Ris Grestar Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I think you guys are confusing me with Sabre.I was responding to your post, yes, but I never said I was referring to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticQuery Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 What sense does this make? You basically just said "People have problems with his sig, but I don't so it's A-ok."He is saying that Dermot could have a problem with someone who has Fox and Krystal in their signature, while you may have a problem with Falco and Fox in his signature. It would be unfair to criticize for this. I was responding to your post, yes, but I never said I was referring to you.Same here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DRL Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 He is saying that Dermot could have a problem with someone who has Fox and Krystal in their signature, while you may have a problem with Falco and Fox in his signature. It would be unfair to criticize for this. That is what I mean, thank youfor clarifying crazyfooinc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticQuery Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 That is what I mean, thank youfor clarifying crazyfooinc.DO I GET MAH COOKIE NOW!?!? :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DRL Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 DO I GET MAH COOKIE NOW!?!? I was about to give you an Arwing,but since you want a cookie (and itis 'a lot' cheaper) I give you that.*Gives a cookie* :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkyway64 Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 He is saying that Dermot could have a problem with someone who has Fox and Krystal in their signature, while you may have a problem with Falco and Fox in his signature. It would be unfair to criticize for this. Only as I understand it, Fox/Krystal has been done before and punished. Wasn't it that relationship images had to be linked to, and not directly shown on site? If this is true, then it's the opposite. Krystal/Fox got modded while Fox/Falco keeps going- even if there are people who don't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticQuery Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Only as I understand it, Fox/Krystal has been done before and punished. Wasn't it that relationship images had to be linked to, and not directly shown on site? If this is true, then it's the opposite. Krystal/Fox got modded while Fox/Falco keeps going- even if there are people who don't like it.Not being at SF-O for a longer time, I wouldn't know what you are referring to, although I don't see why the pictures with Fox & Krystal would have to be taken down UNLESS they violate the image policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DRL Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Not being at SF-O for a longer time, I wouldn't know what you are referring to, although I don't see why the pictures with Fox & Krystal would have to be taken down UNLESS they violate the image policy.Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkyway64 Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Again, I'm just trusting other people's words. I have no clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticQuery Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Again, I'm just trusting other people's words. I have no clue.Ah, ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Julius Quasar Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 No problem, it is just that we do notwant to lock another thread, right? Sorry? No, no, no, you took what I said the wrong way. I just think it's stupid how if there's any mention of politics a warning follows soon after. What I said wasn't meant as anything bad towards you.Anyway, my apologies for straying from the original topic.Ok, cool! Why all the perceived anti-Krystal bias? You can never have too much Krystal! ^ I agree! On the flip side of that equation though Sissi it can be argued that you can't "equally" compare those three scenarios. We all know that other groups who have been discriminated against (such as women, blacks and the disabled) have been given equal opportunity, however as one smart individual I know pointed out: “Gender, race and impairment all relate to what a person is, whereas homosexuality relates to what a person does.” I'm pretty sure she wasn't implying you as such, although I understand where you're getting at.Ah, I see, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Julius Quasar Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Sorry for the DP, but I want to apologize to Dermot for the first post I made here (now deleted). I'm sorry.I know you hate me, but I hope maybe you accept my apology anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DZComposer Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 :facepalm:God dammit, why won't this -F-Bomb-ing die.Look:I can't tell him not to be gay.I also can't tell him he can't post something that would be OK if it were straight.It's a fairness thing. I've encouraged him to post that stuff on the mature board. If you feel something should be there, report it or PM me and I will see if it needs to be moved. I can't read everything, this place is moving too fast for that.I haven't seen his latest posts yet, so I can't comment on them, but if he is being a pompous ass, I will deal with it on those grounds. I have told him not to be pompous about it before. That said, I do have to give him credit for not making a scene in this thread.I'm gonna lock this before the drama spills over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts