New rules

[VioletCamicat]

(BTW I'm still having a hard time figuring out who's admin or not. There's supposedly a colour scheme to indicate this, but how?).

Admins are Hypno, BizKiTRoAcH, ferret and PanthereNoire.
The color scheme seems to be only helpful concerning the display under the board index, which is showing who is logged on.

[SarahAlex]

To Matilda in Oz: Actually, there is an aswer about this matter, written by Hypno not as an admin but as a user (because the letters are white not yellow):

Well, it's all pretty in text, but think. Wouldn't "cultural understanding" also mean that I don't get offended when people do things that I usually would find offensive? As I should know that he might not know the traditions of my culture? Which would make all other discussion... Pointless...

Just my opinion tho :razz:

And although it's not official, I guess it's pretty clear. :wink:

Now, my suggestion.
I thought about this rule:

"2. Anything deleted or edited out by the admin/mod must be copied to a new thread in the Moderators subforum (except for pornbots/pillbots and the like). If the user continues breaking the same rule(s), the edited/deleted posts may be posted to the original thread and we can act accordingly (further warnings or a temporary ban)."

Could it be copied somewhere where everyone could see it? With some statement like "This is against the rules and we disavow responsibility from that." of course. It's nice that you put those deleted things to moderator subforum but if it not a porn, "only opinion", why we must not read it?

[Matilda in Oz]

To Matilda in Oz: Actually, there is an aswer about this matter, written by Hypno not as an admin but as a user (because the letters are white not yellow):

Well, it's all pretty in text, but think. Wouldn't "cultural understanding" also mean that I don't get offended when people do things that I usually would find offensive? As I should know that he might not know the traditions of my culture? Which would make all other discussion... Pointless...

Just my opinion tho :razz:

And although it's not official, I guess it's pretty clear. :wink:

Eh.... I'm really scratching my head here, because I don't understand what you mean. What is it that you mean is clear? To me, this is just bringing the whole discussion back to square 1.
 :cry:

[Matilda in Oz]

(BTW I'm still having a hard time figuring out who's admin or not. There's supposedly a colour scheme to indicate this, but how?).

Admins are Hypno, BizKiTRoAcH, ferret and PanthereNoire.
The color scheme seems to be only helpful concerning the display under the board index, which is showing who is logged on.

Thanks, VioletCamicat. I though there were more, but that's ok.

[Sander]

To Matilda in Oz: Actually, there is an aswer about this matter, written by Hypno not as an admin but as a user (because the letters are white not yellow):

My admin color is orange, not yellow!

To Matilda in Oz: Actually, there is an aswer about this matter, written by Hypno not as an admin but as a user (because the letters are white not yellow):

Now, my suggestion.
I thought about this rule:

"2. Anything deleted or edited out by the admin/mod must be copied to a new thread in the Moderators subforum (except for pornbots/pillbots and the like). If the user continues breaking the same rule(s), the edited/deleted posts may be posted to the original thread and we can act accordingly (further warnings or a temporary ban)."

Could it be copied somewhere where everyone could see it? With some statement like "This is against the rules and we disavow responsibility from that." of course. It's nice that you put those deleted things to moderator subforum but if it not a porn, "only opinion", why we must not read it?

I really don't see a reason why... If it's against the rules (download links), it shouldn't be on the board, ergo, it shouldn't be where everyone can see it.

[SarahAlex]

To Hypno: Sorry - yellow, orange... it's almost the same.

And I didn't mean download links but for example the thing that MistcastDice did few days ago - when he wrote that Matilda in Oz is... you know who. :wink: Not Lord Voldemort, of course. Maybe I'm just too tired (today I passed my last exam *happy*) but I can't see it anywhere so I suppose it is deleted now.
So, this was just my idea how to keep the freedom of speech and the rules in some sort of a balance. :wink:

Thank you for your answer - probably I shouldn't dare to ask you but... was it so quick because my post was not like a novell or because I'm a girl and you're a gentleman or... eh, nevermind, the point is I got a response.

