|
On the contrary, I think any thread that doesn’t contain one Meltzer tweet per page should be gassed
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
NienNunb posted:Any thread that doesn’t contain one Meltzer tweet per page should be gassed
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 05:23
|
|
|
NienNunb posted:On the contrary, I think any thread that doesn’t contain one Meltzer tweet per page should be gassed
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 12:29
|
|
|
That’s the same silly idea as ‘nobody post any scoopster tweets about news that’s on the way’ and should never be implemented.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 12:50
|
|
|
Meltzer doesn't even tweet scoops so that's a confusing one to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 13:05
|
|
|
people still physically cannot stop themselves from posting rovert tweets as one was just posted like a day or two ago so why would you bother trying to limit dave
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 15:04
|
|
|
bebaloorpabopalo posted:Meltzer doesn't even tweet scoops so that's a confusing one to me. the first thing i want to say is that you're right, so that my post isn't seen as an argument against what you said. but after that, someone has been pointing out that dave has been buying into and reporting bad or conflicting information recently, e.g. cm punk somehow being in talks for a contract buyout but also not speaking to anyone at around the same time. i don't have any comment on those points or scoops but i bring this up because i think it's possible that this is contributing to the perception/confusion regarding bad scoop tweets; someone is "tweeting" about the "bad scoops", though it isn't dave. edit: those tweets have been posted before. that also needs to be pointed out and i forgot. so those tweets have been on this forum even though they aren't dave's. Cavauro fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Oct 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 23:53
|
|
|
Orange Carlisle posted:people still physically cannot stop themselves from posting rovert tweets as one was just posted like a day or two ago so why would you bother trying to limit dave Make posting rovert bannable imo Rid us of him once and for all
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2022 23:59
|
|
|
Orange Carlisle posted:people still physically cannot stop themselves from posting rovert tweets as one was just posted like a day or two ago so why would you bother trying to limit dave Sorry this was on me. I knew it was wrong and I did it anyway. It wasn't a scoop or teasing inside info but a pretty decent dunk on someone that objectively deserved it and I found it funny. I'll take a probe if it's warranted.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 04:13
|
|
|
I'm flashy_mcflash.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 05:14
|
|
|
Like, what is this subforum's obsession with Trev? He's got some stupid weird ban in place where he's not actually banned and hangs over the place like a ghost. Just ban him properly and move on. If somebody posts his tweets in the bad takes thread, who cares? That's what it's there for. If you're gonna probe people for posting Rovert tweets than you may as well do the same for whenever Dave or SRS vague post in their tweets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 09:45
|
|
|
It's funnier this way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 10:17
|
|
|
Kosmo Gallion posted:Like, what is this subforum's obsession with Trev? He's got some stupid weird ban in place where he's not actually banned and hangs over the place like a ghost. Just ban him properly and move on. If somebody posts his tweets in the bad takes thread, who cares? That's what it's there for. If you're gonna probe people for posting Rovert tweets than you may as well do the same for whenever Dave or SRS vague post in their tweets. Dave no, as he is always right. Trev and SRS should be permas on sight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 10:23
|
|
|
Kosmo Gallion posted:Like, what is this subforum's obsession with Trev? He's got some stupid weird ban in place where he's not actually banned and hangs over the place like a ghost. Just ban him properly and move on. If somebody posts his tweets in the bad takes thread, who cares? That's what it's there for. If you're gonna probe people for posting Rovert tweets than you may as well do the same for whenever Dave or SRS vague post in their tweets. The difference with Dave, Sapp & rovert is that Dave & SRS aren't banned from posting in this sub-forum & rovert is. If people absolutely must post his tweets keep them to the Cornette quarantine zone or at a push the Chris Regal Memorial Thread. Because I realise asking goons to exercise self-control is folly
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 10:27
|
|
|
The Rovert tweets are nowhere near as annoying as the derails caused by goons trying to police the threads. Just skip past them instead of having the same tedious conversation about him every time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 10:55
|
|
|
He's a total freak and needs to be quarantined, sorry OP
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 11:09
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:He's a total freak and needs to be quarantined Turn on your monitor
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 11:10
|
|
|
It's on and it reads "QoP derangement syndrome", yet again
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 11:14
|
|
|
Dave is permabanned poster scoopstomper58.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 12:17
|
|
|
Ya'll stop fighting in here.Malcolm Excellent posted:Dave is permabanned poster scoopstomper58. No such poster exists.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 12:34
|
|
|
Brut posted:Ya'll stop fighting in here. We're not fighting!!!! We're discussing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 12:38
|
|
|
Kosmo Gallion posted:Like, what is this subforum's obsession with Trev? He's got some stupid weird ban in place where he's not actually banned and hangs over the place like a ghost. Just ban him properly and move on. If somebody posts his tweets in the bad takes thread, who cares? That's what it's there for. If you're gonna probe people for posting Rovert tweets than you may as well do the same for whenever Dave or SRS vague post in their tweets. his account isnt banned from SA, he just isnt allowed to post in this subforum which is much funnier because his brain is so hosed up and toxified he cant or wont post about anything other than wrestling so he might as well be banned from the whole website
