wu :: forums - Print Page


    
      
        wu :: forums
        (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        riddles >> general problem-solving / chatting / whatever >> Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
        
(Message started by: Aryabhatta on Sep 7^th, 2007, 5:11pm)

Title: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Aryabhatta on Sep 7^th, 2007, 5:11pm

Given the flurry of meaningless and irrelevant posts to mostly dead topics, creating new threads irrevelant to the forum etc can we consider srn347 to be a spammer?

If majority agree, I suggest we ban him (at least temporarily)! Enough is enough.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ThudanBlunder on Sep 7^th, 2007, 5:25pm

I suggest cutting the precocious little sh*t some slack by giving him a warning first.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by JiNbOtAk on Sep 7^th, 2007, 5:38pm

on 09/07/07 at 17:25:35, ThudanBlunder wrote:

I suggest cutting the precocious little sh*t some slack by giving him a warning first.

And do you think he'll understand ? ( nevermind following the advice )

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ThudanBlunder on Sep 7^th, 2007, 5:53pm

on 09/07/07 at 17:38:19, JiNbOtAk wrote:

And do you think he'll understand ?

Vee have vays of making him understand.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ima1trkpny on Sep 7^th, 2007, 6:31pm

Amen... this I look forward to seeing! *hauls out bag of popcorn*
I say we explain in rather frank terms the problem and see what happens, if he continues, I am all for kicking his hinny to Mars... but let's give him a fair shot.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by JiNbOtAk on Sep 7^th, 2007, 6:37pm

on 09/07/07 at 18:31:53, ima1trkpny wrote:

..I am all for kicking his hinny to Mars...

I know !! Let's give Obob (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=riddles_hard;action=display;num=1174688369;start=25#25) the honours ! ;D

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ima1trkpny on Sep 7^th, 2007, 6:52pm

on 09/07/07 at 18:37:41, JiNbOtAk wrote:

I know !! Let's give Obob (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=riddles_hard;action=display;num=1174688369;start=25#25) the honours ! ;D

Hey if it comes to that, I fully second! He isn't the only one that is frustrated... (*prays I don't count under Obob's list of irritating ones...* :-[ )

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Obob on Sep 7^th, 2007, 11:53pm

Haha, I didn't intend to be the one to start a revolution. At any rate, it would be nice if he could be made to understand what his place in this community could be. But if he continues with his current habits for very long, I think he will seriously damage these forums.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 2:31am

on 09/07/07 at 17:53:03, ThudanBlunder wrote:

Vee have vays of making him understand.

LOL.

Obob, you do realise (well you are quite brilliant in what you do), that you have posted at minimum 15 posts complaining about him. That's got to be considered a negative from where you stand, trying to only improve the forum, not degrade it.

I fully agree with the posts above, that he should be given a chance, if not vamoose permanently. I mean, his IP is logged.

He does have the qualities of a spammer, so I would consider him one.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Obob on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:32am

Most of my complaints, however, have been in the form of criticisms of srn's actual posts. Maybe it would be better if I just ignored him, but having every thread end in a false statement seems like a worse option to me. Of course, he never acknowledges that he is wrong, and just goes on and posts his false statement again right after its being refuted.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ima1trkpny on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:44am

Ok, after my last post here last night, I sent our dear srn347 a very nice message explaining what we felt was a problem and the sort of "manners", if you will, that to make everything run smoothly should be followed. I then continued to go on, that we would all happily welcome him, etc if he would just try to be more considerate and actually think through his posts.
His reply, was immature to put it nicely... I genuinely think the kid doesn't get it. Anyone else care to try? If not... I'm fed up with his crap.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ThudanBlunder on Sep 8^th, 2007, 12:23pm

He has been warned about his attitude and behaviour but has not changed his dissonant tune at all.
At first I thought he had some entertainment value but I am now in favour of the boot.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by SMQ on Sep 8^th, 2007, 1:02pm

And yet here we all are, effectively talking about srn347 as though he weren't in the "room" -- not exactly the height of politeness either...

