Banbaiting, post revs, and poetic justice

[TheRex9001]

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33773
Typical Typicalrig appeal.....

[Striders13]

rigged, typical!

[ekaterina]

What a confusing, poorly written note. I thought the rev was the one who had his tongue removed from reading the note, but it seems to have been the opposite.
TypicalRig spent a whole round getting bullied and when the camel's back broke he delivered a potent dose of justice upon his aggressor. She acted like an antag and got treated like an antag. Rule 4 is king. This is based and not worthy of a note.

This note is so blatantly unfair that I have to wonder if the only reason it was applied to begin with is that the ahelping player is an admin.

[Turbonerd]

This person just doesn't understand how to RP at all. Constantly referencing metagruding, banbaiting, antagonist (seriously, "borg is not rogue, just a shitter"???) status, and even escalation policy in IC.

If this guy gets permabanned, the requirement to appeal should be a vouch from a heavy RP server. He needs a lesson on how to play this game properly.

[TheRex9001]

This person just doesn't understand how to RP at all. Constantly referencing metagruding, banbaiting, antagonist (seriously, "borg is not rogue, just a shitter"???) status, and even escalation policy in IC.

If this guy gets permabanned, the requirement to appeal should be a vouch from a heavy RP server. He needs a lesson on how to play this game properly.

”So you are escalation baiting” should be notable on its own tbh

[NoxVS]

What a confusing, poorly written note. I thought the rev was the one who had his tongue removed from reading the note, but it seems to have been the opposite.
TypicalRig spent a whole round getting bullied and when the camel's back broke he delivered a potent dose of justice upon his aggressor. She acted like an antag and got treated like an antag. Rule 4 is king. This is based and not worthy of a note.

This note is so blatantly unfair that I have to wonder if the only reason it was applied to begin with is that the ahelping player is an admin.

Writing a note late at night while my sanity rapidly degrades because my text box focus keeps getting stolen by ghost role prompts will do that. I can rewrite it to be more coherent later.

What’s funny though is I’m so bad at name recognition that I didn’t even realize the other player was an admin for most of the ticket

[Not-Dorsidarf]

On the one hand giving someone a note chastising them for taking revenge when an ex-rev fnr de-tongues and grudges them over getting lynch-mobbed for blatant antag activities during a revolution is stupid, but anything that helps build the papertrail towards getting rid of annoying players like typicalrig is a good thing.

[ekaterina]

On the one hand giving someone a note chastising them for taking revenge when an ex-rev fnr de-tongues and grudges them over getting lynch-mobbed for blatant antag activities during a revolution is stupid, but anything that helps build the papertrail towards getting rid of annoying players like typicalrig is a good thing.

"Bad thing is good when it happen to person I don't like"

[Archie700]

As a non-antagonist you may begin conflict with another player with valid reason (refusal of critical services, belligerent attitude, etc) OR if it does not excessively interfere with their ability to do their job. Whomever you engage is entitled to respond to your actions. If the conflict leads to violence and you had a poor reason for causing conflict in the first place, you may face administrative action.

If you are wronged, you are expected to handle the conflict non-lethally whenever possible, escalating in severity as the conflict continues. As the defending party the rate of escalation increases with you, up to and including violence, while the instigator is always able to respond in kind.

If a conflict leads to violence and either participant is incapacitated, the standing participant is expected to make an effort to treat the other, unless they have reason to believe the other was an antagonist. Once treated the conflict is over; any new conflict with either individual must escalate once again. If you get into a conflict again with that individual, they may be removed permanently from the round.

Conflict is automatically suspended when one participant is dead or incapacitated. A player who uses the state of incapacitation to take further action against the downed party chooses to extend the ongoing conflict past its original endpoint, and opens themselves up to further reprisal to avenge damage or recover stolen possessions.

The most questionable issue is round removal after 1 single conflict that happened after both were derevved

[Not-Dorsidarf]

On the one hand giving someone a note chastising them for taking revenge when an ex-rev fnr de-tongues and grudges them over getting lynch-mobbed for blatant antag activities during a revolution is stupid, but anything that helps build the papertrail towards getting rid of annoying players like typicalrig is a good thing.

"Bad thing is good when it happen to person I don't like"

yees

[AlamoTurtle]

On the one hand giving someone a note chastising them for taking revenge when an ex-rev fnr de-tongues and grudges them over getting lynch-mobbed for blatant antag activities during a revolution is stupid, but anything that helps build the papertrail towards getting rid of annoying players like typicalrig is a good thing.

