I-Mockery Forum - Reply to Topic

[QUOTE=Helm;227597]@the[Hitman]:

Hello. I am Helm. I am in charge of this section of the message board (philosophy and/or politics, which will be philosophy and/or politics from here and onwards) as the main moderator.  It has been told to me by the general managment that you have to change your name before you can post in this section (philosophy and/or politics) of the I-mockery Message Boards. Your type is best kept in the General Blabber but if you insist on partaking in political and/or philosophical discussion, there is an option left for you. Change your username, and signature. Register a different account if you must. I have been told to pass along that we are making an exception on you as to what is stated in the creation of characters in the [url=http://www.i-mockery.net/viewtopic.php?t=3138]rules and guidelines[/url], since your new philosophy and/or politics message board friendly persona will not indeed be a character in the true sense of the word. Finding such loopholes is what we philosophy and/or politics people like to do as an enjoable passtime, heh.  Anyhow, the new account's name must not include any of the following:

* References to computer games and other electronic means of entertainment, especially those that are said to be not so good. The reason for this is that this section of the boards (philosophy and/or politics) must maintain a high degree of seriousness if there are any valuable arguments to be had, philosophical essays to be posted and for whatever else that is customary to be done, to be thusly done. In this spirit, you are also urged to post a ":serious" emoticon after your every post. This is considered standard practise. You might notice that not many others do this and this would maybe -depending on your wits- lead you to believe there is a contradiction between what I have just said and the real, actual happenings in this section of the boards (philosophy and/or politics). Astute on your part, but sadly invalid. The reason not many others post the customary :serious at the end of their posts is that they've been in this section of the boards (philosophy and/or politics) for a long period of time and thusly the degree of seriousness of their posts - which is to say, complete and utter-  has been deemed satisfactory. Yours however, has not yet.

Exception: retro game references mildly tolerated. HOWEVER! references to retro games that are held in low regard, will be judged on a case-by-case basis. That is a loop-hole we have already had to deal with, heh.  If you choose a name that makes a reference to a game which is considered to be not good enough, you might be leaving yourself open for another username audit, at the moderator's will. You do not want to do this.

* Usage of punctuation and/or numerals. For example if we were to ignore prohibition one above, "the [Hitman]" as a chosen username would still not do, which is to say, would call for yet another username audit, at the moderator's will. "The Hitman" or simply "Hitman" would be in no violation of the rule, however. Also, a clever loop-hole would be to keep the valid alterations of your name, but remove all references to computer games in your signature and general information, thusly removing any actual connection which would prompt a username audit, at the moderator's will. You would, keep to your private knowledge that your chosen username does indeed refer to a popular computer game, but none would be able to call this lateral connection into question. This is the way of the philosophy and/or politics message board user and for such cunning you would surely be applauded by your fellow posters, which is to say, you would be generally ignored.

These are the sections of the code you are in violation currently. In choosing your new username you should however be aware of the rest of the code that partains to username creation and/or usage within the confines of this section (philosophy and/or politics) of the message board:

*Blatantly insulting crass language. For example you could, perhaps choose the name "I Am A Fucking Moron" as a name, and while that would pretty much echo the collective sentiment of the boards towards you, which is to say, it is considered a known to be true fact, which is to say, it is not false, it would not do, because of it is shocking, provocative nature. If you were to choose the name "I am A Worthless Human Being Whose Posts Are A Waste of Bandwidth, Would God Please Strike Me Down Where I Stand?" that would appear to be correct, since we here are prone to good, PC rephrasal of the truth. However beware! That name would be on an illegal length and thusly either be rejected by BBcode default, or stretch the board view in such a maner that would lead to vicious verbal assault towards the responsible party, which is to say, namely, yourself. We do not want that. We are here to discuss philosophy and politics, and not fight amongst ourselves like young men do in other sections of these message boards. Furthermore, that name, were it to be alterated into "I Worthless Hitman?" would still not be considered valid for twofold reason: firstly, it still contains references to computer games and/or other forms of electronic entertainment, in conjunction to your signature and/or other personal information. Secondly, there appear a punctuative symbol, which under the second rule of the section which partains to the creation and/or usage of usernames in this here section (philosophy and/or politics) of the I-mockery message boards, leaves you open to a username audit, to the moderator's will.

