You've been BANNED

For LOL, guy! Read the words! She says you’re easily offended and you deny it like that?
Talk about being in total denial. You’ve been the chief crybaby on the board for two weeks now. Give it a rest, for Chirst’s sake!

What is this, a “new rule”.

Are you one of those fans of Star Trek or other time travel shows that knows every show needs a new rule every 10 minutes, when the last one starts looking so threadbare it’s transparent?

So now the new test is sig lines? Wow! And you don’t have one…What ARE the odds?

I like Fonz’s sig. I think that having a picture of yourself in your sig is a good idea. I am wondering why the guy has a big Papa Smurf blue tattoo on his body, but hey- it takes all kinds.

And for your information, here is the new rule.

Actually, I base my opinion of posters here on the content of their posts. I’ve just noticed that a disproportionate amount of similar content was followed by a sig explaining where the person screen name came from. What, am I not allowed to comment on things that seem to go together? I was also wondering if MysterEcks (a fellow “trollhunter”) had noticed this as well. Amusing that you complain about me reading to much into a situation by reading too much into my post.

By the way, I can’t stand Star Trek and do have a sig, which I use sporadically.

That blue dot was techchick68’s idea. She wouldn’t accept my original picture. Ask her nice if you must see it, bu please don’t tell me. There’s some things I’d rather not know.

How does this relate? Did someone here make a typo?

I’ve seen a couple of other references to this “rule” this month.

Yeah, but I think everyone aside from Barflyer was talking about the rule to mock him with its stupidity.

As for “Gaudere’s Rule”, I think 2Sense was just mentioning it as the new rule around here.

Oh, and 2sense, I was talking about Mu Mu’s sig, not Fonz’s.

Er… I made a couple mistakes in my post. I mean “newest rule” instead of “here is the new rule”. And I forgot that I was not using my “picture” sig. The post makes a bit more sense now.

And thanks waterj2, I did think you were talking about Fonz.


Just my 2sense
Check out my picture.
[sub]2sense’s likeness created by Highlander and Melin’s talented son, Quizle, and kindly hosted by the PurpleCrackWhore.[/sub]

Don’t you have that backwards? ChiefWahoo used it seriously to attack Piano because she was within 40 user numbers of AM/PM.

barflyer is probably just tweaking Ed’s nose, just because of his obvious use of the Cecil sock, and his fondness for keeping the troll threads around.

So now my sig says what my name means?
And that’s an indicator of troll?

You don’t remember, do you, that I had no sig line and you were the troll (somehow it fits you better than trollhunter) you were the troll that kept saying I was a woman or gay because my name was confusable with “muumuu”.

So I added a sig line to explain it. Now you say you’re going to go trolling with sig lines as bait? Well, fuck off asshole! That “new rule” idea is right on the money. All you trolls do is make up a new rule every time you carp on someone. And you claim credibility? Not with me, babes. You convinced me of the opposite: the way to tell if someone is a troll is going to be that they make up new rules about trolls.

Nobody has to defend using sig lines. They are a feature of the board, and there are lots of threads showing how to build them, and hundreds of clever, plain, and confusingly funny examples, updated daily. If you don’t have one it’s your problem, not everyone else’s.

Back to the OP, this is what Ed Zotti said about the oh-so-appropriately nicknamed catastrophe:
The TUUB - The Total Universal Ubiquitous Banning

Testy? Wow, I didn’t mean for it to sound testy. Whose email program did you read it in, mine or TubaDiva’s, in order to do that analysis?

I think it’s more fair to say that people with usernames that would otherwise be confusing tend to put the reason in their sig. The only other example I can think of is Swimming Riddles (does she still have the Nietzche quote in her sig?), and nobody is about to call her a twit.

Two different problems in the same day, same effect – nobody could post. (With the DNS problem, people couldn’t read the board either.)

Both were brief (the DNS ran a little longer), but were corrected.

I guess it’s human nature, but why the big fuss about the 10 minutes when the board was not accessible versus the hours and hours that it is accessible? We do have the occasional blip like the two incidents referred to above but that are just that, occasional (verging on rare) and momentary. Is your glass 9/10ths full or 1/10th empty?

your humble TubaDiva
Administrator

Yes, and they’re also the same lot that hang around in ATMB questioning board rules and policies, and sometimes make the leap to the Pit, baselessly attacking established posters.

barfly (something about hanging out and drinking), AM/PM (don’t remember), PGB (something a grandkid said once), and Mu Mu (japanese nonsense), and a few others I forget (and a few I’m not sure of) all come to mind. Very little content, much bitching and questioning and whining. Methinks a good, hard look be taken.

And yes, I know I’m going to catch flak for the ‘baseless’ remark. Do what you will.

–Tim

Once again, this is not the forum to square off against one another.

If you have a legitimate question about how this message board operates, this is the forum for that question.

If you want to take one another on, I refer you to the Pit, or, even better, to email.

I’m closing this thread.

your humble TubaDiva
Administrator