kaglov2

[ClericLordLeo]

This thread suddenly got pretty weird.

[ithrow4luk]

I took a liking to Nicholas after the release of National Treasure

kag confirmed for 8 year old

[Watashi]

yo shut up her dad broke her legs.

[Omar Ranger]

Been going to the gym everyday since March, hadn't lost anything. I can't tell because both scales in my home are broken. Oh and I think my father broke my legs. Can't walk properly anymore

Holy crap she doesn't think at all. I can't even understand. Is this a joke or is she seriously sitting there thinking I THINK MY DAD BROKE MY LEGS. I CAN'T BE SURE. MAYBE THEY'RE BROKEN. I CAN'T WALK CORRECTLY SO I THINK HE BROKE THEM.

[ithrow4luk]

Why do you have to take things literally. It's an expression.

she totally has some type of autism or other social mental disorder.

also, how bad is it that we have an area dedicated to her disorders?

[turles]

eggggsss leggggss

[ClericLordLeo]

jeggggings

[ithrow4luk]

Because you haven't eaten anything the whole night

scientis t

[PhoenixRider]

I've tried to post a response to this but since I accidentally deleted my paragraphs long response the last time around I decided against it till now since I have nothing to do and I hate sleep.

I'm adamantly in favor of treating kag as if she were a normal member, because that's ultimately the only responsibility we have. For the longest time, it seemed that some (kag included) considered genuine responses to be personal attacks, and that's not the case. Some members treat her fairly, offering support at best and mild, normal teasing and critique at worst. You are, however, right in that many people take it too far, hence it being directed to the only place where that is allowed.

In my view every discussion she entered changed into how dumb they viewed her. Isn't the first person this has happened to with examples being wyatt, zodiac and bulma. In bulma's case he broke several rules but that conversation has come and gone. Point being there's more you could do than just supporting it, enforcing rules help.

Stupidity alone doesn't warrant a ban, at least in my opinion, and since getting to know her I have adamantly argued (both here and off the website) that some of the claims are not grounds to ban her. However, she had previously crossed a line and received a temporary ban, with that temporary ban being her final warning. I would rather trudge through an arduous process of warnings before unfairly banning someone, even if it means people get angry. I don't know that this is the best process, but I don't do it out of laziness or favoritism; it's very much a part of who I am morally.

She doesn't deserve to get banned. It's people who spam every thread she participates in that deserve a warning/ban. Intellegence shouldn't warrent one, but there are actual rules that aren't valued here; That being #2 and #4 in the ToS. A good portion of the garbage on the forum that existed and still do would simply not exist. With that being said it's mostly down to the community to shape the tone of the discussions and even if it was regulated it would still be ****.

Also, there's one other popular devolution of threads, and that's complaining about the current state of things. It's very rare that a light-hearted Tomato Island thread or an Empty House thread don't at some point attract a pretentious "circlejerk", "ignore it like me", or "better back in the day" post. Regardless of whether or not these claims are true is of no consequence; they do just as much pointless harm as the rest of the bad posts. Nothing is solved. No topics are discussed. No one learns anything new.

People generally like to make memories seem more proper than they really are so nostalgic posts will happen. The circle jerking in the community on the otherhand definitely stops discussion, a community fault, tag that along with the freedom to spam and good luck trying to form a discussion.

That being said, other than the occasional topic-related joke, most truly pointless silliness is kept to the chat thread, visitor messages, and the chat box. It doesn't really matter if you like it; that's where the silliness belongs. If you really want to see discussion, make an effort to initiate change.

Pretty sure that ship sailed with how long the people were able to **** around in threads other than the chadthread. There was legitimately a time where I was making 2 thread in tomato island every week and where active official threads like the political, sports and anime threads had to get bumped from falling to the 2nd page. But with time came new members along with some old ones moving on, this is also true with mods. Old mods became inactive and in came a flood of new mods so rules are interpreted differently. For the new mods that wanted to interpret rules in a harsher light they got chewed out and left. I'm not just being nostalgic, there's something to take from the past and I'm not saying laying bans will allure more people to join the community. People weren't banned often but were warned and it actually showed on their profile, I should know, I was a pretty ****ty member early on. Keeping people's foot to the fire when it matters encourages a healthy discussion and results in an active community, whether it be a small one or large is something else.

I realize that addressing very specific issues may be a bit pointless in the long run, but since this one is personal I feel obligated to respond.
I have no problem with Sayo as he is now. If he continues to post without flaming, then as far as I'm concerned that's fine. I believe people have the capacity to change. That said, I don't know why you group him with me. I don't talk to him much, even in the chatbox. We have different interests and different personalities. How is your generalized grouping of members any different than the assumed idiocy of kag?

I've always believed in peoples ability to change, I'm one of them. Since Sayo came I defended him when he made his outbursts time and time again. He has come and gone under new usernames for a reason. I gave up the moment he pulled to suicide shtick along with going at Jon on the forum, reddit and steam. I think I'm one of the few members that's actually likes Kag but that's neither here nor there.

Again, whether you like it or not, the chatbox is the place for pointless teasing, silly comments, and general chatting. When just a handful of people are online every day, the most popular method of communication (chatbox) will eventually become filled with inside jokes and teasing. "Decent conversation" will eventually devolve into this or just run its course. If that's what members find fun, and they do not break the rules, then who are you to critique them?

Depends what your definition of teasing is. There's a difference between teasing and flaming but that's a matter of perspective. You can ask Wyatt and Omar how they view that discussion I used as an example.

I think the biggest problem is one you did not address, and that is the lack of discussion necessary for Maplestory. It's an almost entirely straightforward game now, and new members' questions can all be answered within a few posts. There's no reason for most new people to stick around. Most people are not attracted to a Maplestory forum for serious discussions about world events, new technology, philosophy, religion, science, or whatever else you deem "decent conversation". They come for Maplestory and find their needs satisfied almost immediately, giving little incentive to return and stay long enough to venture outside of the Maple section.

That's a different issue altogether. Sure a more populated community can make up for an inactive one, but HS has always been a forum of a small yet active community with thousands of active guests who never sign up. The reason for members leaving and what's preventing some new members from meshing is from what I've stated.

[Omar Ranger]

Depends what your definition of teasing is. There's a difference between teasing and flaming but that's a matter of perspective. You can ask Wyatt and Omar how they view that discussion I used as an example.

Yeah I was on his case for a good amount of time about the money (since it took him over a year before he finally "saved up" enough to pay me back) but most of it was actually me poking fun at Wyatt. Others joined along because it seemed like the topic in the chatbox at the time. I did want to get paid back but since he was so long overdue I felt like I could at least enjoy this opportunity instead of being grumpy and frustrated every time he logged on while also making sure he remembered. Not like I could barge into his farmhouse and demand the cash and honestly I half expected him to never pay me back. Not like it was that big of a deal. I can live without $15. I wasn't trying to seriously attack him about it.

The funniest part of this is that you were looking in the chatbox for some meaningful, deep, thought out discussion. Yeah... Try somewhere else.