[Matilda in Oz]

SarahAlex,

Congratulations on finishing your exam! That's fantastic! Well done.

I replied so quickly because some days I have computer access all day and night and other days only at night. I don't mind long posts at all, so no need to keep it short as far as I'm concerned.

Sorry, the last bit wasn't a question for me, *LOL.... I must be extremely tired. Ah, well, I answered it anyway, ha ha...

 

[SarahAlex]

SarahAlex,

Congratulations on finishing your exam! That's fantastic! Well done.

I replied so quickly because some days I have computer access all day and night and other days only at night. I don't mind long posts at all, so no need to keep it short as far as I'm concerned.

Sorry, the last bit wasn't a question for me, *LOL.... I must be extremely tired. Ah, well, I answered it anyway, ha ha...

 

Yeah, it was for Hypno but nevermind, it happens. :wink: I know how does it feel to be tired, really. This was my first year in college so I was sort of O_____o from the beginning but today... happy end. See you in September, textbooks.

[Hollywood]

I have another question about the rules and to what degree they apply to admins.

In the sharing forum rules, it says:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=746

Welcome to the downloads subforum. This is a place created for all X Japan fans to share their rare X stuff. Yup, RARE. Things that are on sale in well-reachable places like amazon.com, for example the Blue Blood and Jealousy re-releases (and originals), The Last Live DVD rips and so on are not allowed here.

However, in this thread, Hypno is not only offering to share "things that are on sale in well-reachable places like amazon.com", he is also asking money for them if you want DVD versions:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=40633

The Blue Blood Tour (Bakuhatsu Sunzen Gig) and On the Verge of Destruction DVDs are still in print and readily available through many online retail sources; they are available for purchase both separately and as part of the X 1989-1992 box set.

And yes, the thread is old, but it's a sticky in the "general chat" subforum and the offer is apparently still available, given than in the most recent post-- posted just yesterday-- Hypno offers to upload Bakuhatsu Sunzen Gig for MIHO.

I want to make it clear by the way that I'm not complaining about MIHO for taking Hypno up on his offer, at all.  I'm simply pointing out that once again, we have a situation where an admin does not see it necessary to follow his own rules (presumably sharing "things that are on sale in well-reachable places like amazon.com" is not allowed outside of the sharing subforum either?).

So, could I ask when it is OK for an admin to break the forum rules?  I ask because this rule

1. Moderators and administrators are subject to the same rules as general forum members.

...makes me rather confused about this whole situation.

Also, I would still highly appreciate answers to the following:

By the way, Hypno, I'm going to ask you yet again to please answer my questions.  Your "I'm busy" excuse is beginning to wear out, given that you are obviously not "too busy" to post elsewhere in the forum, or even to reply to others' posts on this very thread.

Originally posted on June 5th:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2052&start=179

OK, since Hypno said it's still OK to point stuff out:

Right now (without the new rules), PN is allowed to do as she will as long as I'm ok with it. And you are by all means allowed to point out where she has done so.

I'd like to point out what happened to the first post of this thread.  I just now noticed this:

The post made here originally has been deleted because it was incomplete and distorted. Full information, possibly a complete translation, about the press conference, will become available on Jrock Revolution from the JRR representative who attended the press conference. A link where to find that will be posted as soon as it becomes available.

I don't know who made this edit or when-- while it matches PN's writing style, to be fair it's not signed or dated.  I don't remember now what was in the original post, but regardless, here again is that JRR connection.  Even if it was just a rumor, I thought rumors were allowed to be posted here?

I'm confused.  This post was deleted because the information in it had not been confirmed by JRR?  Is approval from a JRR representative really needed before posting information on X Freaks? :?

Originally posted on June 10th:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2447&start=37

I said:

2. Please make constructive posts. A certain amount of good natured off topic is ok, but negative and bantering comments without facts to back them up and direct offenses are not allowed. Constructive criticism is welcomed. This rule is not enforced as harshly in the Offtopic section of the board.