Well, this is it young man. You have 24 hours, starting at 9:29 GT + 3 to alter your current, or create a new account which is valid under the above specifications. After your alterations, you are urged to post here for further inspection. This however is not mandatory but is considered good manners. If you are confident that your new persona fits the criteria of usage in this section (philosophy and/or politics) of the I-mockery message boards, then you are free to continue posting as you would. However, if your new persona is then, consequently, which is to say, in the future, again found to be violating one of the mentioned rules, you will again be open to a username audit under the will of the moderator. This has the unfortunate effect of placing you in the category of two-time offenders, the specific qualities of which are best not left discussed at the present time, which is to say, right now. So if you post here right after your needed alterations, the moderators could inspect your new account and tell you if you need to make any other adjustments as a part of the first username audit, which is quite less severe.

Under I-mockery.net bylaws, let it be known that this written statement gives you the status of [b]First-Time Offender[/b]. This may, or may not also grant you a title "McClain's Bitch" according to the moderator's will. The title will, given future favourable behaviour, be removed.

This will be all for now. You may proceed to make the warranted adjustments and present yourself for further inspection within said 24 hour limit, which is to say, the limit of a full day and night.[/QUOTE]

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options Automatically parse links in text

Jun 23rd, 2004 06:53 PM

KevinTheOmnivore

Gilles Duceppe Leader of the Bloc Quebecois (score = 100)

Jack Layton Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada (score= 100)

Stephen Harper Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada (score = 58)

Paul Martin Leader of Liberal Party of Canada, Prime Minister of Canada (score = 42)

Jun 23rd, 2004 05:45 PM

Zebra 3

ONTARIO

35036 – KINGSTON AND THE ISLANDS (8)

ELSTON, Rosie The Clown (Independent) - Unlike the other candidates, she said she'll break her promises.
FISHER BALFOUR, Janina (Green Party)
HUTCHISON, Rob (N.D.P.)
MacLEAN, Blair (Conservative)
MARSHALL, Terry (Christian Heritage Party)
MILLIKEN, Peter (Liberal)
ROGERS, Don (Canadian Action)
WALKER, Karl Eric (Independent)

Jun 21st, 2004 01:57 PM

Anonymous

Why does it matter to you since you live in Texas anyway? ;<

I just find myself hating more and more of what this country's now about every day.

Jun 21st, 2004 11:40 AM

ItalianStereotype

Stephen Harper Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada (score=100)
Paul Martin Leader of Liberal Party of Canada (score=56)
Gilles Duceppe Leader of the Bloc Quebecois (score=11)
Jack Layton Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada (score=11)

it's good to see you taking part in the politics forum, Chojin, but I hate all this talk of moving.

Jun 21st, 2004 06:04 AM

Anonymous

Jack Layton Leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada (score = 100)
Gilles Duceppe Leader of the Bloc Quebecois (score = 89)
Stephen Harper Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada (score = 56)
Paul Martin Leader of Liberal Party of Canada, Prime Minister of Canada (score = 33)

I might be moving to Canada soon anyway, provided I can't scrape together the money to get to Australia.

Jun 20th, 2004 08:10 PM

The One and Only...

100% for Harper.

Jun 20th, 2004 11:20 AM

AChimp

It was a good quiz to steal.

Jun 20th, 2004 11:07 AM

Royal Tenenbaum

Chimp stole my quiz! :o Either way, it's a pretty cool quiz, and I, surprising enough, got a 100 for Layton.

Hmm, not so surprising perhaps. Apparently a preliminary agreement has already been reached by the Liberals and NDP to form a coalition if they can. It'll be interesting if Martin gets to stay PM even if the Conservatives have more seats than Liberal's. It's really up to the Governer-General and how she uses her prerogative powers, ie. whether she asks Martin to step down and allows Harper to govern anyway. Somehow I doubt that would happen, since she was appointed by Liberals, so I'm really crossing my fingers on a Liberal-NDP government.