To note, my issue wasn't with Finn calling me out as a revolutionary, but rather that he hadn't seen me once after I left medbay and lied about me being antag (I hadn't used a flash that entire shift, not to mention even touch one) to try getting security to lynch me/round-remove me, but it was a confusing shift and extremely hectic. Finn's willing to lie about any bullshit if it means getting someone he doesn't like lynched, so I was rightfully pissed about being falsely accused.

[sinfulbliss]

Seems largely like an IC issue, except that borg lynching Lyn over what it should've heard was consensual human harm is suspicious. Silicon players all suck etc etc.

Maybe the fact the tongue was placed back in makes RR a little bit far, I mean clearly there was some good-will shown and a desire to de-escalate.

[ekaterina]

Maybe the fact the tongue was placed back in makes RR a little bit far, I mean clearly there was some good-will shown and a desire to de-escalate.

Why should the person who spent a whole round being bullied care that the aggressor wants to de-escalate now that he's done bullying? "I wronged you but now I want to stop the fight so I don't get my comeuppance"

[sinfulbliss]

Maybe the fact the tongue was placed back in makes RR a little bit far, I mean clearly there was some good-will shown and a desire to de-escalate.

Why should the person who spent a whole round being bullied care that the aggressor wants to de-escalate now that he's done bullying? "I wronged you but now I want to stop the fight so I don't get my comeuppance"

because escalation rules make you bring the other guy to medbay after you kill them unless they're acting like an antag, and de-escalating a fight by replacing their tongue sort of moves it out of acting-like-an-antag territory (particularly after they were de-revved)

[TypicalRig]

Maybe the fact the tongue was placed back in makes RR a little bit far, I mean clearly there was some good-will shown and a desire to de-escalate.

Why should the person who spent a whole round being bullied care that the aggressor wants to de-escalate now that he's done bullying? "I wronged you but now I want to stop the fight so I don't get my comeuppance"

because escalation rules make you bring the other guy to medbay after you kill them unless they're acting like an antag, and de-escalating a fight by replacing their tongue sort of moves it out of acting-like-an-antag territory (particularly after they were de-revved)

I'd have accepted this argument if Lyn had done one of the following:
1. Removed the tongue while still a rev, rather than doing it to get a final sucker punch in after being mindshielded, and was then deconverted, AND reinserted the tongue. She would also have to communicate this with me with a third party (like sec) to confirm that she was deconverted since otherwise I'd have just assumed she was still a rev OR another antag type. If I have no sec confirmation that she was derevved, her words mean diddly squat.
2. Reinserted the tongue immediately after being asked when she removed it as a non-antag in the brig. Mind you, I absolutely still would've killed her over this, but the chance of round removal would've been far lower. Especially if she had communicated that she was a rev at the time of the eye damage AND had sec confirm she was no longer one.

But no, you don't get to reap the benefits of a free grief pass as antag AND get immunity for the consequences of your actions when still being petty after your deconversion AND making no effort to explain what was up. Also, Lyn was often the only medical doctor who was available and/or paying attention to my tongueless gibberish enough to understand what I wanted. It wasn't deescalated because she reinserted my tongue, it was temporarily peaceful because I both needed an opportunity to kill her AND was dependent on the tongue remover to reinsert my tongue.

There was also a lot of tension between me and the engiborg I was calling a shitter, because since shift start he was randomly flashing me and wirecuttering me because it was a guy being speciest and no admins were on at the time, so he only got a talking to when admins logged on far later when I had already killed that same engiborg. The fact that Lyn of all people was capitalizing on a griefing ASIMOV borg critting me was just a source of extra contempt from me. If "cutting my tongue out for lying" is poetic justice for you, then "manipulating a borg to kill you after taking advantage of a silicon critting me" was my poetic justice.

[Armhulen]

this fast tracks typicalrig's removal from the server so it's a good note

[Bawhoppennn]

On the one hand giving someone a note chastising them for taking revenge when an ex-rev fnr de-tongues and grudges them over getting lynch-mobbed for blatant antag activities during a revolution is stupid, but anything that helps build the papertrail towards getting rid of annoying players like typicalrig is a good thing.

"Bad thing is good when it happen to person I don't like"

yees

Tbh I love that you double down on this

[sinfulbliss]

this fast tracks typicalrig's removal from the server so it's a good note

[Indie-ana Jones]

The rev was trying to disable Finn so I, a head revolutionary monkey, could convert him. Unfortunately, I didn't have a flash since I wasn't a starting headrev, so I just shrugged and went to robotics to try and get a flash.

