Fined NotSuitableForChildren (in Public Record)


SNK3R December 19 2007 2:34 AM EST

23:25:00 <NotSuitableForChildren> I think it is funny, my gf got me GH3 and she burnt my ba for me that whole day
23:25:10 <SNK4R> NSFC!
23:25:18 <SNK4R> Would you like me to reset you now?
23:25:39 <NotSuitableForChildren> SNK aint that a good gf lol
23:25:44 <NotSuitableForChildren> (;
23:25:52 <SNK4R> It's against the rules, that's what it is.
23:26:14 <NotSuitableForChildren> just one day, and she impersonated me in chat lol
23:26:30 <PopsicleManSupreme> she called us nerds
23:26:42 <NotSuitableForChildren> she did lol I was there
23:26:49 <PopsicleManSupreme> i remember

As per the FAQs (Official FAQs > Terms of Use > 2) this is against the rules.

Your main character has been confiscated.

TheHatchetman December 19 2007 2:37 AM EST

Seems a bit excessive, imo...

SNK3R December 19 2007 2:38 AM EST

Better than a ban, I would think.

Popsicle Man Supreme December 19 2007 2:39 AM EST

oh my god u can see me in chat. Who wants to touch me. by the way just taking tyhe 4 hours of ba would of been sufficient not reset

Godpanda December 19 2007 2:39 AM EST

4 hours of ba = Nearly 3 years of solid play, of being in this game, a respected member of the community.

This is NOT another DAWG.

This is NOT two roommates fighting together.

This is a player who we all know. Resetting him is ridiculous. COMPLETELY ridiculous.

NotSuitablForChildren [Yeeeaahh.................] December 19 2007 2:39 AM EST

yeah since she burnt 70 ba for me. Ummm... this seems like an overreaction. I understand that SNK is just doing his job, and doing it well. But... wt heck?!?

Popsicle Man Supreme December 19 2007 2:42 AM EST

make a poll and see what the outcome is

NotSuitablForChildren [Yeeeaahh.................] December 19 2007 2:42 AM EST

lol @ popsicleman

Iluvatar[NK] December 19 2007 2:57 AM EST

It's all rather illogical to me. Obviously, NSFC committed an infraction of the rules, but not with intent to do so.

I had a lot of things to say; this succinctly wraps up my thoughts though: actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea.

Popsicle Man Supreme December 19 2007 2:58 AM EST

un reset him now

chuck1234 December 19 2007 2:59 AM EST

are you a lawyer or a churchman pulchritude, btw, you made me search the online dictionary for the latin meaning of "beauty" ;)

BluBBen December 19 2007 3:00 AM EST

NSFC have played a long time, is it really right to restet his char and about 20mill worth of equip for this? No! I could accept a fine, even a huge one like 5mill or something, but this is just wrong! Please, can't we be a little flexible with the rules?

NotSuitablForChildren [Yeeeaahh.................] December 19 2007 3:07 AM EST

really I thought this was a joke. If this is not overturned I don't see any reason to come back. I dislike the UI changes, and if I have to start over I might as well get an NCB even though that sucks now. I have tried to talk to SNK through PM and he is not responding. He is a good admin, however I think that his judgement was a bit rash. I just want to play the game, even though I do admit that on Sunday since my GF bought me Guitar Hero 3 she pushed a few buttons, and used about 30-40 ba. I have not touched my CPU since then, and now that I admit it openly I lose a HoC, BG's, a 16mill ELB and my 7 mill ToA, plus bit of cash, that I get reset. I mean I wanted to start another char but... lol. I admit that for one day she did play a bit of the game for me, if this is truely just I will accept it and probably not return except to sell my remaining CB$. But I did not mean to impose any true infraction of the rules. BTW the reference to my GF was my ex from several years ago. I suppose that is all I have in my defense. Whatever the outcome may be, I do not blame SNK4R for the imposed fine. But it still may influence my opinion of the game.

SNK3R December 19 2007 3:17 AM EST

Fined NSFC $1M for his sins of having someone else play his account; returned NSFC's main character on terms of probation -- do not share accounts again.