As a practical matter, I don't believe anyone but William can actually kick/ban an account; is it time to bring him into this?

--SMQ

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ThudanBlunder on Sep 8^th, 2007, 3:27pm

on 09/08/07 at 13:02:27, SMQ wrote:

And yet here we all are, effectively talking about srn347 as though he weren't in the "room" -- not exactly the height of politeness either...

OK, let's arrange a secret conclave and at the end announce our decision with either black or white smoke. ::)

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 5:39pm

on 09/08/07 at 15:27:13, ThudanBlunder wrote:

OK, let's have a secret conclave and at the end announce our recommendations with either black or white smoke. ::)

If we look at actual conclaves, the outlook doesn't look good for srn347.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 8:07pm

YOU PEOPLE DARE START SUCH A TOPIC! Why do you people make your life's ambition be to virtually attack me continually?

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Obob on Sep 8^th, 2007, 8:12pm

I for one do not want to attack you. Rather, I would prefer that you stay a member of this community, provided that you become a bit more mature and heed the advice of those who are more knowledgeable than you. It is your arrogance and seeming total disregard for the work and opinions of others that means your current behavior in the forums cannot be tolerated forever.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Michael_Dagg on Sep 8^th, 2007, 8:14pm

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 8:16pm

on 09/08/07 at 20:14:13, Michael_Dagg wrote:

??? :D, No Obob, I do not wish to attack him like I do, but I have tried being polite, yet it didn't sink in. I went for a more direct approach, and it seems to have registered, but not fully yet. But we shall see the effects sooner than later.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 8:20pm

Some of you don't wish to attack me. Those people are not spammers and I am not directing the below comment to them. Those of you who are attacking me:

You disapoint me more than sasuke hates itachi.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by SMQ on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:08pm

on 09/08/07 at 20:07:17, srn347 wrote:

Why do you people make your life's ambition be to virtually attack me continually?

Are you really so oblivious as to be honestly unable to answer that question for yourself?

In a nutshell, it's because, unlike every other regular member of these forums you don't come here to learn anything -- only to "teach." And even that might be somewhat tolerable if you were really as smart or knowledgeable as you think you are, but you're not. You presume to teach math to people -- intelligent people -- who have been studying math longer than you've been alive. You come across as disruptive, arrogant, immature, self-serving, and only rarely give any indication that you've even read, let alone attempted to understand what any one else has written here.

That's why you're not well liked. That's why we "dare" to question your continuing role in this community. Because you don't seem to want to be part of a community -- you seem just to want to be a dick (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_a_dick).

(And yes, I realize that calling you a dick makes me a dick too -- so be it. I've tried being polite. I've tried talking like a Texan. You don't seem to have heard a word of it. Maybe by being a dick I'll at least make an impression.)

--SMQ

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:27pm

I have learned and taught. Have you? What would you do if you were you(which luckily for you, you aren't)?

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:31pm

on 09/08/07 at 21:27:49, srn347 wrote:

I have learned and taught. Have you? What would you do if you were you(which luckily for you, you aren't)?

Have you learned not be a dick from now on, and to post only to active threads, not one's which are long dead, and nobody is interested in(the one's in which there has ben a conclusive answer and proof). Have you learned from the abuse that you are annoying people? Have you learned that you re not respected? Have you understood that your stupid replies are not wanted e.g. the one you just stated? Well have you?

You have only taught us that we can be mean, but only when the correct pressure is applied, and you are certainly doing that.

Please stop for your own benefit.

Title: srn347 is not a spammer!
Post by srn347 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:37pm

What is wrong with replying to long dead posts?

Title: Re: srn347 is not a spammer!
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:42pm

on 09/08/07 at 21:37:30, srn347 wrote:

What is wrong with replying to long dead posts?

Nothing is wrong if you make a positive contribution. Unfortunately for you, and all of the other users on this site, you do not. Hence you are not benefiting the site, which is why doing so is incorrect. If you made some serious remarks and contributed in a positive fashion it would be acceptable.