[Armhulen]

... (typically, brick walls do not communicate)

i know you will never understand but the rule isn't "no meanie pants" it's no

ERM...! OMG! HE SAID SO MANY WORDS THAT OFFEND MY WITTLE EAWDWUMS! OWCHIES!
What's that you say? His overall point was actually something completely uncontestable and agreeable?
N-no...! Da words dey make me UNCOMFY! So totally NOT wholesome chungus 420 ( >_< )

and again I know you won't get it, i'm basically replying to a brick wall

[sinfulbliss]

... (typically, brick walls do not communicate)

i know you will never understand but the rule isn't "no meanie pants" it's no

ERM...! OMG! HE SAID SO MANY WORDS THAT OFFEND MY WITTLE EAWDWUMS! OWCHIES!
What's that you say? His overall point was actually something completely uncontestable and agreeable?
N-no...! Da words dey make me UNCOMFY! So totally NOT wholesome chungus 420 ( >_< )

and again I know you won't get it, i'm basically replying to a brick wall

Armhulen my friend the only communication you've done is copypasting my comment, that is not a good way to explain your perspective.

Here is what I think... I think, it's totally kosher for you and others to be mean to TypicalRig because YOU DISLIKE HIM... and others have expressed the same sentiment in this thread, which makes it cool and hip to rag on him. You get a pass!! But when ol' Sinful does it to a coder... In a much sillier, less meanspirited manner I might add... The MOD GLOVES come out.

IT'S EITHER ALLOW A LITTLE BIT OF RIBBING AND "HOSTILITY" OR NONE AT ALL. YOU SHOULDN'T GET TO PICK AND CHOOSE BECAUSE ONE IS A MAINTAINER AND THE OTHER IS TYPICALRIG.

[Armhulen]

Man: Hello, brick wall. How are you today?
Brick wall: ...
Man: Oh, I see. You're not much of a talker, are you?
Brick wall: ...
Man: Well, that's okay. I don't mind. Sometimes silence is golden, right?
Brick wall: ...
Man: You know, you're very sturdy and reliable. You've been standing here for a long time, haven't you?
Brick wall: ...
Man: You must have seen a lot of things in your life. Do you have any stories to share?
Brick wall: ...
Man: No? Nothing at all? Come on, don't be shy. I'm sure you have something interesting to say.
Brick wall: ...
Man: Fine, fine. Be that way. But don't think I'm giving up on you. I'll be back tomorrow, and the next day, and the next. Until you open up to me.
Brick wall: ...
Man: Goodbye for now, brick wall. Take care of yourself.
Brick wall: ...

[sinfulbliss]

Man: Hello, brick wall. How are you today?
Brick wall: ...
Man: Oh, I see. You're not much of a talker, are you?
Brick wall: ...
Man: Well, that's okay. I don't mind. Sometimes silence is golden, right?
Brick wall: ...
Man: You know, you're very sturdy and reliable. You've been standing here for a long time, haven't you?
Brick wall: ...
Man: You must have seen a lot of things in your life. Do you have any stories to share?
Brick wall: ...
Man: No? Nothing at all? Come on, don't be shy. I'm sure you have something interesting to say.
Brick wall: ...
Man: Fine, fine. Be that way. But don't think I'm giving up on you. I'll be back tomorrow, and the next day, and the next. Until you open up to me.
Brick wall: ...
Man: Goodbye for now, brick wall. Take care of yourself.
Brick wall: ...

Man: TypicalRig, you suck get outta the servers.
Brick wall: Sir, isn't such a comment of the variety you would warn others for?
Man: You're a brick wall.
Brick wall: I beg your pardon? I would simply like clarification in how you are enforcing these rules.
Man: You're a brick wall.
Brick wall: That isn't very productive to say my friend.
Man: You're a brick wall.
Brick wall: Let me try to rephrase. You see, it seems to me the fact TypicalRig is publicly disliked here makes similar rude comments to him acceptable, whereas when it's someone who isn't incurring mob wrath, the comment is disallowed. This is why I find such enforcement unequal!
Man: You're a brick wall.
Brick wall: ...