Godpanda December 19 2007 3:20 AM EST

YAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

NotSuitablForChildren [Yeeeaahh.................] December 19 2007 3:32 AM EST

BTW I have disabled chat. See you in the forums. BTW Hatch, I 3> U!!! lol.

PS. CM's still work if you want to get ahold of me.

NotSuitablForChildren [Yeeeaahh.................] December 19 2007 4:22 AM EST

I dunno if the recent UI changes had anything to do with it but this sure did. Please check out my FS thread, and once I am outta here put me on the Wall of Rememberance. Thanks and peace out.

Flamey December 19 2007 4:55 AM EST

so you're leaving because you knowingly broke the rules? rules which get people banned? it was only 1 mil. You can make that in a week. It sounds mighty silly.

NINAbuser December 19 2007 5:04 AM EST

Seems like he's a celebrity and could kill someone should he want to and still get away with it... If you break the rules you should have to pay whatever penalty is written. He isn't "The Juice" this isn't real life and he broke a rule and should be punished like any other person would be, especially if this comes up in the future and someone who isn't as well known gets banned can they get a change of punishment? I mean sorry if I get flamed for this but again rules are rules.

AbbathorX December 19 2007 5:52 AM EST


So, NSFC is being fined because his GF doesn't have her own account? This rule clearly states that sharing accounts is fine as long as both parties have one. Just something to think about. . . a vague disclaimer is no ones friend.

Excerpt, official FAQ:
Q: May I share my account with someone who doesn't have a CB account?

A: No. This was allowed in CB1 but it wasn't a good idea; it's disallowed in CB2.


Sickone December 19 2007 6:14 AM EST

To be honest, I just read the "Terms of Use" only now, seeing this forum thread... and I have to say, "ouch", reads like the inquisitorial manual or somesuch.

As for the actual "crime" commited here, first of all, nobody would have been the wiser if he would have shut up about it, and he admitted it openly, JUST because he had no idea anybody would react so badly to it... it wasn't his fault entirely, you know ?
If my girlfriend would come over to my house, and I would, I don't know, use the bathroom and she would be bored, all she would have to do to "use" my Carnageblender account would be to sit down and access the proper bookmark, since it's on "remember me" settings, with no login needed.
One could even argue this guy was the "victim" here, not the "criminal".

It also dawned on me the fact that nowhere there is a "punishment" stated for each of the "terms of use" breaches, and as such, I'd have to say admins (as exemplified by this thread) are probably the only ones dispensing punishment in whatever way they see fit.
At least you can try and appeal to their better judgement, again, as seen in here... and to some degree, it appears to help.

ALL of this being said, I can see why this guy would want to leave, and why he would want to get as much USD out of it while still posible.
As you just said, it's 3 years of his life he spent with this game, apparently being an active memeber of the community and all that jazz... and suddendly, out of the blue, somebody decides the proper punishment for a minor issue is confiscation of "stuff worth xyz USD" (I am really wondering how much USD, you know, for a laugh).
So, yeah, when somebody can simply wipe several good bunches of USD worth of virtual goods for a minor transgression, you have to ask yourself, would I want to risk it happening to me too ?


If I ever had the urge to re-join the chat before (one of the first things I disabled since I saw no use in it when I first joined), it's all gone now, for good.
And on second thought, I'd probably better stay away from the forums too, you never know when you might actually say something wrong and get fined, banned or worse.

For a game that's supposedly community-oriented, it sure feels like thoughtcrime police headquarters.
But I guess I'd better shut up before I get banned for expressing dissenting views... right ?

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] December 19 2007 6:18 AM EST


SNK's gone soft in his old age.

Sickone December 19 2007 6:21 AM EST

I mean, seriously, I am shocked, you can actually get fined in-game money if you accidentally slip a non-PG word in chat ?
How crazy is that ?

QBJohnnywas December 19 2007 6:26 AM EST

Sickone - what you have to remember is that none of the items in the game really belong to the players, despite the presence of real money in the game. Everything belongs to Jon. The admins are his voice on earth. At any time Jon can take away what he giveth.