This, combined with the lack of rules about what will be done to bad mods/admins, presents an absolutely fantastic loophole for capricious staff members to do as they will.

You said:

Don't be stupid, you know what I mean.

When you ask me to not be stupid, shall I interpet that as "good natured off topic" or as "contructive criticism"?

It's constructive criticism.

Thank you sir, you prove my point.  I understand that from now on I will also be allowed to call other users "stupid"?

It's not a double standard. Downloads are not allowed, YM messages are not allowed.

Earlier on the thread:

Rules #10 and #11 present an incredibly strange double-standard.

Umm yeah, combine rule #12 and you have a triple standard?

You already said it was a double-standard.  If you want your rules and the intention behind them to seem credible to users, I constructively, good-naturedly, usefully and helpfully suggest that you make up your mind before contradicting yourself more than necessary.
I still have not received an answer as to why illegal activity 1 (posting Yoshiki's YM messages) is restricted but illegal activity 2 (sharing Yoshiki's copyrighted music) is allowed and encouraged.

As for the photo disclaimer issue, your own rule 13 invalidates any need for photo disclaimers:

13. Board members are solely responsible for the content of their post. The board owner, administrators and moderators accept no responsibility for any kind of offensive or illegal posts.

If board members are solely responsible for the legality of their posts, what are the photo disclaimers for?  I understand that you are having difficulty managing your forum, and that in times like these it is probably some measure of comfort to exercise your power as an admin in arbitrary and highly visible ways, such as asking forum members to needlessly jump through hoops and include this and that in their posts.  Unfortunately, it does not actually help anyone or benefit the forum (if you were concerned legally about this issue and wanted to help, you could post an image disclaimer for the whole forum, just like this disclaimer you posted in rule 13).  It comes across as petty and gives the impression of a struggling administration losing control over its forum.

Most of the rules were here already in an unwritten form (thanks to my lazyness).

Rules "in an unwritten form" are not rules.  These are new rules, they were not "here already".  Some of them are PN's spontaneously-invented new rules; I suppose their inclusion now as actual rules might be intended as some kind of retroactive claim that PN was enforcing the rules all along (she wasn't).

So, one more inappropriate edit/deletion as she's de-adminned?  Sounds fair, I can live with that.

The 'list' Hollywood managed to put together was 30 people, who had even the slightest complaint about PN, mostly neutral people; against 10 people, who were clearly on PNs side. I wouldn't call that 'everyone'.

Can you think of any other mod or admin that 31 people-- a very high percentage of the active members here-- have "even the slightest complaint" about?

[ferret]

I have another question about the rules and to what degree they apply to admins.

In the sharing forum rules, it says:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=746

Welcome to the downloads subforum. This is a place created for all X Japan fans to share their rare X stuff. Yup, RARE. Things that are on sale in well-reachable places like amazon.com, for example the Blue Blood and Jealousy re-releases (and originals), The Last Live DVD rips and so on are not allowed here.

However, in this thread, Hypno is not only offering to share "things that are on sale in well-reachable places like amazon.com", he is also asking money for them if you want DVD versions:
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=40633

The Blue Blood Tour (Bakuhatsu Sunzen Gig) and On the Verge of Destruction DVDs are still in print and readily available through many online retail sources; they are available for purchase both separately and as part of the X 1989-1992 box set.

And yes, the thread is old, but it's a sticky in the "general chat" subforum and the offer is apparently still available, given than in the most recent post-- posted just yesterday-- Hypno offers to upload Bakuhatsu Sunzen Gig for MIHO.

I want to make it clear by the way that I'm not complaining about MIHO for taking Hypno up on his offer, at all.  I'm simply pointing out that once again, we have a situation where an admin does not see it necessary to follow his own rules (presumably sharing "things that are on sale in well-reachable places like amazon.com" is not allowed outside of the sharing subforum either?).