[Armhulen]

The clarification is, in short, that we don't have to like each and every other person but we should be civil. and I do mean that from a place of explaining my moderating

[TheRex9001]

Can we at least keep the discussion slightly civil? its really shitty to say you want notes to stick purely because you dont like the player. There is a lotta stuff to talk about when it comes to the note that is not just "I hate this player so much......", you can dislike players fine, but at least give som perspective.

[Armhulen]

Civility is better, prevents ragebait from derailing threads, makes it so people post in funnier ways (i like our brick wall back and forth), and means that at the end of the day even after a forum thread goes SICKO MODE we can all chill out and be cool afterwards. unless i actually don't like you, which means i will be chilling with CERTIFIED chillers. which isn't the case for you, or really typicalrig, but i do really dislike typicalrig's contribution to the average round

[sinfulbliss]

The clarification is, in short, that we don't have to like each and every other person but we should be civil. and I do mean that from a place of explaining my moderating

I believe then, my dear Armhulen, that our disagreement stems from a matter of tone. You see, although my post had a quite flashy tone to it -- with many capitalized words, emojis, and a very extreme hyperbolic strawman of our mutual acquaintance Potato's perspective -- it was yet a nonhostile comment, one that would not evoke the reader to be overtly upset or belittled, precisely because of its hyperbolic, superficial nature.

Your comment, and some that others have posted here, although they lack the flashy tone, at bottom are more hostile, because they evoke in the reader (in this case, TypicalRig), a feeling of "hey, these people don't like me and don't want me here."

I believe the feelings our posts evoke from the recipient should count just as much, if not more than the superficial tone on the surface of such posts.

[Armhulen]

If you meant it as a nonhostile comment, it did not come out as one. And hostility isn't the rule here anyways, because we need a forum where people are allowed to be honest with each other

[Capsandi]

smh you people and your brick wall analogies are ut yer gourd just use the emptyposting indexing tool on scrubby

[Armhulen]

smh you people and your brick wall analogies are ut yer gourd just use the emptyposting indexing tool on scrubby

yeah it just falls apart when it's anything that isn't a brick wall

Man: Ah, there you are. Just what I need on a hot day like this.
Water: Hello, thirsty human. I'm glad you chose me.

this is NOT ok

[sinfulbliss]

If you meant it as a nonhostile comment, it did not come out as one. And hostility isn't the rule here anyways, because we need a forum where people are allowed to be honest with each other

And that is a completely fair, accurate charge for you to make, as is your right and the reason you are glossed with the beautiful dark blue name color and not I. However, I am most befuddled by the claim that there is no rule against hostility, as it seemed to me that my comment was warned purely for this reason.

If the reason is a lack of civility, perhaps -- which, seems to me to be the same as hostility, but perhaps I am mistaken here -- then I would ask that you consider the aforementioned comments made about TypicalRig. Perhaps the tone is a civil one, but the feelings it evokes in the reader should matter more than this, for we only preserve civility to preserve each others' feelings. We are all allowed to dislike someone, but this dislike is better expressed in constructive criticism rather than something that will only cause hurt feelings and a sense of indignation.

[Armhulen]

I'd like to think TypicalRig has the resources to correct his behavior while playing: checking in game notes is a great resource, if you're racking up more than 4-6 a year you're probably closer to a problem player than a regular one. I always expect players to rack up some "inevitable" notes out of human error, emotions, etc and given 6 months those will fade out. Clean slate, mostly!

But tying it back into your post, being able to say I don't like someone shouldn't have to come with proof that they're someone I shouldn't like, or a guide on how to improve (despite in the end me giving some advice). Simply put, player's club would be walking on eggshells if constructive criticism was required. I don't want it to feel like walking on eggshells, so maybe I'll look into a formal thread discussion for what players club can generally agree is "conveying your point with needless, excessive rudeness". It's about tone and delivery.

[Armhulen]

But unfortunately, as much as we try to formalize rules, every ruling is going to be a judgement call. I just expect myself and others to be able to defend their judgement calls and, if convinced, start mending instead of double downing. Still, some examples to players as to what constitutes "conveying your point with needless, excessive rudeness" might help

[ekaterina]

[you're a brick wall]

[no you]

Armhulen, sinfulbliss, can we compromise and agree that you both are brick walls? This way nobody is left out.

[Armhulen]

I can only agree on one thing when it comes to me and sinfulbliss:

Hidden Content

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.

[sinfulbliss]

Simply put, player's club would be walking on eggshells if constructive criticism was required. I don't want it to feel like walking on eggshells, so maybe I'll look into a formal thread discussion for what players club can generally agree is "conveying your point with needless, excessive rudeness". It's about tone and delivery.