And everyone agrees to the game conditions, especially the stuff about multi-ing and keeping things PG. If you didn't bother to read them before you started playing that's tough, you had to agree to them before you could sign up.

Sickone December 19 2007 6:35 AM EST

*shrug*
I guess you could put a clause in there saying "and after you agreed to supportership, whenever I feel like it, I will bill 5 USD from your paypal account every couple of months or so", and still most people wouldn't notice it, or would simply choose to ignore its existence, as a "no way this is actually going to happen" thing.

What I'm trying to say is that nobody ever reads the TOS/EULA until you actually end up (almost) butting heads with it.

QBJohnnywas December 19 2007 6:36 AM EST

That's the player's fault, not the game.

Sickone December 19 2007 6:43 AM EST

I get the whole "everything belongs to the game maintainer" mentality, it's pretty much the same for each an every online game... but allowing real-money trades is a very strongly misleading choice.
Heck, it's not even a "buy CB$ from the game maintainer" thing (not directly anyway).
If everything else is so harsh, how come this part is so "relaxed", and contrary to every other game out there ?

And hence my previous comment of "I'd better not enter chat and keep forum discourse to a minimum", since I might end up doing something I might get fined/banned for.
In other words, a strong anti-community trend from a supposedly community-friendly/promoting game.

Just my 0.02 CBD.

QBJohnnywas December 19 2007 6:47 AM EST

How difficult really is it for people to keep their language PG? I've never had a problem with it; and believe me, my RL language is not so controlled.

Sickone December 19 2007 7:00 AM EST

It's not difficult at all when you are acting "all official", and just talk with a clear purpose (getting information, making an announcement, etc).
But once the chatter gets more casual, and you start writing "as you would speak it" (meaning, faster and with a more personal note), it gets really hard, almost impossible, especially if your RL "friendly" language is, how to put it, a bit "spicy".
Of course, if your target is a sterile, fake friendly "country club"-like atmosphere, where people almost never say what they think, but keep appearances for the sake of appearance, then it's the perfect choice of rules.

Talion December 19 2007 7:07 AM EST

Sickone, it's simple: Keep it PG and everything is fine. Do otherwise and you get fined.

I don't understand why you are complaining.

smallpau1 - Go Blues [Lower My Fees] December 19 2007 7:35 AM EST

So... What were to happen if i were to go to the bathroom, during that time, my girlfriend decides to get on and chat until i get out and i get back and say "Hey, my girlfriend was just on here while i was in the bathroom!! Hope she didnt sell anything to the store, =P"

Besides everyone rushing to check stores, what would happen?

QBJohnnywas December 19 2007 8:36 AM EST

That was a long toilet break then?

QBRanger December 19 2007 8:42 AM EST

SP,

I would hope that if your GF did not fight or do anything else with your character, everything would be fine.

However, when someone else plays CB with your character, that is against the terms of use.

The problem is, and always will be for now, the admins take different approaches to the same problem and often distribute justice unequally. There is no consistency in the system.

yoyo December 19 2007 9:08 AM EST

So as I understand it, a person who plays CB2 had their character first confiscated then given back and a fine was implemented instead because their GF モplayedヤ their account for a short period of time. I know it is against the rules to have someone else play your account but I am not sure why. I understand why people cannot multi. I hope an admin or Jon can please post why it against the rules to have someone else モplayヤ your account.

Rules are rules for a reason. A rule should be in place to stop some sort of action that would be detrimental to the game. So if a person does something that is not detrimental why should they be punished. I know there are people out there that will say rules are rules. However, killing a person is not always homicide. It can be self-defense. The world is not black and white. If the rule is in place for a reason then the punishment should be based off of the reasoning behind the rule.