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 15:34
|
|
|
History Comes Inside! posted:Make posting rovert bannable imo
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 15:47
|
|
|
If the Trev tweet is relevant, post for the hell of it. Lol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 16:30
|
|
|
yea ok posted:If the Trev tweet is relevant, post for the hell of it. Lol. Alternatively, stop following Trev or letting them enter your mindspace at all. Be free.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 20:48
|
|
|
Kosmo Gallion posted:Like, what is this subforum's obsession with Trev? He's got some stupid weird ban in place where he's not actually banned and hangs over the place like a ghost. Just ban him properly and move on. If somebody posts his tweets in the bad takes thread, who cares? That's what it's there for. If you're gonna probe people for posting Rovert tweets than you may as well do the same for whenever Dave or SRS vague post in their tweets. he's a mentally unstable narcissicist that goes full on stalker meltdown to people in PMs here when he's allowed around and had multiple posters feeling like he's actually a risk to keep around because the instability kept getting worse it's not just about his stupid tweets hope this helps
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 21:06
|
|
|
I dont read the social media or bad takes thread so I had no idea the specter of Rov still hung over us. Talk about not getting a hint.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 21:09
|
|
|
I think there's also now been 3x more meta discussion about the last time someone posted a Rovert tweet compared to how much discussion the actual post created. Seems like the current rovert rules work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 21:13
|
|
|
In a diplomatic way, shut up about that guy. Nothing happened
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 21:34
|
|
|
Cavauro posted:In a diplomatic way, shut up about that guy. Nothing happened 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 23:37
|
|
|
I was marinating on this since the other day it happened to me. SA shouldn't allow posters to be harassed and someone can change their avatar to something terrible just because they don't like them. If we can't outright remove the ability for other users to buy someone an avatar, then we should at least make it publicly known who bought the avatar and if they bought it to harass someone it should be punishable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 14:04
|
|
|
This gets floated in QCS all the time and the answer is always no. No is also the correct answer, imo. Mods and admins will blank anything that’s genuinely offensive anyway. You upset some salty loser enough to make them spend  and that’s a win for you all by itself, calling it ‘harassment’ is setting a ridiculously low bar for harassment in all but the most extreme of examples.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 14:15
|
|
|
Yeah personally I didn't feel particularly like a winner when someone decided for they could make me display a fash slogan in all the forum spaces I usually go to, and pay another tenner for the privilege to stop doing that, so I gotta reject that notion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 14:31
|
|
|
My favorite from years back is PLEASE FUNNEL HOT TAR INTO MY ANUS WITH A ROAD CONE
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 14:34
|
|
|
Shard posted:I was marinating on this since the other day it happened to me. SA shouldn't allow posters to be harassed and someone can change their avatar to something terrible just because they don't like them. If we can't outright remove the ability for other users to buy someone an avatar, then we should at least make it publicly known who bought the avatar and if they bought it to harass someone it should be punishable. How is changing your avatar harassment? It's an inconvenience, & for example I have a dog for an avatar when I am not a dog person, but  If it bothers you enough you can replace it, if it doesn't then you can live with it as a permanent memorial that you got someone else really mad over a silly internet argument. I had some dumb avatar "gifted" to me for a while before the dog was gifted to me by someone who was clearly sicker of looking at it than me, I don't even remember what it was though, a fat bloke dressed as a mermaid or something?I'd kind of like to know who I made mad enough to waste money on but Red Text calling someone a dumb poo poo for example is part of the DNA of the site. In the same way that some people have the premature baldness gene & that's encoded in their DNA Also I think this is more of a topic for QCS than the PSP feedback thread, because it's a sitewide issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 14:36
|
|
|
Yeah this thread really isn't the place for that discussion
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 14:40
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Yeah personally I didn't feel particularly like a winner when someone decided for If it was something genuinely bad then a mod or admin would revert it for free for you, that’s been standard for years now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 14:46
|
|
|
Which means either a) somebody hadn't got that memo or b) what is or isn't too right-wing to display as my avatar isn't actually up to me to decide.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 15:04
|
|
|
History Comes Inside! posted:If it was something genuinely bad then a mod or admin would revert it for free for you, that’s been standard for years now. That's not actually the standard and they're not trying to move away from that. It's always been an adhoc "If an admin thinks they should" but not an actual standard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 15:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
Once again big shoutout to Critical for helping me out
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 15:15
|
|