couple of slashes and a plus sign.
Give me the good ol’ days of Silent Bob.
It’s the smilie that annoys you, isn’t it, Chiefy?
It’s her schtick, but I don’t get the sig. I’m sure it’s code for something, but I’m apparently too dense to get it.
This is not the first time.
You where a little bit nicer about it, naturally.
Hey, thanks for the link yojimbo. After reading that thread, I now get the sig.
I think.
But that tiny, run together, thought ballon text is annoying.
It is a bit tiresome isn’t it? I mean, it’s not clever and it adds nothing. Every time i see a Sweet Sue post i marvel that someone actually took the time to do that and wonder why on earth they would. Having read the above linked thread though, i now realise she’s just might be a troll’s alias.
But… it’s harmless and it’s no skin off my nose. A great bit “Whatever” to Sweet Sue.
Fran
If posting an extra seven lines of useless annoying garbage at the bottom of every post, which are always one short line long and written in subscript without spaces doesn’t count as being a jerk, I would say that ignoring the direction of the moderators (Alphagene: “It’s up to you. Stop the gratuitous graphics or we’ll stop them for you.”) probably does.
And there was also TubaDiva’s quote:
Considering also the taxing on the server…
Yeesh…why not just ban her-she’s an obvious troll?
I remember a thread a little while back in which Sweet Sue posted several sentences of related subject matter in the form we have all come to know and love as a paragraph! I think the topic had something to do with geography, but I’m not completely sure. I remember how taken aback I was to see her abandon her shtick for once. I thought it might continue in that direction, but she devolved, sadly.
Yup, she can talk alright. She doesn’t seem to like me very much, though. :rolleyes:
Maybe that’s because your initial response to her post in that thread seemed rather snide for GQ, Coldfire.
Personally, I think its going overboard to accuse Sweet Sue of being a troll. Her posts can be somewhat amusing, and I certainly don’t see why anyone would get worked up enough about them to tell her to “fuck off” or call her a “vapid worthless fool.”
In what world?
In my world, apparently, where I don’t flip out over innocuous posts or go ballistic over someone’s use of a smile icon.
How 'bout unintelligble. I have better ways to waste my time then trying to deciper tiny, unspaced sentence fragments.
And when, after 147 posts, someone’s contributions to the board are mostly one sentence, illegible drive-bys
**sub[/sub]
O
º
[sub]:rolleyes:[/sub]
--¥–
^
1 1 **
, a touch of irritation is not entirely unexpected. I don’t belive she’s a troll, and I don’t care about the doll, but I do care about the fact that the runon “thought balloons” are impossible to read. Sue, if you must do them in subscript, please, at least put spaces in!
Fenris
Ahem.
Fuck you, Starbury.
Snide for GQ? Sweet Jesus, have you ever seen Manny when he closes a thread?
Read my remark towards her (I’m even trying to help her, vapid worthless fool that I am), and then read her furious three-page response. A tad over the top, perhaps?
If someone comments on one aspect of your posting style, and it’s enough to make you explode in rage, you’re either too sensitive, or you only have a one-aspect posting style. Or, as the case may be, both.
Look. On peak hours, it takes me 10 minutes to open a fucking thread sometimes. Until we get a new server, do you like the feeling of competing for bandwidth with ohmygodimsocutecuzicandrawthisheredollwithsmiliesfuckingsue? Who adds absolutely fuck all to the boards?
It’s not that I don’t like mundane, pointless stuff. For fucks sake, I moderate MPSIMS. But the main purpose of these boards is to fight ignorance. Yup, we’ve heard that a thousand times before. Posters who solely contribute pointless stuff are not the ones who gain my respect.
I don’t have much interest in getting into a debate about how GQ is moderated, but Manhattan’s lack of tact in closing some threads isn’t usually seen in most posters’ GQ responses. I probably don’t know the full story behind it, but it seemed to me that peace was banned from here for being rude in his posts to GQ. So, again, I’d say it seemed like a snide remark (though I should have added in my first post, it seemed snide at the time, when there had been a few posts in other threads aimed at her by other posters). That, I believe, is why she reacted that way.
I guess my point is that I don’t see much of a reason to take someone to task for their one-aspect posting style. Many of the people that get upset at Sweet Sue defended Silent Bob. I don’t see much harm in either of them.
This seems to be a fairly subjective standard. For instance, I probably am not too excited about the fact that I am competing for bandwith with someone posting “Ahem. Fuck you, Starbury.” either, but I’m not going to get too worked up about it.
Viewing a whole bunch of posts that I perceived as intentional static (no information) pissed me off. Normally when I see that kind of thing my eyes just gloss over and I go to the next post. But the “cutesy” aspect of these drove me over the edge.
Actually, I was kind of proud of the subject line…
I say, start editing her posts. They drain bandwidth, all right? WHAT is her point?