Sure, I seem to be doing a lot of that recently(not making a positive contribution), but not in the same way you are. And it seemed that most people who have taken on the same trend seemed to start doing it around August 27 2007.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:48pm

Not the day I registered. If most people did it, why blame me?! Let's solve this with a riddle. Why is there no correct answer to this question?

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:51pm

on 09/08/07 at 21:48:25, srn347 wrote:

Not the day I registered. If most people did it, why blame me?! Let's solve this with a riddle. Why is there no correct answer to this question?

A riddle is not a pardox, you should know yourself, you did start a stupid thread. Here is your details according to my timezone when I look at you:

Username: srn347 Picture/Text

Name: srn347
Posts: 252
Position: Full Member
Date Registered: Aug 27th, 2007, 12:52pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ICQ:
AIM:
YIM:
Email: hidden
Website:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gender: Male
Age:
Location:

So you did register then. But since your not in my timezone and no one else is currently open to being so except for Noke, the 26th.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 8^th, 2007, 9:54pm

Mine says the 26th. And that wasn't a paradox.

Title: Re: srn347 is not a spammer!
Post by SMQ on Sep 9^th, 2007, 5:11am

on 09/08/07 at 21:42:04, mikedagr8 wrote:

Sure, I seem to be doing a lot of that recently(not making a positive contribution), but not in the same way you are.

Since we're having this public discussion... Mike, while I appreciate your enthusiasm 'round here, I'm not sure your replying to every single post srn347 makes with a correcting comment, however deserved, is helping anything. Clearly by now he knows what he's doing, and just as clearly he doesn't care. Only he knows why that is, but if it's to get attention/recognition/notoriety, you're only "egging him on."

Which is in no way to say you're doing anything "wrong" -- everyone is welcome to post as much or as little as they like, so long as they keep it civil (though "constructive" is preferred) -- but I fail to see what purpose is served in "hounding" him the way you seem to be doing. Just my opinion; make of it what you will.

--SMQ

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 9^th, 2007, 5:18am

Understood, sorry, it just frustrates me, that after being able to finally use the internet for recreation, I see that people can be so ignorant, when they have such a wonderful opportunity to grasp knowledge. Knowledge = Power when money isn't involved. So I try to gain as much of that as possible. Sorry, if I am enticing someone to have a go at me, just I am not used to such ignorance, by someone who looks like they are capable of understanding.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 9^th, 2007, 10:05am

knowledge=power when money isn't involved? Why can't money be involved?

Title: Re: srn347 is not a spammer!
Post by Roy on Sep 11^th, 2007, 12:29am

on 09/09/07 at 05:11:38, SMQ wrote:

Clearly by now he knows what he's doing, and just as clearly he doesn't care. Only he knows why that is, but if it's to get attention/recognition/notoriety, you're only "egging him on."
--SMQ

I'd say it's to gain uberpuzzler status; doing what he's been doing means an extra 50 posts or so, then he gets to reply to threads like this, forcing some of us to tell him off repeatedly, then he replies again! I mean he registered on August 27 and is already a senior riddler, not many people actually respect people with higher status, and at this rate no one will respect srn347 even if he stays on long enough to be uberpuzzler

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 11^th, 2007, 4:32pm

Clearly the reason you don't respect me is because none of you respect each other or yourselves. If you people had a theme song, this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFTw5hmQbdQ
would be it since I'm waiting for you all to stop haiting.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by TenaliRaman on Sep 11^th, 2007, 7:24pm

Funnily enough, after eliminating all his posts from my sight, i find the replies made to his posts more annoying now.

A sincere request to all, "please stop feeding the troll".

This is for 2 good reasons,
1. The person you are trying to help doesn't want to be helped.
2. You are not contributing anything to the thread.

For example, check the exponential inequality thread. Out of the 38 posts (1+37) at the moment, 14 posts are crap and roughly 18 posts are replies to that crap, making the contribution to original thread just 6 and this includes the post which has the question.