I agree with you that tone and delivery in making one's point make all the difference, and can turn a productive discussion into an unproductive, hateful one. But, and I am curious what your perspective on this is, what happens if there is no point being made -- if the goal of the post is purely to express a sense of dislike of the player in a way that could only serve to evoke negativity in them?

[...] anything that helps build the papertrail towards getting rid of annoying players like typicalrig is a good thing.

"Bad thing is good when it happen to person I don't like"

yees

this fast tracks typicalrig's removal from the server so it's a good note

I am not sure what points are being expressed here, other than a dislike of the player. Perhaps it is agreeable to you to express one's dislike of a player in a peanut thread about them. Perhaps we should be able to say what we think and be honest, as you have said, regardless of how that might affect the reader, even if that honesty is just a simple expression of dislike.

Yet I still feel unsure here. Why does tone and delivery matter if the hostility of a comment does not? It becomes muddied to me, and I hope you can offer clarification. I can only hope to share my perspective and leave the sorting out of enforcement up to those entrusted with it. It seems to me that tone and delivery matter for the same reason hostility matters, and if we are allowed to be somewhat hostile as in the posts I've attached, we should also be free to express our views in a tone and with a delivery that matches the hostility of other, more superficially sanitized posts.

[Armhulen]

"A point" can be as simple as "I don't like this player", delivered in any such way. If you're worried about contentless posts, I usually try to be pretty lax on those: if the thread subject is to make posts with little content, the posts in those are held to that. Otherwise, I try to keep it to "not only is this contentless, but actively encouraging others to be contentless as well" because those are the posts that can deal a lot more damage to a real discussion. But in general, I think people enjoy the memey threads. They're, if we ever unlock the hut, kind of the hut culture.

Perhaps we should be able to say what we think and be honest, as you have said, regardless of how that might affect the reader, even if that honesty is just a simple expression of dislike.

Yeah. And you know, the opposite of this exists on the forums too. People can make a point as simple as "I like this person" as well. And many people will say what they think on the forums based off of their experiences of the player/admin/whomever. People who are disliked by a lot of admins shouldn't expect admins to make "i like this person" posts.

Why does tone and delivery matter if the hostility of a comment does not?

Because disliking a player isn't personal. Having over the top "YOU'RE A GRIEFING FUCKING LOSER FUCK YOU ADMINS NEED TO REMOVE THIS GUY" makes the post more likely to, entirely needlessly, make it overly personal. Since joining tgstation in 2015 I've posted a LOT on the forums (4th most posts on the forum ever) and met a LOT of players both in games and here. Almost all interactions are not and should not be personal. And if it is? It's time to talk to them one on one, in dms, forum messages, etc.

[sinfulbliss]

Why does tone and delivery matter if the hostility of a comment does not?

Because disliking a player isn't personal. Having over the top "YOU'RE A GRIEFING FUCKING LOSER FUCK YOU ADMINS NEED TO REMOVE THIS GUY" makes the post more likely to, entirely needlessly, make it overly personal. Since joining tgstation in 2015 I've posted a LOT on the forums (4th most posts on the forum ever) and met a LOT of players both in games and here. Almost all interactions are not and should not be personal. And if it is? It's time to talk to them one on one, in dms, forum messages, etc.

This is an incredibly interesting perspective, and I can't help but comment on that fact that in less than an hour of engaging in a proper discussion, I have already been exposed to a viewpoint I want to learn more about.

I'm interested what you mean when you say it's not personal. You and I are both persons, Armhulen and Sinful, discussing matters here. We are individuals behind the screen, and if I were to say something like "I dislike you, Armhulen, I think you're this and that and these other things, too," I would expect that this would be taken personally, since it is about you yourself, Armhulen. I would take such things personally myself at least, and indeed I do, at which point I would attempt to adjust my tone and delivery in response to match -- perhaps for the worse, but almost out of a sense of obligation rather than desire.

Perhaps you're proposing a sort of disconnect between ourselves as presented on the forums, and our persons behind our screens, which allows us to stay disaffected by any comments about the former self, and that is indeed a very interesting perspective that I'd like to hear more about.

[bastardblaster]

SHUT UUUUUUUUP

[Armhulen]

SHUT UUUUUUUUP

GET OUT OF MY ROOM WE'RE PLAYING MINECRAFT

[Armhulen]

Why does tone and delivery matter if the hostility of a comment does not?

