So how come this post wasn't deleted?

Cause nothing is wrong with it. It's not flaming, offtopic or any other rule. Rude doesn't equal flame.

alright then no need to say he's bitching about being treated unfair. Plus your just calling him out more to reply since you use the B word towards him.

Regardless of the word I used he would probably find it insulting. Bitching, Whining, Crying.

Contradiction.. you're trying to call Jaxill out. ;/

Not really.... hes just asking why Jaxill is bitching about Jocer

Get back to the topic instead of bringing stupid personal feuds.....

Pull your head out of it Jax. Citrinate is a big boy and can make his own decisions. Just because you want Jocer off these forums DOES NOT mean other people do. I'm telling you this now, if anything happens because you manipulated citrinate to "hate" jocer and cit gets rid of him because of this, then expect a lot of people to leave this site.

And don't pull this crap that you don't manipulate citrinate because you did play a role in trying to get me demoted. Citrinate has to realise the "root" of the problem is with the rules/mods. Not the members. Mods are picking and choosing when to enforce rules, and keep on throwing members around the bend.

Last time I checked this was jocer bringing up an issue with his infraction which MODS gave to HIM. Not a jocer hate thread or a thread to remove him off these forums. Don't turn this on him jax. I find it honestly pathetic. Talk about taking a grudge too far.

Okay I didn't want to get involved but I feel I have to say something now.

I won't make the claim it's entirely about a personal feud with Jocer but I will make the claim it's partially responsible. Both you and Jocer have been trying to goat each other into arguments. Just block each other and shut the fuck up, how about that?

And really, saying you don't care is just a cheap cop-out, made even more obvious when saying it after posting a wall of text.

I've said this to you before but I feel it necessary to say it again. You give too many fucks, sir.


As for the issue at hand, you can't expect us to come up with a perfect rule right off the bat. Changes will be made as problems with it are brought to light. It's usually a report or an infraction that sparks up the discussions.

I didnt talk about Jax this whole thread. He came at me. His name was just in the message cit sent me.



It's not fair that i was told information from a mod that he made publicly. If i was mislead, why should i get infracted for it? The rule was changed the next day.

It's like Cit saying "Anyone who eats carrots gets banned" next day he changes the rules and someone eats a carrot and they get banned.

Its bullshit.

I was speaking about the past several days in general, not just this thread.


As for your infraction, I do agree the original poster should be allowed to change the topic, to an extent. The new topic should at least be in some way related to the original topic, which is reflected in both the "Before" and "After" rules(note the "extremely off topic" part). The original topic of the thread in question was the history of gaming. You had complained about people going off topic in the thread, and then later you and Jaxill went off on a tangent about moderator corruption. In both the before and after rules your posts were off topic.

So no, it isn't bullshit and your logic is flawed.