What I find most humorous about this is the hypocrisy of it. As I type this people are taking advantage of the vendor and forcing exshots to spawn and then reselling the regular ammo backラwhich is a violation. Yesterday someone sold 93k iron shots back to the store. This is a blatant attempt to circumvent the games economy and gain an unfair advantage. Yet not one person has been fined or confiscated for it. What NotSuitableForChildren did was not injuries to the game at all. I am not sure but he may have been in the same room as his GF when the モinfractionヤ occurred. He may have been telling her what to do, what to train, what to click for the 30-40 BA. モplayingヤ this game is not about who is at the computer is it? Does someone elseメs mouse click of the same minion win more battles? If I break my hand and cannot play easily and I have my wife does the clicks but I tell her what to do have I broken the rule?

In sortラto late for that huhラit seems like this rule is in place to stop abuse, but there is a known abuse going on in other areas and nothing has been done about it. I really hope that blatant abuses of the economy and game mechanics are dealt with instead of this nonsense where a person had some fun playing a game with their GF and gained nothing from it.

Thanks for your time.

Thanatos December 19 2007 9:30 AM EST

Rules are Rules is a true statement and the part about multi is a pretty easy one to find.

Ex-shot is a different issue but related, The one's that continue to exploit should be reset. That would correct the problem, there has been plenty of forum coverage. Selling iron shot should be a red flag.

Reason we do not like multi's is the fact that we put we put time in to build our characters and some people have less time to put in then others. So the person with the least amount of time is taken advantage of because the multi's get the experince they earn and that of the person helping them.

yoyo December 19 2007 9:42 AM EST

I did not ask about multi account playing. I asked why people could not have some else play their account, I would like clarification on why the rule is in place from an admin or Jon. Although I doubt what I want is of great conscience to them.

QBRanger December 19 2007 9:48 AM EST

It is to prevent someone from teaming up with someone on the other side of the world to get in all your BA.

When BA was refreshed every 10 min, at 6 refresh you still had to burn BA every 5 or so hours. So if you teamed up with someone else, you had a great chance to get in every BA.

This is less of a problem with the 20 min refresh but still occasionally I oversleep and miss some BA. At 7 or 8 BA refresh it could matter more.

Also, if you took a vacation, your "partner" could get in BA while you were away.

Now that is impossible if you play by the rules. Which is much fairer for all.

yoyo December 19 2007 10:27 AM EST

I assumed that was the reason, however, I do not think that NSFC actions can in any way can be construed as trying to get an unfair advantage.

I was not a fly on the wall nor am I drinking buddies with him. However, it seemed like he wanted to play his new game and still be apart of the CB community. Most likely he had his GF at the computer so he could enjoy both of the games at once. In effect he was punished for enjoying the game with his GF and wanting to be apart of the community while he did other things. If this is the case then any actions taken against him are straight bafoonery...bafoonery at its finest. I completely understand why he would want to walk. Being punished for enjoying the game with his significant other and having a strong tie to a games chat/community. Bafoonery.

Flamey December 19 2007 10:30 AM EST

funny how all the newer players posts are against the whole thing.Also, adding to what Ranger said, that does constitute as a multi.

It's been made clear that you cannot play someone else's account, whether you have one or not. You also may not creat more than one, or get someone else to play for you. You have to be physically playing. They're the rules. Why are you complaining against them? They've already been set and you've already agreed to abide by them.

Another thing, saying that you don't talk in chat because you might get fined is one of the stupidest things I've seen come from CB. It really isn't that hard to control your mouth. Obviously if you don't, you won't be using the harshest expletive, so you'll probably get kicked or killed. I very much doubt if its a once in a blue moon accident you'd get fined the usual 25k.

You will not get fined for speaking your mind, unless you're breaking the rules. So that means you can't spam, swear or abuse people. Keep to the rules and you can vent all you want, really.

Stop being so stupid about this all. 1 mil is NOT hard to make at all. You can make it in a week, so seriously stop complaining.

Flamey December 19 2007 10:35 AM EST

you have got to be kidding me. CB can take only 20 minutes of your life in a 24 hour time frame. Saying he's trying to enjoy the game is mighty stupid. If he's not actually playing the game then he's not enjoying it. He's not being apart of the community if someone else is talking on his account.

It is an unfair advantage, because he could have kept going. Obviously he still wanted to burn BA while not being there, you don't see how that's unfair? Oh, I can't be bothered burning BA, I'll get my brother to do it. Oh, I'm at work, I'll get my mum to burn my BA so I don't miss any.