Jun 20th, 2004 10:48 AM

Zebra 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Papa Goat

Bah, what make the reform party so regional?

- Besides their politics not much I guess...

Quote:

Couldn't you say the same thing about the Liberal party, except that they happen to have a hold over a more populous region?

- The Liberal Party of Canada is a truly national party not only for its ideology, but for having MPs from every Canadian region, which includes drunken King Ralph's kingdom aka. the Canadian province of Alberta.

Quote:

Thats what I hate about Ontarions, they think they're the only real Canadians

- Wrong again. The chosen ones don't think it - they know it.

Jun 20th, 2004 03:22 AM

Big Papa Goat

Bah, what make the reform party so regional? Couldn't you say the same thing about the Liberal party, except that they happen to have a hold over a more populous region? Thats what I hate about Ontarions, they think they're the only real Canadians

If you're all so much more Canadian, you should just kick the rest of us out, and form a new Canada, and the rest of us can just be The Confederation formerly known as Canada

Bah I'm drunk, but you get the gist of it

Jun 20th, 2004 03:16 AM

Big Papa Goat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walter Simard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Papa Goat

I'm voting Green just so they can enough votes to qualify for federal funding.

Federal funding is usually based on the amount of MPs in the House and not on the vote count, which means by the most optimistic polls, the Green Party can possibly win one to two seats which is short of at least 10 more MPs required to reach official party status and this means they'll get no federal funding.

I just heard that funding would be given to any party with >2% of the country or 5% of a ridiing.

Jun 19th, 2004 06:24 PM

Zebra 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by AChimp

It said I should be voting for Duceppe, but I can't in Manitoba.

- People make mistakes, machines don't. There's plenty of time to move to Quebec. First, you'll need to get familiar with the Bloc's platform: BlocQuébécois.org, try to learn the lyrics to Gens du Pays cause they'll be singing this for sure on election night and a French phrase for quick service at restaurants: Un smoke meat, une grosse poutine et une Laurentide, sti!

- As for myself, it's Layton at 100, Martin at 73, Duceppe at 67 and Harper at 13.

Jun 19th, 2004 05:45 PM

AChimp

The same way that I can be "all for" Duceppe but totally against separatists.

Jun 19th, 2004 05:25 PM

Baalzamon

wow, I am a 100% match with jack layton , with duceppe in second with 68, harper 58 and martin 42

how am I more of a match with harper than with martin when I am left leaning?

Jun 19th, 2004 04:46 PM

AChimp

http://www.politicswatch.com/VoteSelectorQuiz2004.html

OMG FANCY QUIZ

It said I should be voting for Duceppe, but I can't in Manitoba.

Jun 19th, 2004 01:01 PM

AChimp

Heh, yeah. I forgot to mention what Walter just said.

Jun 19th, 2004 12:56 PM

Zebra 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore

I got the impression that this is what the late Reform Party was all about. Have more "libertarian" voters been absored into the conservative coalition....?

- The Reform/Alliance/New Conservative Party is actually a right-wing regional party trying to pass off as a national one. Their hardcore support has always been the far right-wing Alberta members/supporters of the Progresssive Conservative Party with even a few neo-Nazis to boot.

Jun 19th, 2004 12:49 PM

AChimp

Quote:

I got the impression that this is what the late Reform Party was all about. Have more "libertarian" voters been absored into the conservative coalition....?

Ehh... there aren't really any "libertarians" in Canada. The people that label themselves with that term do so and vote for the Conservatives.

You have to look at it this way: every major political party in Canada is really just a different flavour of centre. Some are to the left, others are to the right. The parties that don't get elected are the fringe parties that are truly left or truly right, and voters view them as too radical.

The Liberals make a good balance because they are right on some issues and left on others; in the end, it may not make everyone happy but you have a higher level of people who say the government is doing "okay." Better to have 70% of the population saying that you're doing "okay" than 40% saying you're awesome and the remaining 60% hating your guts. Canadians like being in the middle.

