Jump to content
Search In
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Beejay

  • Rank
    Shiitake Mushrooms Yaaaaaaaaaaaaay!!
  • Birthday 02/11/1986

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Shidnay, Aushtrahlia MAET!
  • Interests
    I like pie. <br />So should you. <br />Lest you die. <br />Without having had pie. <br />A terrible demise. <br />To die without pie. <br />A wasted sense. <br />Wasted awry. :(
  1. did i not say goodnight? i cant remember :P

  2. Even if Dan does agree with your position on this, I doubt he'd start arguing with these parents who contact him about their inability to be good parents. It is beyond the scope of the Org to try and change the way people parent, so the Org must cater to all.
  3. Yeah, but until your silly culture becomes more liberal, people need the option to protect their kids.
  4. I don't %$&@#$% think so! &%$#& :lol: Hahaha damnit :lol: Well that didn't go as planned. :P I thought you'd say "YEAH!" and then we'd have a nice example of a profanity filter doing good work.
  5. Would you say that it helped to curb your habit?
  6. That's some seriously hardcore language filtering right there.
  7. Not a half-bad idea, it's the same as a profanity filter, but it hides profanity entirely, and trains people to curse less by forcing them to retype what they said without curse words. Brilliant! :D .. and that's when you bring down the banhammer!
  8. What Panda does seem plausible, unfortunately. I think the ability to rate a user's karma being available only to mods is a great idea, though. All that 'karma time' stuff could be taken out too, since the judgment of all mods should be considered equal anyway, which would make the system much simpler to implement. A user's karma rating would simply be equal to the average of all the ratings applied to them by mods, regardless of time spent with the user. The worst-case scenario solution I de
  9. Maybe it's just me, but it seems that anyone who wants the chat back would be better off directing their efforts here.
  10. Nah, the chatroom was accessible by all, but there was a room only accessible to veteran members. Most of the discussion took place outside of that room, though. :shock: Don't mind me then.
  11. There was no warning that the chat would be taken down because tightening of rules was applied prior to this with no lasting effect on people's behaviour. The admins seem to believe that were people warned that the chatroom would be removed, their behaviour would only improve until the "danger had passed". So, with no apparent solution that would have a lasting effect on the behaviour of the chatroom's users, the chatroom had to be removed.
  12. You gotta understand that Dan is absolutely obliged to make his website safe for all. When an effective compromise cannot be found, a loss will be endured by all in order to secure said safety.