-- AI

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 11^th, 2007, 8:09pm

What is wrong with you people?! If you think at least one thing I say is spam, you must have coral in your brain. This may be slightly exagerated.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ima1trkpny on Sep 11^th, 2007, 10:40pm

on 09/11/07 at 19:24:17, TenaliRaman wrote:

A sincere request to all, "please stop feeding the troll".

Fair enough... sorry for being a contributer to your irritation. Lucky ducky, I can't remove the posts from my sight >.< so forgive me my momentary lapse of control... I felt like slapping him for his silly behavior and the posts were the only way I could display my displeasure with him... but I see your point and will endeavor to comply.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Roy on Sep 12^th, 2007, 4:56am

on 09/11/07 at 16:32:08, srn347 wrote:

Clearly the reason you don't respect me is because none of you respect each other or yourselves.

No, i respect those who don't try to tear others down like that.
All i did in that post was make a comment based on the observations of your posts and you insulted me and everyone else on these forums.

Going about things in that manner isn't going to earn many other peoples respect. If you reply to this, i would appreciate it if you would at least make it neutral instead of negative: at least let us know why you have been doing all of this.

Sorry for "feeding the troll" TenaliRaman, but I'm still doing my best to not make my posts one sided against srn347

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 12^th, 2007, 8:31pm

I don't insult people unless insulted first. :)
FYI, I usually don't do that symbol thing, so tell me if I did it wrong.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Roy on Sep 13^th, 2007, 8:00pm

Was it my first post or someone elses in this thread, because i don't think i've insulted you yet, except for the no one respecting you, but to actually contribute something to this thread, no, srn347 wouldn't be considered a spammer, more of an (sorry srn) annoyance, at least that's what you are to me.

The smiley was correct, :)

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer? No!
Post by srn347 on Sep 13^th, 2007, 9:02pm

Well, although I still don't see myself as an annoyance either, at least it's better than spammer.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by hiyathere on Sep 14^th, 2007, 5:06am

I see an odd resemblance between srn and cowsRus, if you guys still remember him.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 14^th, 2007, 4:56pm

Who is cowsRus? By the way, you forgot the 347.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Obob on Sep 14^th, 2007, 5:33pm

CowsRus showed up around here maybe a year or so ago, and conducted himself in a manner that didn't benefit the boards. Although in retrospect, he wasn't that bad. We all know better now.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by srn347 on Sep 14^th, 2007, 7:18pm

What happened to him after that?

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Obob on Sep 14^th, 2007, 9:46pm

He got bored and left, presumably.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Aurora on Sep 15^th, 2007, 3:43am

on 09/14/07 at 21:46:17, Obob wrote:

He got bored and left, presumably.

I wouldn't count on it...
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=what_am_i;action=display;num=1188440718

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Sameer on Sep 16^th, 2007, 9:59pm

I think TR and others have suggested starvation!! I think we all need to do our part to bring hunger to that little part of the world!! I have been guilty of fueling the fire, not any more!!

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by JiNbOtAk on Sep 17^th, 2007, 12:10am

on 09/16/07 at 21:59:37, Sameer wrote:

I have been guilty of fueling the fire, not any more!!

Agreed Sameer !! So, let's totally ignore the troll with profound odasity (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=riddles_whathappened;action=display;num=1188493661;start=50#50), and let's converse meaningful stuffs. ;D

So, anyone else in the world is fasting right now, or am I just the only one ?

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 17^th, 2007, 1:53am

Quote:

So, anyone else in the world is fasting right now, or am I just the only one ?

Next Saturday I know that several million people will be fasting, so if you can wait that long....

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Barukh on Sep 17^th, 2007, 4:33am

on 09/17/07 at 01:53:01, mikedagr8 wrote:

Next Saturday I know that several million people will be fasting

Many more people are fasting these days.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on Sep 17^th, 2007, 4:36am

on 09/17/07 at 04:33:02, Barukh wrote:

Many more people are fasting these days.