Quote:

I read a recent speech by Martin, and it just amazes me that a politician can stand up and talk of welfare state policies the same way our president can talk about "hard working Americans" and how much we love freedom and shit.....

Well, a country won't function as effectively as it could if half of the people are living in relative squalor compared to the rest. So we're not as rich as Americans... at least we are happier on the whole. :P

Jun 19th, 2004 12:11 PM

KevinTheOmnivore

Quote:

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

Is there a party for Canadian libertarians?

I got the impression that this is what the late Reform Party was all about. Have more "libertarian" voters been absored into the conservative coalition....?

Furthermore, what numbers could they possibly even represent? BPG said it bothered him that the Liberals claimed to represent Canadian values, but as far as I can tell, they in fact do. I read a recent speech by Martin, and it just amazes me that a politician can stand up and talk of welfare state policies the same way our president can talk about "hard working Americans" and how much we love freedom and shit.....

Jun 19th, 2004 12:05 PM

Zebra 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by AChimp

Yeah, the libertarians are nutjobs that stand on street corners and preach about the end of the world. They usually only run provincially, and you phone the police when they knock on your door.

- The one I spoken to was just two blocks away from the Peace Tower and that's too close for my personal comfort. I say the Mounties should round them up and ship them off to Frobisher Bay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

What about the "Freedom" party of Canada, which is really libertarian but for some reason associates that title with anarchists?

- They'll only have candidates by 2008. Their fuckin' site: FreedomParty.ca

- Nobody gives a shit about them except for window repairmen and the police and maybe, just maybe you can learn something from the following quote.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AChimp

The Liberals are really the only ones fit to run the country, though. The Conservatives would fuck shit up, and the NDP would make us all paupers.

Jun 19th, 2004 09:02 AM

Brandon

Quote:

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

What about the "Freedom" party of Canada, which is really libertarian but for some reason associates that title with anarchists?

What about them?

Jun 19th, 2004 09:01 AM

The One and Only...

What about the "Freedom" party of Canada, which is really libertarian but for some reason associates that title with anarchists?

Jun 19th, 2004 08:34 AM

Helm

Rules must be maintained, until they are found unfit to be done so, which is to say, they have been made redundant via clever usage of loop-hole, which means they would be considered invalid for an undefined amount of time in which the moderator group of this section (philosophy and/or politics) of the I-mockery Message Boards can revise them, which is to say alter then is significant ways, which is to say attach enough errata so that the past loop-holes will again be considered invalid, in which case they will again be considered fit to, as mentioned above, be maintained.

Jun 19th, 2004 07:28 AM

Anonymous

I don't think I'm ever leaving this forum again, as long as administrator Helm is in charge. :serious

Jun 19th, 2004 01:31 AM

Helm

@the[Hitman]:

Hello. I am Helm. I am in charge of this section of the message board (philosophy and/or politics, which will be philosophy and/or politics from here and onwards) as the main moderator. It has been told to me by the general managment that you have to change your name before you can post in this section (philosophy and/or politics) of the I-mockery Message Boards. Your type is best kept in the General Blabber but if you insist on partaking in political and/or philosophical discussion, there is an option left for you. Change your username, and signature. Register a different account if you must. I have been told to pass along that we are making an exception on you as to what is stated in the creation of characters in the rules and guidelines, since your new philosophy and/or politics message board friendly persona will not indeed be a character in the true sense of the word. Finding such loopholes is what we philosophy and/or politics people like to do as an enjoable passtime, heh. Anyhow, the new account's name must not include any of the following:

* References to computer games and other electronic means of entertainment, especially those that are said to be not so good. The reason for this is that this section of the boards (philosophy and/or politics) must maintain a high degree of seriousness if there are any valuable arguments to be had, philosophical essays to be posted and for whatever else that is customary to be done, to be thusly done. In this spirit, you are also urged to post a ":serious" emoticon after your every post. This is considered standard practise. You might notice that not many others do this and this would maybe -depending on your wits- lead you to believe there is a contradiction between what I have just said and the real, actual happenings in this section of the boards (philosophy and/or politics). Astute on your part, but sadly invalid. The reason not many others post the customary :serious at the end of their posts is that they've been in this section of the boards (philosophy and/or politics) for a long period of time and thusly the degree of seriousness of their posts - which is to say, complete and utter- has been deemed satisfactory. Yours however, has not yet.

