NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7863466&postcount=21

I am sure this kind of vulgar needless attack is against the TOS.

Posted.

Thanks

Is calling someone a douchbag a flame??

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7870984&postcount=19

Is calling someone a douchbag a flame??

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7870984&postcount=19

Not really, considering what it was in response to.

Not really, considering what it was in response to.
Then, considering what it was in response to (rape rooms, torture, mass graves, starving children, genocide), the the invasion of Iraq is justified, based on what it was in response to. So I will consider you on the side of Iraqi Freedom from here on out.

That is unfairly applied. A flame is a flame, regardless of what it was in response to. There should have been warnings applied to each side of that.

If you posted the "liberal pussies" ad, you're just as guilty.

If you posted the "liberal pussies" ad, you're just as guilty.
If? Have you read the thread? Feel free to know of what you speak.

Not really, considering what it was in response to.

Has the stated policy that one should not flame in response to flames been changed?

Has the stated policy that one should not flame in response to flames been changed?
Evidently.

If? Have you read the thread? Feel free to know of what you speak.I know enough to comment on it. It's entirely possible that could have been you posting that from a puppet nation.

The First Amendment gives people the right to question the government and the military when they're in the wrong. If you don't like that, too bad.

I know enough to comment on it. It's entirely possible that could have been you posting that from a puppet nation.

The First Amendment gives people the right to question the government and the military when they're in the wrong. If you don't like that, too bad.
Tell you what, I am just going to ignore you, because you have nothing to do with this. Have a nice day. :rolleyes:

Has the stated policy that one should not flame in response to flames been changed?

No, but in this case I was willing to let it slide because firstly, it wasn't a particularly serious insult and secondly I considered what it was in response to.

Are we then allowed to flame in response to particular post that offends our sensibilities? I am just wondering for future posts. With your response I will consider the matter closed and effectively handled.

Are we then allowed to flame in response to particular post that offends our sensibilities? I am just wondering for future posts. With your response I will consider the matter closed and effectively handled.

No, I judge each on a case-by-case basis. In this case, calling someone a 'douchebag' wasn't enough to warrant a warning.

Has the stated policy that one should not flame in response to flames been changed?

Are we then allowed to flame in response to particular post that offends our sensibilities?

With apologies to my associate, Myrth, this matter has been brought before the NationStates staff for team review. Please await a final ruling. Thank you for your cooperation.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

With apologies to my associate, Myrth, this matter has been brought before the NationStates staff for team review. Please await a final ruling. Thank you for your cooperation.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

Thank you.