Complaining in this thread is completely idiotic. Yes, I'm calling you an idiot.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] December 19 2007 10:55 AM EST

*Sigh*

Soxjr December 19 2007 10:58 AM EST

I'm sorry. I usually don't voice my opinion on threads such as these, but I felt the urge to do so this time. I don't understand the arguing. I really don't. If you look up a few posts about the person understanding why there shouldn't be multi's but then questioning why this is wrong, I just don't understand how you feel that way.

The easiest way to explain this in my opinion is this. Where do you draw the line? You say that it should be allowed for his GF to play a few ba and that is ok, but at what point is it an unfair advantage? How do you enforce a rule like that? Well his GF played for a few ba while he was playing a game, why can't my roommate play my ba while I'm at work? Do you not see where that can lead to people having an unfair advantage? The point of this game is that if you try your best you have the opportunity to climb towards the top and compete with the best. If you don't have the time to put in like they do, then you must make goals that you can achieve and strive towards.

This is just my opinion and as such might not mean anything, but that is what I see. Also to bring in the argument of money. That shouldn't even be a side thought at all. It cost you zero money to start playing this game and the money part of the game isn't something the creator of the game implemented. It is something that players have done and do at their own risk. Nowhere does it say the game will continue or you will get any of your money back at all. Actually there is no talk of money value of items. So to say that he should or shouldn't be banned or reset based on the monetary value of his items is a bad way of doing things.

Well I could continue to ramble on but I will cut this short. I am sorry that this outcome made you leave. The only reason I can see that would make you sell out is that maybe this was something that happened regularly and being caught and almost losing everything made you realise that you should get out before you did lose it all... Might not be true but it looks that way.

Ulord[NK] December 19 2007 11:24 AM EST

I just want to note that merger accounts used to be acceptable a long time ago. Todd-Spydah is a primary example of this where two players merge together and play one account. I merged with a friend of mine back in the days as well and the two of us played one account back in 2004/2005. I suppose that would be illegal under the current rules.

AdminShade December 19 2007 11:51 AM EST

Shame on you NSFC.

smallpau1 - Go Blues [Lower My Fees] December 19 2007 12:42 PM EST

Is this really necessary now that the BA/20 is here to stay as it is not that hard to get in a full 24 hours worth of BA without missing any. I could see it before when you had to log in every 3 hours to get every last BA, now you only have to sign in 3 times a day. The only way ANYbody would even know it happened is if the person was chatting and told everybody they weren't the person who owned the account, or this case with NSFC where he openly admitted his GF played... As for the idea that people team up with people on the other side of the world to play while they sleep is just ignorant with the BA regen every 20 minutes, i dont think we have to worry about that (anymore). I just don't see how its fair because i have my login name and password saved on my home computer, who's to say my girlfriend or roomate doesn't come in here, bring up CB and play (while I'm not here)? Is it really fair to me to get fined? Thats like someone stealing my credit card and me paying the card stealer to use it... No ill will to the admins, as i know it is a rule, i truly dont see the point to the rule anymore.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] December 19 2007 1:17 PM EST

Even as easy as it now is sp, there are still sacrifices players make in order to burn BA. Having help is unfair.

Ahhzz December 19 2007 1:29 PM EST

"Csn't swear, spam, or abuse people"

"Yes, I'm calling you an idiot."



nice.......

Devenger [/me Forge Stuff :D] December 19 2007 1:44 PM EST

This sort of thing makes me seriously uncomfortable continuing to play the game. This is the part of CB that makes me remember why I left the first two times.

SimplyNic December 19 2007 2:42 PM EST

I agree with Sox. Unlike others, some don't have time to play this game for very long, giving them a disadvantage. And to get punished while someone plays against his will or being unaware of the game being played? Seems unfair to me.

TheHatchetman December 19 2007 2:51 PM EST

"The only reason I can see that would make you sell out is that maybe this was something that happened regularly and being caught and almost losing everything made you realise that you should get out before you did lose it all... Might not be true but it looks that way."