True, probably closer to a billion people these days, but I'm sure you know what I meant. ;)

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Barukh on Sep 17^th, 2007, 4:54am

on 09/17/07 at 04:36:44, mikedagr8 wrote:

True, probably closer to a billion people these days, but I'm sure you know what I meant. ;)

Sure! ;D

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ima1trkpny on Sep 18^th, 2007, 8:52pm

Hmmmm... the irritation has yet to quit... maybe another approach should be taken "Don't be affended by my frank analysis, think of it as personality dialysis..." (http://youtube.com/watch?v=WKazP76V6nQ)
"I know, I know about popular..." LOL... just having some fun ;D
But if you haven't seen it, Wicked is definately a show worth seeing! (If you didn't like the song, give it a fair shake by seeing the set up to the schticks!) Great acting and some fabulous singing... a most excellent show.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Master Roshambollah on Apr 27^th, 2008, 11:47am

Just out of curiosity, how did the whole srn347 saga end? He's been posting a lot over at the worldrps.com bull board, and one of our members just found your forum and this thread.

I don't mean to dredge up old business, and excuse me if I'm resurrecting a dead thread. However, I was struck with the similarities between our beloved Bull Board and this forum, as well as with the circumstances (especially "posting in dead threads.") A lot of our members feel the same about our forum as you obviously do about yours. A little cross-community communication can't be a bad thing. Besides, I imagine a handful of our members may find interest in your riddle forum...

Any information greatly appreciated: how did it end, was srn banned or warned, is the problem still going on, did the admins get involved, etc.

Thanks for your time, and think three!

Rosh

http://www.worldrps.com/bullboard/index.php

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by SMQ on Apr 27^th, 2008, 12:07pm

He was warned repeadedly that his disruptive behavior was not appreciated. A non-binding community vote/poll (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=riddles_suggestions;action=display;num=1189630753) was taken (with srn347 participating), and eventually the board administrator (William Wu) stepped in and banned him. (The first few posts on page three of this thread (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=riddles_whathappened;action=display;num=1188460334;start=50#50) are probably a reasonable summary of the way that ended.)

There's a strong general suspicion that he's recently resurfaced under the nick of temporary, but if so he's been far less disruptive this time around and so temp is (sometimes grudgingly) tolerated.

--SMQ

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by towr on Apr 27^th, 2008, 12:17pm

on 04/27/08 at 11:47:24, Master Roshambollah wrote:

Any information greatly appreciated: how did it end, was srn banned or warned, is the problem still going on, did the admins get involved, etc.

He was warned repeatedly and when that didn't help he was eventually banned. Of course it's hard to really ban someone. I'm confident he's back under another name (a rather blatant example here (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=riddles_general;action=display;num=1209089700)). But he's not quite as bad as before, so I'd say it helped.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by temporary on Apr 27^th, 2008, 12:29pm

I thought this thread was locked? Anyway, I see master rosh has joined the wu forums. Srn347 is apparently your apprentice(or so I heard). Anyway, it ended the same way kaiji ended. To be specific, he was cruelly and unjustly banned. Kaiji was just left with debt and pain(about 6 million yen and 4 fingers cut off). however, unlike kaiji, the good guy(srn347 in this case) actually gets another series with a better ending(if there is an ending).

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by towr on Apr 27^th, 2008, 12:40pm

There was nothing cruel or unjust about it; hence why you're the only one that thinks it was, because you're him.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by temporary on Apr 27^th, 2008, 12:50pm

If he is 1 and I am 1, we are 2. If you think he is me, you think we are 1. You think 1=2? We are quite similar though. best friends actually. Also, just like I used to watch this forum from afar, I do the same with the rps bullboard(see the bridge for a link).

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ThudanBlunder on Apr 27^th, 2008, 5:09pm

on 04/27/08 at 12:40:10, towr wrote:

There was nothing cruel or unjust about it; hence why you're the only one that thinks it was, because you're him.