So, could I ask when it is OK for an admin to break the forum rules?  I ask because this rule

1. Moderators and administrators are subject to the same rules as general forum members.

...makes me rather confused about this whole situation.

From what I got the uploading and stuff is supposed to happen per PM and  when people share things via PM, well, who cares? (Hypno may correct me if I'm wrong)


I don't really understand what you're still doing this for, though, what's the big plan? Have the rules be made stricter/more specific?

[Hollywood]

I don't really understand what you're still doing this for, though, what's the big plan? Have the rules be made stricter/more specific?

I find it very telling how people who complain about the rules and the admins' behavior get "threatened" with even more and stricter rules-- means you guys know how annoying your rules are and how no one asked for them, huh?  Otherwise why should the prospect of stricter rules be used as an implied "punishment"?

Though in case the intention of my post wasn't clear: I don't care what people share via PM, whatever people are PMing to each other isn't any of my business anyway.  But since Hypno has publicly offered to sell bootleg copies of X DVDs which are not even out of print, it becomes utterly impossible to take any of the new quasi-official-forum "copyright infringement" rules seriously.  Why should users be expected to uphold these kinds of rules and standards when the forum owner himself obviously couldn't care less about upholding them himself?

I mean, on one hand we have Hypno insisting that users be held to such obscure and highly masturbatory rules as "you need to post a disclaimer after every photo", and god forbid anyone repost a Yoshiki Mobile message.  These rules supposedly exist for copyright/legal reasons.

And then on the other hand, we have Hypno selling bootleg DVDs in plain sight in the main subforum.

Double-standard much?  If Hypno can't follow his own rules-- nevermind PN's inability to follow the previous set of rules-- then the applicable rules really should be tossed, as no one else should be expected to follow them either.

[ferret]

I don't really understand what you're still doing this for, though, what's the big plan? Have the rules be made stricter/more specific?

I find it very telling how people who complain about the rules and the admins' behavior get "threatened" with even more and stricter rules-- means you guys know how annoying your rules are and how no one asked for them, huh?  Otherwise why should the prospect of stricter rules be used as an implied "punishment"?

That's not what I meant. I mean is the goal of those examples to get more specific rules so that there are no loopholes (for admins)? Or less rules? Or both stricter rules for admins and less rules for users? I just wanna have that cleared up because I'm slightly confused  

About the copyright: Personaslly, I find it annoying but add it in one way or another (even better when I have a source, then I just add that) but honestly, have you seen anyone get a warning for not posting the disclaimer? It's by far not as strict as you make it out to be, to be honest.

About posting in that thread: Yeah, can't say anything, you must patiently await Hypno's answer on that one  :wink:

[SarahAlex]

Have you seen anyone get a warning for not posting the disclaimer? It's by far not as strict as you make it out to be, to be honest.

Then why does this rule exist? *thinking about bureaucracy*

[ferret]

I have no idea, it came out of nowhere, sneaky little rule that  :x

The rule might be altered sometime soon, though.

[SarahAlex]

The rule might be altered sometime soon, though.

That would be great. :wink:

And ferret, this has nothing to do with you, I really appreaciate your effort. I know it's not easy to dispute all the time with people as annoying as we are sometimes. Ok, often. You are not afraid of being unpopular, this we have in common. :wink:

[Hollywood]

That's not what I meant. I mean is the goal of those examples to get more specific rules so that there are no loopholes (for admins)? Or less rules? Or both stricter rules for admins and less rules for users? I just wanna have that cleared up because I'm slightly confused  

Ah, got it then.  Well, it's a three-part thing for me:

1. I'd like fewer rules, because I find most of the ones that were added to be unnecessary and overly restrictive (this isn't an official forum and I don't think anyone wants it to be, etc.).
2. I think rules should be consistent.  For example, it makes absolutely no sense to me why such a fuss is made about Yoshiki Mobile when people are allowed to trade files of Yoshiki's music.
3. Whatever rules are used, I'd like the admins to be held to those rules to the same extent that normal users are.  In other words, no double-standards.

