NY Resolution - 'Redemption' month

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't buy the morally upright 'redemption' thing. There's something else behind this.

Wanderer: an Apollonian without self-pride? Really. Any one of these people should feel a tinge of offense at being asked to return but with their tails between their legs. And what happens after a month? Anyway, I hardly think they'll be able to contain themselves for too too long. Poll idea: who will be the first to revert?
 
Plazma Inferno! said:
As a part of NY resolution, I decided to offer a so called ‘second chance’ for comeback to several long standing members that have been banned permanently in the 2007

I will offer them to return on a 'Redemption' month and to gain status of SciForums member again.
Click to expand...
So, I seem to be alone in thinking this is a generous gesture, considering the behaviour of those banned members that I know of. But,...why ever not? We all deserve a second (third, fourth,....) chance!

I support the idea.
 
Plazma as seen a few moments before issuing redemption. Drawn on the accounts of a traumatized now dead member. RIP :D

 
Ripley said:
I don't buy the morally upright 'redemption' thing. There's something else behind this.

Wanderer: an Apollonian without self-pride? Really. Any one of these people should feel a tinge of offense at being asked to return but with their tails between their legs. And what happens after a month? Anyway, I hardly think they'll be able to contain themselves for too too long. Poll idea: who will be the first to revert?
Click to expand...
Your error, my brilliance, is that you actually believe I care.
 
Whats the problem with ignoring people why does everybody feel like every negative contribution is such a high matter of importance, as if boredom causes one to bitch. I believe the people that try to prevent "spam" from happening encourage the insecure ones to do it because it poses a challenge. Obviously the spammer is insecure if boredom lead him to waste his time writing something with no substance in the first place and by placing boundaries on the person I think they utilize that structure as a platform to piss people off and see what they could get away with or what response they can initiate from the counter. Who cares, let them post if they have something valuable to input - learn from it otherwise keep reading. By responding to trolling it's almost as if your trolling yourself. o_O
 
sandy said:
Most of the really cool people don't post much anymore or are gone. I doubt they will come back.
Click to expand...

Yes, too bad about peta9.

Otherwise I agree with Hercules Rockefeller. Make him mod!! A guy like Read-Only would be good for the same reason. Scientific + low tolerance for nonsense.
 
Last edited:
WANDERER said:
The Iced retard is re-accepted into the sheepish, mundane fold, and yet the cloven hoofed is shunned.

Fuck off!!!!
Click to expand...

I'll have to admit that there was a time where I enjoyed reading your point of view. The latest editions of "philosophy according to Satyr" seems to be nothing but angst/taunts towards the online community (which isn't very interesting at all). The mutton in me was kinda hoping this was just a phase.
 
domesticated om said:
I'll have to admit that there was a time where I enjoyed reading your point of view. The latest editions of "philosophy according to Satyr" seems to be nothing but angst/taunts towards the online community (which isn't very interesting at all). The mutton in me was kinda hoping this was just a phase.
Click to expand...
The Satyr was a carefree, indifferent, jokester with not a care in the world and no point to make but unmasking the dead and exposing the dim.

Wanderer can be a little more serious, if he's in the mood.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top