RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS?

RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

[Poll]

FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS?

FOR

83% (64)

AGAINST

16% (13)

Total Votes : 77

(last vote on : 8/31/2010 9:12:33 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:05:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric You at least got one part right. RAVE ON!! Thank you. I shall. I appreciate you too, Saykiatric. In case you were feeling neglected, or disrespected by my disagreeing with you. I understand it takes a genuinely confident and secure person to learn the art of debate without resorting to insults. I hold no ill will at your lack of fortitude. WinD

Saykiatric -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:08:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric I never thought you were a Moderator your ego is to over inflated. Actually, there are people on this thread who have said on other threads that they thought I was a Mod. They can reveal themselves if they like. quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric Show me where anyone has attacked anyone. oh great woman of wisdom. Thank you for appreciating My wisdom. Just because some of your posts have been pulled, doesn't mean they never existed. I would not know if a post of mine was pulled or not I have an endless supply of opinions...I see you lack the ability to detect sarcasm when posting to you I will be to point out the exciting sarcastic moments so you do not miss them in the future. I asked you to show me where anyone has attacked a Moderator in this thread you instead try to side step me with a quip to your wisdom....Give me the air pump you are inflated enough......So some people thought you were a Mod big deal now they don't glad that is all cleared up. However this is not about YOU I know crushing isn't it?

Icarys -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:10:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys If it was true (Which I believe it may be) she won't be able to see it.[:D] An overinflated ego would be one who can not accomplish those things which a person professes that they can do. When that happens, I'm sure you will let Me know. [8D] I think I could spend some time with you and probably find things like that. The reason I say this is because those who usually feel the need to slip comments in that are driven by ego tend to over-inflate things. I've always been impressed with actual humility and humbleness and not the projected kind. I personally think that anyone who "rules" from ego will always be the first to fall. You are correct though, I would point it out because I would see you as needing that.[8D]

PeanutTigerinBox -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:11:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric Who feels it is acceptable to put a two week or more waiting to be approved censor on an individual Heck, I agree...it should be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than two weeks in your case [:D] be lucky I am not a mod, I would leave your notes for at least 2 months until I would bother to check them out [8\|] If you have an issue with it just open your own homepage to rant how you wish [8\|]

LadyPact -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:13:50 PM)
Actually, please look at your own post. The original comment did not include the words "in this thread". Perhaps, rather than trying to explain a supposed intent of being sarcastic, you may wish to include those words that convey your intended meaning.

LadyPact -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:16:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys I think I could spend some time with you and probably find things like that. The reason I say this is because those who usually feel the need to slip comments in that are driven by ego tend to over-inflate things. I've always been impressed with actual humility and humbleness and not the projected kind. I personally think that anyone who "rules" from ego will always be the first to fall. You are correct though, I would point it out because I would see you as needing that.[8D] In that case, it's probably a very good thing that I don't find impressing you very high on My priority list.[;)]

Rule -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:17:30 PM)
I have had enough of the trolling. Too many drops have fallen already. I cannot be bothered with reading his or her posts any more.

Icarys -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:17:49 PM)
quote: In that case, it's probably a very good thing that I don't find impressing you very high on My priority list. Well you wouldn't want to come off as humble now would you.

Saykiatric -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:18:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeanutTigerinBox quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric Who feels it is acceptable to put a two week or more waiting to be approved censor on an individual Heck, I agree...it should be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than two weeks in your case [:D] be lucky I am not a mod, I would leave your notes for at least 2 months until I would bother to check them out [8\|] If you have an issue with it just open your own homepage to rant how you wish [8\|] Any Mods like to comment on this GEM?

Saykiatric -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:20:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: In that case, it's probably a very good thing that I don't find impressing you very high on My priority list. Well you wouldn't want to come off as humble now would you. A humble female oh I dare not DREAM that big....

LadyPact -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:20:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys Well you wouldn't want to come off as humble now would you. It would depend on your definition of humble. If you see it as specifically not having confidence in the things that you are capable of doing, you would be right. That isn't Me. If you would want to take it from the angle of admitting those things that a person isn't able to do, I'd probably fit.

Icarys -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:23:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys Well you wouldn't want to come off as humble now would you. It would depend on your definition of humble. If you see it as specifically not having confidence in the things that you are capable of doing, you would be right. That isn't Me. If you would want to take it from the angle of admitting those things that a person isn't able to do, I'd probably fit. I'd take it as a person who has the confidence and doesn't have to state it. You don't have the confidence you project. I told you..You have a really good mask but it's not entirely complete. I know..I know..I hate LP[:D] not proud or arrogant; modest: to be humble although successful. to make meek: to humble one's heart.

Saykiatric -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:23:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys Well you wouldn't want to come off as humble now would you. It would depend on your definition of humble. If you see it as specifically not having confidence in the things that you are capable of doing, you would be right. That isn't Me. If you would want to take it from the angle of admitting those things that a person isn't able to do, I'd probably fit. How does a ball gag and handcuffs fit you?

LadyPact -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:26:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys I'd take it as a person who has the confidence and doesn't have to state it. You don't have the confidence you project. I told you..You have a really good mask but it's not entirely complete. I know..I know..I hate LP[:D] Yet, I am able to back up everything I say.

GreedyTop -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:28:36 PM)
LadyP.. I have, in the past , thought you were a Mod.. Then I was disabused of that notion by the way you HAVE NOT moderated yourself in posting. grin

Icarys -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:28:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys I'd take it as a person who has the confidence and doesn't have to state it. You don't have the confidence you project. I told you..You have a really good mask but it's not entirely complete. I know..I know..I hate LP[:D] Yet, I am able to back up everything I say. Anyone can say that..It's the internet.

LadyPact -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:29:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric How does a ball gag and handcuffs fit you? Actually, I wouldn't know. I don't bottom and I don't submit. The only ball gag in My house is clip's and I don't think there are any handcuffs here. If you look at some of the pictures on My profile that include him, you will see that I prefer leather restraints on him.

dcnovice -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:29:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: You forgot the option that says that the mods are too lenient. I was thinking that too. Pffffffttttt, those are just the whiny, overly SENSITIVE, pussies!!! It's not sensitivity so much as a low threshold for stupidity. I'm an editor, so I'm used to slashing stuff that doesn't advance/enrich the story, and I sometimes wish mods would do the same.

PeanutTigerinBox -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:29:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric quote: ORIGINAL: PeanutTigerinBox quote: ORIGINAL: Saykiatric Who feels it is acceptable to put a two week or more waiting to be approved censor on an individual Heck, I agree...it should be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than two weeks in your case [:D] be lucky I am not a mod, I would leave your notes for at least 2 months until I would bother to check them out [8\|] If you have an issue with it just open your own homepage to rant how you wish [8\|] Any Mods like to comment on this GEM? yeah, it would be great if they would follow my suggestion [:D]

GreedyTop -> RE: FOR MODERATORS OR AGAINST MODERATORS? (8/30/2010 2:31:25 PM)
2 months? I think you are being generous.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.046875