He's actually been on the fence about quitting for a good while now... This wasn't the end all be all drive him out knockout punch, it was just the straw that broke the camel's back...

AdminNightStrike December 19 2007 2:53 PM EST

Just thought I'd copy and paste this:

"The problem is, and always will be for now, the admins take different approaches to the same problem and often distribute justice unequally. There is no consistency in the system. "

AdminG Beee December 19 2007 3:07 PM EST

This type of thing has happened before. There's precedence for not banning someone in these circumstances and I myself have taken the same approach in the past that SNK eventually did, always without the forum hype however.

A fixed set of rules for every conceivable situation is the last thing that we need. The admins are either trusted to use their balanced judgement when making a decision or they're not. At the end of the day if we make a bad call then Jon usually lets us know...

[MG]Mecca-Devilbot [Clan of One] December 19 2007 3:08 PM EST

As someone before me said, Admin's are Jon's "Voice on Earth" as it were. In my opinion, NSFC got off easy. What he did was a resettable offense, yet in the end he only ended up with a million dollar fine.

And notice how the story changes, as the thread goes on. First it starts off with "the whole day" then, "just a few hours", then "just 30-40 BA". Which is the right one?

The system right now may seem to be arbitrary, with punishments for the same 'crime' varying from admin to admin. That's both a good and bad thing. One admin (snk4r), confiscated his character, and ended up fining him 1mil. Another admin might just have reset his characters, after posting in here. Both would be equally right, as there is no hard and fast rulebook that we know of, for breaking the CB rules.

In my opinion, NSFC got off easy, after bragging about what he did. Now he's free to sell all of his items, making actual money from the game, rather than losing it all for breaking the rules. I don't see his reasoning for leaving either. He broke the rules, he got fined, don't do it again. Perhaps leaving is his way of saying "it would have happened again"

Wizard'sFirstRule December 19 2007 3:16 PM EST

I think in law, some crimes require a guilty mind (can someone help me with the Latin term?) whereas other crimes doesn't (performing certain action is enough). So my interpretation of the current CB rules are that some actions are forbidden without the requirement to prove the person is indeed trying to cause harm to the game?

Another thing, from the little infraction notice that I read, I think the admin only does give fines/other penalty when a person confesses?

three4thsforsaken December 19 2007 3:30 PM EST

I'm glad NSFC only got fined.

What bothers me about the rule is that it cannot be in any way enforced, unless someone happens to state it in front of an Admin. And with the current BA system I find it difficult to understand how having multiple users abuse the game.

Iluvatar[NK] December 19 2007 4:17 PM EST

I think in law, some crimes require a guilty mind (can someone help me with the Latin term?) whereas other crimes doesn't (performing certain action is enough). So my interpretation of the current CB rules are that some actions are forbidden without the requirement to prove the person is indeed trying to cause harm to the game?

Yes, I mentioned mens rea. Seventh post.

Soxjr December 19 2007 4:49 PM EST

"And with the current BA system I find it difficult to understand how having multiple users abuse the game. "

So basically you are saying that if I oversleep and don't have a friend that is able to make up the slack and play some of my ba, or if I'm at work and don't have access to a computer and a friend to use my ba that that is fair that someone else can pass me because they have a friend to use theirs? The current ba system allows more people to use most if not all of their ba, but there are still some that can't/won't log in and use all of it, but people that are able to get 2 or more people to log in will be able to use all of theirs and not have to put in the effort. That is the problem and abuse of having multiple people on an account. You are allowing even less and less dedication to push towards the top. I hope that answers your question.

smallpau1 - Go Blues [Lower My Fees] December 19 2007 4:57 PM EST

Ok, i see it as not much difference from NUB helping people towards the top (even if they miss BA)...

QBsutekh137 December 19 2007 10:01 PM EST

I personally have no problem with two people playing one account. I was able to defeat such a team before (for about 17 minutes), so maybe there's hope here too. *smile* I'm actually not sure why Jonathan came down on the side against it here, actually...

