Call it bitching & complaining

[the408kid]

Not as easy as that. Btw, when did your opinion start meaning anything?

If my opinion doesn't mean anything oh well, but I'll say my peice anyways whether you guys like it or not.

 

[monkeystyle]

Of course I fully know it is annoying. That's why I did it..

Either way though, it's nothing compared to getting IP banned off the forum, is it? Or do you consider HIAT to be everything about IWF?

No it isn't as bad but it is still annoying.

I just think that you are reasonably clever enough to be annoying back without resorting uncreative bannings. Just feels like the cheap way out to me.

 

[xtremebadass]

He's mod of fucking HiaT. For a logical reason? NO. There is no logical reason to even moderate HiaT, so what else would he do. Banning to make kids rage is appropriate and probably what Mike intended for in the first place. This has nothin to do with common sense.

All members have the right to post in each section while obeying the rules. If they do not break the rules they should not be banned. It is that plain and simple. They cannot be banned because one staff member finds them annoying or they just do not like them. That is ludicrous.

G1 thinks Diesel getting banned for absolutely nothing is fine. Yet members who post child pornography of a member getting sucked off by their own child does not get punished one bit. I am sorry but logic needs to step into a situation like this even if it is HIAT. Use your head and think about this for a second.

 

[Moonlight Drive]

Why don't we just silent ban them, then we don't need a reason.

 

[This Guy]

I haven't said anything because I'll be honest I don't know what to say. When Beer was brought up as mod for HIAT I did ask why, but I did eventually go along with it. Why? I'll be honest, I don't know why.

I agree with what Monk is saying about banning someone from the section just because you don't like them and not giving a valid reason is stupid and shouldn't happen but then again we gave him the power to do that and perhaps we weren't clear on what should and shouldn't be done.

I also find it funny though that people like Diesel & Nation got completely bent out of shape about being banned from the section and complained to anyone that would listen and at least in Diesel's case caught the attention of someone to speak up on his behalf saying it was unfair when no one did for Nation or anyone else.

And speaking of Nation & Diesel I also find it funny that they even were this upset about it. Sure it sucks not being able to go to a section of the forum and feel your being left out, and yeah even I post there more then I do probably anywhere else (except for my own section of course) but so what? Its kind of a stupid section to begin with.

Does HIAT have rules? No (other then the 3 listed) and I guess I felt that the only thing Beer would be there to do was delete threads that were strickly bots or whatever posting advertisements or to ban people from the section that were getting bent out of shape about the content of the section. (ie. LKP complaining about the pictures of his son with the dicks on it, and continually going back and fueling it more, oh and I will address this too) But obviously we are at fault because we were not clear in our directions to Beer.

So I guess its of my opinion that Beer should be allowed to remain mod of the section as long as its clear what his duties are to include. (ie the stuff I mentioned above) and not to just mess with whoever he wants using his mod powers. (feel free to continue to mess with anyone verbally there you want)

On a quick note for the whole LKP pictures stuff. LKP was bent out of shape over two specific things. 1) the pictures in the Ugly threads of just him. Which in my opinion makes him a bit of a cry baby. 2) the pictures of his son with all the dicks edited, and the last supper parody pictures etc you know what I'm talking about. Those ones I find pretty offensive, and I think it shows a pure lack of maturity on anyones part who created them.

I know its allowed by the rules of that section, but its pretty weak, and to be honest I don't think its even that clever. Again my opinion.

 

[Nation]

I wasn't upset. I was trolling Beer.

 

[LKP]

Thanks^^^^ At least you admitted it.

 

[LadyHotrod]

That would be funny if I hadn't already admitted I was wrong. How do you manage to constantly fail so hard?

LMAO, typical MS answer. DURRR, I ADMITTED I WAS WRONG whenever he gets caught doing something he cries about someone else doing (whether you hit the button or not, you were still contemplating doing it).

Common sense, as you like to preach about, would have told you it was wrong before you made the thread.



What's next? Are you going to make a thread telling me I am a hypocrite after I've openly admitted to being one since I joined? Owait.

 

[monkeystyle]

LMAO, typical MS answer. DURRR, I ADMITTED I WAS WRONG whenever he gets caught doing something he cries about someone else doing (whether you hit the button or not, you were still contemplating doing it).

Funny part about this whole thing? I admitted I was wrong before I said anything. Got any thing else you would like to misrepresent?

Common sense, as you like to preach about, would have told you it was wrong before you made the thread.

You're right. It was a lapse in judgment on my part, which again I admitted to.

 

[Qwake]

All members have the right to post in each section while obeying the rules. If they do not break the rules they should not be banned. It is that plain and simple. They cannot be banned because one staff member finds them annoying or they just do not like them. That is ludicrous.

G1 thinks Diesel getting banned for absolutely nothing is fine. Yet members who post child pornography of a member getting sucked off by their own child does not get punished one bit. I am sorry but logic needs to step into a situation like this even if it is HIAT. Use your head and think about this for a second.

Here you're crying about people getting banned from HIAT, yet I'm pretty sure you're apart of the staff that put a mod incharge of the section so if you didn't want people banned then why did you put a mod their in the first place?

I'm finding the controversies that Beer has brought us rather hilarious btw.

 

[LKP]

^^^^ You suck beers cock you stupid cunt. Go fuck a kangaroo or something. I hope you die a slow death.

 

[xtremebadass]

Here you're crying about people getting banned from HIAT, yet I'm pretty sure you're apart of the staff that put a mod incharge of the section so if you didn't want people banned then why did you put a mod their in the first place?

...because a Mod does more than just ban people?

 

[Hometown Kid]

 

[THE Brian Kendrick's Biceps]

Why don't we just silent ban them, then we don't need a reason.

This sounds like the most logical choice.

 

[Qwake]

...because a Mod does more than just ban people?

Wow, thought you were a little smarter then this. A mod that moderates HIAT does nothing at all, the section has no rules whatsoever, therefore they have nothing to moderate because anything anybody does is alright in that section. You understand? You guys put Beer incharge of that section, you told Beer to do whatever he wants pretty much, and that's what he did, he banned people that were annoying and ruining threads with lame jokes and whatnot, its not like he banned them from the forum, he was just giving them a short ban from HIAT. Man seriously, I don't know how you're on staff when you're giving back replies like that.

rofl @ LKP.