About the copyright: Personaslly, I find it annoying but add it in one way or another (even better when I have a source, then I just add that) but honestly, have you seen anyone get a warning for not posting the disclaimer? It's by far not as strict as you make it out to be, to be honest.

Yeah, I agree that nobody really cares about it or enforces it, which is great, but-- then why even have it at all?  As I said in one of my two posts that Hypno still hasn't replied to , if this were REALLY just about legal issues, Hypno could add a disclaimer what covers the whole forum (and he actually already does in one of the other rules, negating the need for photo disclaimers at all).  Asking people to add their own disclaimer every time they post a photo smacks of mental masturbation: rules made for no useful or helpful reason, but simply to make people jump through hoops in a highly visible way and enjoy watching them do so.

About posting in that thread: Yeah, can't say anything, you must patiently await Hypno's answer on that one  :wink:

Oh yeah, I will.  Been patiently waiting on Hypno for weeks now on some of this stuff...

EDITED TO ADD:

The rule might be altered sometime soon, though.

Oh, that's good news, glad to hear it.  Thanks.

[Sander]

First of all, why I always delay answering your novels- the answers always generate more...

*long rant about the rule not to post copyright and available stuff in the sharing subforums but yet Hypno is selling the same stuff on the public forum*

I have nowhere forbid anyone to request the copyright and available stuff and then let others PM it. And regular mail can be considered one form of Private Messaging. So technically, I'm not doing anything wrong.

*something about the first post of one thread, which was edited*

I believe it was edited before the new rules, which means they won't apply. The JRR thing... I dunno, I wouldn't have put that there, but... Yeah...

*Something about asking if you can call others stupid*

No you can't. And I told you not to be stupid, not that you are stupid. It's like if I tell you "Don't go and die" doesn't mean I say you are dead.

*Something about YM posting and Yoshiki's music posting and double and triple standards *

You are, of course, allowed to suggest things and encouraged to do so, but I'm not obligated to follow the suggestions. If I want any double/triple/quadruple standards on this board, then there will be.

*Some stuff about the photo disclaimer*

As Ferret mentioned, the photo disclaimer rule is being reviewed.

*Asking, if I know more admins/mods, that 31 people have even the slightest complaint about*

I'm sure everyone have even the slightest complaints about many people, but no one is perfect.



And Hollywood, try to follow rule #5 a bit more carefully, thanks.

[Hollywood]

First of all, why I always delay answering your novels- the answers always generate more...

That should be no surprise, considering that you seem to be continually unable/unwilling to address all of the issues I bring forward.  Answering users' questions is part of your job as an admin.  And naturally, if you make strange rules or support the administration of an abusive admin, you should expect to receive more questions.

You still haven't answered my questions about the discrepancy between this:

I have nowhere forbid anyone to request the copyright and available stuff and then let others PM it. And regular mail can be considered one form of Private Messaging. So technically, I'm not doing anything wrong.

...And the, in your words, "double/triple/quadruple standards" in regard to Yoshiki Mobile posts.  Of course I understand that it IS an enormous double-standard, but:

I still have not received an answer as to why illegal activity 1 (posting Yoshiki's YM messages) is restricted but illegal activity 2 (sharing Yoshiki's copyrighted music) is allowed and encouraged.

I'm really curious.  Why is this double-standard in place?  What is the rationale behind it and how does it benefit X Freaks?

*something about the first post of one thread, which was edited*

I believe it was edited before the new rules, which means they won't apply. The JRR thing... I dunno, I wouldn't have put that there, but... Yeah...

If it happened before the new rules, then shouldn't it be reviewed under the old rules?  Or is a part of the reason for instating new rules to "erase" all previous admin wrongdoing?

*Something about asking if you can call others stupid*

No you can't. And I told you not to be stupid, not that you are stupid. It's like if I tell you "Don't go and die" doesn't mean I say you are dead.