Look at it this way -- if I wanted to "benevolent multi", i.e. spend all my BA forging for someone or fighting and giving them money, there would be nothing against that. There is nothing stopping a coalition. So, comparing that to a person sitting at my workstation burning a few BA for me seems somewhat trivial. Is anyone saying that if I broke my hands and had no means of typing "C-Enter", that my BA would just have to sit at 160? What if I were sitting at the workstation with someone, saying, "C-Enter" every time they pressed the buttons for me?

But given the current policy, it is most certainly against the rules. Not to rain on everyone's conflict-driven parade, but everyone here has said many right things (even when coming out dead-heat against each other -- a particularly tasty irony!). NSFC got off easy. NSFC was harshly treated. The policy is right. The policy is wrong. The policy could be changed now. The policy shouldn't be changed now. Admins are human (and make mistakes). Admins are human (and should be lauded for it).

Has it occurred to anyone that ALL OF THE ABOVE are _correct_.

I'm suddenly reminded of a fairly commonplace "pro-life" bumper sticker (at least here in Missouri):

"It's a child, not a choice."

I'm not going to get into a political abortion debate (and I won't tell you what side I'm on, if such a thing is even accurate to say). But the bumper sticker has a HUGE flaw in it that few seem to see, based on simple syntax: it assumes the poles ("child" vs "choice") are mutually exclusive. I consider this the penultimate strawman. Stating, "it's this or that" without considering that perhaps it is "C. Something else entirely." Or, "D. Both", or "E. Something totally beyond the scope of this conversation." Hell, there aren't enough letters in the alphabet to list the choices. Choice is infinite. No matter how white a situation may appear, just the tiniest amount of black makes it gray, and vice versa (my apologies to the series "Angel" for the blatant steal of that line. Go Lilah!).

So, this isn't a plea for everyone to slow down. It's a plea for everyone to step it up a notch and actually use the squishy grey stuff between their ears. Relax and get alert. Push hard and chill out. It's all good, and it all sucks...

And that's OK.

TheHatchetman December 19 2007 10:17 PM EST

"Is anyone saying that if I broke my hands and had no means of typing "C-Enter", that my BA would just have to sit at 160? What if I were sitting at the workstation with someone, saying, "C-Enter" every time they pressed the buttons for me? "

I was gonna ask the exact same thing but got distracted by something shiny...

TheHatchetman December 19 2007 10:20 PM EST

and now that I've read the rest of hat you had to say, I must say this:

Very well put Scrabaluminous! Very well put indeed!

QBsutekh137 December 19 2007 10:27 PM EST

Maybe, but you can't beat the Hatchet! *whack whack*

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] December 19 2007 10:45 PM EST

I imagine if the hands thing were to happen you could explain your situation and work something out with the admins. The rules are a framework within which the wise and learned admins can deal with things on a case by case basis.

As far as all the above all being correct certainly I can adopt a number of perspectives in order to agree with that statement but if I wish to say something meaningful about the system "Carnage Blender" I need to choose one and state my case from there.

My own opinion based on what I know of the infringement and of NSFC is that the final punishment is a little harsh. I understand why the rule is in place (admittedly there is less need for it since BA refresh was reduced) and think it a sensible rule.

When we attain the ability to see all perspectives at all times and up is down and vice versa I don't think we will be playing too much CB ;)

Why are you still here ;)

Armageddon December 19 2007 11:01 PM EST

DEMOCRACY!!!

GO FOR A POLL!!!

Underage Drinking December 19 2007 11:30 PM EST

the rules should apply to everyone, was a rule broken? no one should be given special treatment regardless of popularity or seniority, whats to say this has not been happening for sometime, its a slip up and a cover up. seems like the rules apply to nubs ;). i support the Admins on their work, and if this is fair to to them thats fine . they do stuff in cb i could prob careless to know about, but that does not mean they dont do their jobs.

DH December 19 2007 11:31 PM EST

this isnt a democracy. its a Jonocracy, dont like his admins? leave

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] December 20 2007 12:30 AM EST

You guys don't know when enough is enough do you? Someone broke rules, they were punished, end of story. Thread Closed.
This thread is closed to new posts.