Exception: retro game references mildly tolerated. HOWEVER! references to retro games that are held in low regard, will be judged on a case-by-case basis. That is a loop-hole we have already had to deal with, heh. If you choose a name that makes a reference to a game which is considered to be not good enough, you might be leaving yourself open for another username audit, at the moderator's will. You do not want to do this.

* Usage of punctuation and/or numerals. For example if we were to ignore prohibition one above, "the [Hitman]" as a chosen username would still not do, which is to say, would call for yet another username audit, at the moderator's will. "The Hitman" or simply "Hitman" would be in no violation of the rule, however. Also, a clever loop-hole would be to keep the valid alterations of your name, but remove all references to computer games in your signature and general information, thusly removing any actual connection which would prompt a username audit, at the moderator's will. You would, keep to your private knowledge that your chosen username does indeed refer to a popular computer game, but none would be able to call this lateral connection into question. This is the way of the philosophy and/or politics message board user and for such cunning you would surely be applauded by your fellow posters, which is to say, you would be generally ignored.

These are the sections of the code you are in violation currently. In choosing your new username you should however be aware of the rest of the code that partains to username creation and/or usage within the confines of this section (philosophy and/or politics) of the message board:

*Blatantly insulting crass language. For example you could, perhaps choose the name "I Am A Fucking Moron" as a name, and while that would pretty much echo the collective sentiment of the boards towards you, which is to say, it is considered a known to be true fact, which is to say, it is not false, it would not do, because of it is shocking, provocative nature. If you were to choose the name "I am A Worthless Human Being Whose Posts Are A Waste of Bandwidth, Would God Please Strike Me Down Where I Stand?" that would appear to be correct, since we here are prone to good, PC rephrasal of the truth. However beware! That name would be on an illegal length and thusly either be rejected by BBcode default, or stretch the board view in such a maner that would lead to vicious verbal assault towards the responsible party, which is to say, namely, yourself. We do not want that. We are here to discuss philosophy and politics, and not fight amongst ourselves like young men do in other sections of these message boards. Furthermore, that name, were it to be alterated into "I Worthless Hitman?" would still not be considered valid for twofold reason: firstly, it still contains references to computer games and/or other forms of electronic entertainment, in conjunction to your signature and/or other personal information. Secondly, there appear a punctuative symbol, which under the second rule of the section which partains to the creation and/or usage of usernames in this here section (philosophy and/or politics) of the I-mockery message boards, leaves you open to a username audit, to the moderator's will.

Well, this is it young man. You have 24 hours, starting at 9:29 GT + 3 to alter your current, or create a new account which is valid under the above specifications. After your alterations, you are urged to post here for further inspection. This however is not mandatory but is considered good manners. If you are confident that your new persona fits the criteria of usage in this section (philosophy and/or politics) of the I-mockery message boards, then you are free to continue posting as you would. However, if your new persona is then, consequently, which is to say, in the future, again found to be violating one of the mentioned rules, you will again be open to a username audit under the will of the moderator. This has the unfortunate effect of placing you in the category of two-time offenders, the specific qualities of which are best not left discussed at the present time, which is to say, right now. So if you post here right after your needed alterations, the moderators could inspect your new account and tell you if you need to make any other adjustments as a part of the first username audit, which is quite less severe.

Under I-mockery.net bylaws, let it be known that this written statement gives you the status of First-Time Offender. This may, or may not also grant you a title "McClain's Bitch" according to the moderator's will. The title will, given future favourable behaviour, be removed.

This will be all for now. You may proceed to make the warranted adjustments and present yourself for further inspection within said 24 hour limit, which is to say, the limit of a full day and night.

This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

About Us |

Store |

Advertising |

Contact

Features

Shorts

Editorials

Games

Comics

Blogs

Forum

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts vB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off