Because disliking a player isn't personal. Having over the top "YOU'RE A GRIEFING FUCKING LOSER FUCK YOU ADMINS NEED TO REMOVE THIS GUY" makes the post more likely to, entirely needlessly, make it overly personal. Since joining tgstation in 2015 I've posted a LOT on the forums (4th most posts on the forum ever) and met a LOT of players both in games and here. Almost all interactions are not and should not be personal. And if it is? It's time to talk to them one on one, in dms, forum messages, etc.

This is an incredibly interesting perspective, and I can't help but comment on that fact that in less than an hour of engaging in a proper discussion, I have already been exposed to a viewpoint I want to learn more about.

I'm interested what you mean when you say it's not personal. You and I are both persons, Armhulen and Sinful, discussing matters here. We are individuals behind the screen, and if I were to say something like "I dislike you, Armhulen, I think you're this and that and these other things, too," I would expect that this would be taken personally, since it is about you yourself, Armhulen. I would take such things personally myself at least, and indeed I do, at which point I would attempt to adjust my tone and delivery in response to match -- perhaps for the worse, but almost out of a sense of obligation rather than desire.

Perhaps you're proposing a sort of disconnect between ourselves as presented on the forums, and our persons behind our screens, which allows us to stay disaffected by any comments about the former self, and that is indeed a very interesting perspective that I'd like to hear more about.

but i did get bored of this sadly so im gonna stop replying

[Armhulen]

and you know what? sealioning me? it shows you have no respect for me. so now i've lost my respect for you

[sinfulbliss]

Why does tone and delivery matter if the hostility of a comment does not?

Because disliking a player isn't personal. Having over the top "YOU'RE A GRIEFING FUCKING LOSER FUCK YOU ADMINS NEED TO REMOVE THIS GUY" makes the post more likely to, entirely needlessly, make it overly personal. Since joining tgstation in 2015 I've posted a LOT on the forums (4th most posts on the forum ever) and met a LOT of players both in games and here. Almost all interactions are not and should not be personal. And if it is? It's time to talk to them one on one, in dms, forum messages, etc.

This is an incredibly interesting perspective, and I can't help but comment on that fact that in less than an hour of engaging in a proper discussion, I have already been exposed to a viewpoint I want to learn more about.

I'm interested what you mean when you say it's not personal. You and I are both persons, Armhulen and Sinful, discussing matters here. We are individuals behind the screen, and if I were to say something like "I dislike you, Armhulen, I think you're this and that and these other things, too," I would expect that this would be taken personally, since it is about you yourself, Armhulen. I would take such things personally myself at least, and indeed I do, at which point I would attempt to adjust my tone and delivery in response to match -- perhaps for the worse, but almost out of a sense of obligation rather than desire.

Perhaps you're proposing a sort of disconnect between ourselves as presented on the forums, and our persons behind our screens, which allows us to stay disaffected by any comments about the former self, and that is indeed a very interesting perspective that I'd like to hear more about.

but i did get bored of this sadly so im gonna stop replying

and this is why we can't have nice things, armhulen. i will now default back to my standard mode of operation in light of your negative reinforcement like a whipped pavlovian dog and get banned in 2 weeks

i hope it was worth it

[sinfulbliss]

and you know what? sealioning me? it shows you have no respect for me. so now i've lost my respect for you

IT WASN'T SEALIONING!! GOD FORBID I COULD TAKE AN INTEREST IN SOMETHING YOU'VE SAID. THAT WAS MY MISTAKE ALL ALONG

[Turbonerd]

Nice double posting.

[sinfulbliss]

Nice double posting.

nice profile picture

[sinfulbliss]

Nice double posting.

by the way, real chads don't care about silly little formatting rules like this. you see that's the difference between you and I ashlyn. you, like cattle grazing within the confines of his little grassfield, abide by the bounds he is contained within, content to gnaw and chew in the safety of familiarity

i on the other hand know enough about them to know when they are acceptable to break, as I am doing here, and you know what? that makes me more of a man

[Shellton(Mario)]

On an unrelated note next time I get head rev am going to give the rev conga weapons and speed run revs

[Vekter]

I frew up

[AlamoTurtle]

On an unrelated note next time I get head rev am going to give the rev conga weapons and speed run revs

Dude, our conga went to shit when we let the Cap slip out. That whole thing was a great idea that was scuffed. Definitely needed weapons, lol, but it was hilarious to see everyone just start dogpiling and kicking the captain. Good conga great conga.