The bullboard (http://www.worldrps.com/bullboard/index.php?topic=2659.0) have quickly concluded he is a whackjob (http://www.worldrps.com/bullboard/index.php?topic=2657.0). ;D

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by temporary on Apr 27^th, 2008, 9:20pm

He is protected under the wings of the master, and also roshambollah(lol). http://www.worldrps.com/bullboard/index.php?topic=2659.msg20418#msg20418

In fact, you people have been attacking rosh when you attacked srn347. UNFORGIVABLE In fact, just like srn347, rosh, and custard something, I will not post on this board for 168 hours(1 week) after this one.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by ThudanBlunder on Apr 27^th, 2008, 9:26pm

on 04/27/08 at 21:20:07, temporary wrote:

In fact, you people have been attacking rosh when you attacked srn347.

He sounds like another whackjob.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by JiNbOtAk on Apr 27^th, 2008, 11:35pm

on 04/27/08 at 21:20:07, temporary wrote:

In fact, just like srn347, rosh, and custard something, I will not post on this board for 168 hours(1 week) after this one.

Promises, promises.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by towr on Apr 28^th, 2008, 1:01am

on 04/27/08 at 21:20:07, temporary wrote:

In fact, you people have been attacking rosh when you attacked srn347.

Rosh is not Srn's master in the context of this forum (if only because this isn't an rpg forum and such relations don't exist here in the first place). Nor is Rosh responsible for anything Srn did a) before he knew Srn, b) in places where he has no responsibility or control.

Quote:

In fact, just like srn347, rosh, and custard something, I will not post on this board for 168 hours(1 week) after this one.

Can't you add a few zeros?

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by Whiskey Tango Foxtrot on Apr 28^th, 2008, 1:48pm

on 04/28/08 at 01:01:04, towr wrote:

Can't you add a few zeros?

After how long he kept silence here (http://www.worldrps.com/bullboard/index.php?topic=2659.15)... :-/

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by temporary on May 4^th, 2008, 1:22am

You mean after how long srn347 kept silent there, and he lasted the week(as did I here). And yes, I can add some extra zeroes, but if I was going to I would have already. Also, srn347 was apparently unbanned, but something doesn't seem right. He has no posts, he is a newbie(I know his posts weren't deleted), and he emailed me saying his password was changed so he can't even log in. Which one of you staff is the one who did that? Why mess with him? How could you bring him any lower after banning him?

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by mikedagr8 on May 4^th, 2008, 1:54am

on 05/04/08 at 01:22:52, temporary wrote:

By my calculations you only lasted 6 days 4 hours and 2 minutes. Now 168 hours is not equal to 148 hours and 2 minutes. You did well to last so long, but I feel as it can be seen you don't have the control. So maybe a longer period of banning should be enforced on you so you can show your control.

The only person capable of changing another person's password is Mr. Wu.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by towr on May 4^th, 2008, 7:24am

on 05/04/08 at 01:22:52, temporary wrote:

Also, srn347 was apparently unbanned

I doubt William had the time or inclination to unban him. More likely is that srn's IP number has changed in the last half year or so. Or perhaps there's a natural time-out to a ban; in any case it's very doubtful there was any intent behind it.

Quote:

but something doesn't seem right. He has no posts, he is a newbie(I know his posts weren't deleted)

If an account is deleted, the posts remain. If a new account under the same name is (re)made, the old posts are not re-attributed to that (new) account.

Quote:

and he emailed me saying his password was changed so he can't even log in. Which one of you staff is the one who did that?

Well, considering none of us can do that (except our admin who's otherwise occupied), I would have to guess none.
If srn wasn't the one to remake that account, then someone else did; and then naturally he wouldn't have the password.

Quote:

Why mess with him? How could you bring him any lower after banning him?

We could try and tell on him to his mother. But really, he doesn't rank high on my list of people I want to waste effort on one way or another. You're overinflating his importance.
And if you think banning is low, then you lack perspective. It simply says that enough is enough. He had ample chances to improve his behaviour, and took none.

Title: Re: Can srn347 be considered a spammer?
Post by temporary on May 6^th, 2008, 5:10pm

Time is relative to space, and srn347's space from the forum wasn't constant, so can anyone tell if he was off by 12 hours?