Sorry, but I really have to laugh about this one.  OK, so: it would be acceptable for me to tell you not to be stupid? :lol:

As Ferret mentioned, the photo disclaimer rule is being reviewed.

That's great, glad to hear it.

*Asking, if I know more admins/mods, that 31 people have even the slightest complaint about*

I'm sure everyone have even the slightest complaints about many people, but no one is perfect.

Certainly no one is perfect, but it should be blatantly obvious that there is one admin who generates a greatly disproportionate amount of complaints, given that over half of the posts in the suggestions forum are about PN, while there are not and have never been complaint threads about any other mods or admins.  PN has abused her adminship and generated an enormous amount of complaints, and you know this.

Which brings me to the question you didn't address at all:

So, one more inappropriate edit/deletion as she's de-adminned? Sounds fair, I can live with that.

[MiscastDice]

I have nowhere forbid anyone to request the copyright and available stuff and then let others PM it. And regular mail can be considered one form of Private Messaging. So technically, I'm not doing anything wrong.

I still have not received an answer as to why illegal activity 1 (posting Yoshiki's YM messages) is restricted but illegal activity 2 (sharing Yoshiki's copyrighted music) is allowed and encouraged.
I'm really curious.  Why is this double-standard in place?  What is the rationale behind it and how does it benefit X Freaks?

Agreed! And why can't someone with YM access make a thread offering to share the messages via PM with all interested or link their site displaying the messages in their sig? Hell, if I knew someone with a Yoshiki Mobile account, we'd post them on Voiceless Scream and I'd link to the tag, would that be allowed?

*something about the first post of one thread, which was edited*

I believe it was edited before the new rules, which means they won't apply. The JRR thing... I dunno, I wouldn't have put that there, but... Yeah...

If it happened before the new rules, then shouldn't it be reviewed under the old rules?  Or is a part of the reason for instating new rules to "erase" all previous admin wrongdoing?

I'm quite convinced that somehow, PanthereNoire has threatened to sue/report this board and everyone's trying to be too careful. Never mind that if ANYONE's going to get us in trouble it is not her. She doesn't even have Yoshiki's phone number or private e-mail and has to resort to Myspace mail, which from my personal experience, doesn't get much attention. If it did, Kuri would no longer be an employee of JRR.

*Something about asking if you can call others stupid*

No you can't. And I told you not to be stupid, not that you are stupid. It's like if I tell you "Don't go and die" doesn't mean I say you are dead.

Sorry, but I really have to laugh about this one.  OK, so: it would be acceptable for me to tell you not to be stupid? :lol:

Ahahaha, so now we can insult people just by adding "don't?" So does that mean I can tell PN, the next time she goes off on, say, trashing hide, "don't be a fucking asshole, and I so do not want to reach through my net connection and not-bitchslap you?"

As Ferret mentioned, the photo disclaimer rule is being reviewed.

That's great, glad to hear it.

Thank you!

*Asking, if I know more admins/mods, that 31 people have even the slightest complaint about*

I'm sure everyone have even the slightest complaints about many people, but no one is perfect.

Certainly no one is perfect, but it should be blatantly obvious that there is one admin who generates a greatly disproportionate amount of complaints, given that over half of the posts in the suggestions forum are about PN, while there are not and have never been complaint threads about any other mods or admins.  PN has abused her adminship and generated an enormous amount of complaints, and you know this.

Which brings me to the question you didn't address at all:

So, one more inappropriate edit/deletion as she's de-adminned? Sounds fair, I can live with that.

AGREED. If PN, despite her threats to involve Yoshiki, had just been banned at the beginning, none of this fucking drama would have happened and we would have been the same board we always were. Instead, you allowed an abusive and litigious admin to abuse her power and show off her conflict of interest and unprofessionalism, and then didn't ban her.

The best example I can give here is that everyone's having a party. It's a great party, everyone's having fun, then someone who's a little mentally ill or very drunk starts going off on a religious rant that's so loud no one can hear anyone else talk, hear the music, or hear anything but why all must follow the path of the Blahblah Cult. Said person then finally shuts up screaming, only to begin to hassle anyone who's NOT a member of the Blahblah Cult to join it or berating them for their actions that violate the principles of it, even if said actions are normal or accepted outside of the cult. Finally, the enraged cultist demands that there be no negative discussion of the Blahblah Cult or else.

So what do you do? Logically, the answer would be to ask the person to simmer down, or, if their beliefs in Blahblahism are so fucking much they can't, to leave. (e.g. warnings in the forum context). If the person still stays around causing trouble, most people would kick the person out of the party (ban) rather than demand that things accommodate his or her threats (making new rules for behavior to accommodate someone so she can co-admin at JRR and an unofficial board.)

[SarahAlex]

So, another one with that long-posts-disease. Is it infectious? :shock: *scared*

[Hollywood]

If PN, despite her threats to involve Yoshiki, had just been banned at the beginning, none of this fucking drama would have happened and we would have been the same board we always were. Instead, you allowed an abusive and litigious admin to abuse her power and show off her conflict of interest and unprofessionalism, and then didn't ban her.

That's exactly it right there.  Very well said.

Though I don't personally think she needs to be banned, as I haven't seen her do anything that (in my opinion) would have been ban-worthy if she were a normal user.

But de-adminned?  Absolutely.

And had that happened, we would not have needed any of these new rules, nor would there have been any new-rules-drama-- and everyone's "life" around here would be much easier, Hypno's included.

[MiscastDice]

So, another one with that long-posts-disease. Is it infectious? :shock: *scared*

Only in some ways.  :wink:

[leria83]

This is like the never-ending thread.

[MiscastDice]

If PN, despite her threats to involve Yoshiki, had just been banned at the beginning, none of this fucking drama would have happened and we would have been the same board we always were. Instead, you allowed an abusive and litigious admin to abuse her power and show off her conflict of interest and unprofessionalism, and then didn't ban her.

That's exactly it right there.  Very well said.

Though I don't personally think she needs to be banned, as I haven't seen her do anything that (in my opinion) would have been ban-worthy if she were a normal user.

But de-adminned?  Absolutely.

And had that happened, we would not have needed any of these new rules, nor would there have been any new-rules-drama-- and everyone's "life" around here would be much easier, Hypno's included.

The only reason I say banned (AND being made where she cannot view the board) rather than just de-adminned IS due to the legal threats. Her continuing presence here (especially if she gets mad and starts pestering Yoshiki and/or his lawyers, and he/they doesn't have more courage than Hypno to tell her to STFU and GTFO and decides to oblige her just to not deal with it all or take her claims at face value) is a threat to the existence of the forum.

[Zwanster]

This is like the never-ending thread.

Tell me about it.

[Hollywood]

This is like the never-ending thread.

Tell me about it.

Are either of you currently strapped to a chair, your eyelids propped open with toothpicks, while someone is shoving a laptop in your face and inescapably forcing you to read this thread?

If not, then if you don't like the length of this thread you COULD simply not read it, you know.  It's not like you're admins or are otherwise in any way obliged to look at it or comment on it.

[leria83]

Actually they're Q-Tips. The cotton adds cushion. Toothpicks leave a nasty dent in your face  :wink:

Um..there definitely needs to be a sarcasm decoder or something because that is my main tool.

[MiscastDice]

WTF? WHY was my post on a thread in the Pata forum deleted when it stated a fact? Miyavi and Pata worked together in the past, specifically on the Miyavi album Galyuu and early in Miyavi's solo career. THAT isn't a fucking rumor!

 
 :x  :x  :x  :x

(edit: may have been looking for it in the wrong thread. but I think it was deleted.)

[VioletCamicat]

Do you by any chance mean that one?
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2439&start=50

[MiscastDice]

Do you by any chance mean that one?
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2439&start=50

 :oops: yeah