Deleted Posts
Oct. 28th, 2004 08:47 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
naruki_oniConsidering how nasty some people get (myself included, when provoked), I figured it'd be nice to remember some of the posts that were made before they got deleted by self-righteous hypocrites. It's hard to predict which ones will get the axe, but I can make a guess in some cases. Like the one I made here:
That post is in response to their oh-so-subtle rule "- NRK rule: Do not try to make conflicts worse than they already are. It is not funny." listed on the community's User Info page.
I imagine their reasoning went something like this:
TacoBrain: Naruki is a bastard for pointing out that I'm an idiot so convincingly!
Slammedlander: Yeah, he is! He's a boy! He's obviously male! I'm not obsessed with pointing out what I think Naruki's sex is!
OzanBaka: English hate me. Me hate Naruki. Hate me. Eat kitten.
iptv_stalker: We should delete all her posts responding to our unwarranted attacks!
Dragoonlady: Order! If I delete all the letters in your post except for two esses and an ay and then rearrange them, you said the word "ass", and now I have to moderate you!
Salegamine: Why does he keep attacking my innocent love who only attacked him first?
blab_rattus: We need to name a self-righteously hypocritical rule after Naruki that will be encoded so cleverly that nobody will ever figure out it's named after NaRuKi. I propose "NRK"!
I could be wrong, though. :-)
That goes well with your lame-ass "NRK" rule, dipweed.
naruki_oni
2004-10-28 05:43 (link)
You guys make up a rule based on behavior you falsely attribute to me, and it self-righteously ignores the fact that had you idiots not attacked me I would never have posted here in the first place. Way to go!
Self-righteous hypocrites are the worst kind of hypocrites. ;-)
That post is in response to their oh-so-subtle rule "- NRK rule: Do not try to make conflicts worse than they already are. It is not funny." listed on the community's User Info page.
I imagine their reasoning went something like this:
TacoBrain: Naruki is a bastard for pointing out that I'm an idiot so convincingly!
Slammedlander: Yeah, he is! He's a boy! He's obviously male! I'm not obsessed with pointing out what I think Naruki's sex is!
OzanBaka: English hate me. Me hate Naruki. Hate me. Eat kitten.
iptv_stalker: We should delete all her posts responding to our unwarranted attacks!
Dragoonlady: Order! If I delete all the letters in your post except for two esses and an ay and then rearrange them, you said the word "ass", and now I have to moderate you!
Salegamine: Why does he keep attacking my innocent love who only attacked him first?
blab_rattus: We need to name a self-righteously hypocritical rule after Naruki that will be encoded so cleverly that nobody will ever figure out it's named after NaRuKi. I propose "NRK"!
I could be wrong, though. :-)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
I never said the rule was bad.
Date: 2004-10-28 08:43 am (UTC)I cannot create a new entry in that community, nor would I want to. As usual, I only responded to places where I was specifically mentioned or referred to. The one whole deleted entry started with a slam against me. That's hardly the spirit of friendliness, there.
BTW, not all those mean-spirited posts are gone. Look at the founding comments (while you still can). See that Kickstart and I are both excluded, for example. Little things dropped here and there show that many of the members aren't as openminded as you.
That comment you are thinking about was toned down a bit, too. The original line was quite a bit worse, given my anger. I reread before posting and edited a bit. Hopefully it is more defensible than what I originally wrote (and also hopefully it will not be true very often in the future).
I do not consider tit for tat a bad thing, obviously. I'm just displeased that the tit was negative, requiring the tat to be likewise.
Not all tits are bad :-)
Date: 2004-10-28 09:20 am (UTC)I saw it.
Date: 2004-10-28 09:26 am (UTC)Re: for correctness sake
Date: 2004-11-03 06:56 am (UTC)Re: I never said the rule was bad.
Date: 2004-11-03 06:55 am (UTC)Perhaps, perhaps not.
Date: 2004-11-03 11:22 am (UTC)If you were to rename your group to something other than "UNWANTED" you might not look pathetic. But don't listen to "the unmentionable one". Gods, some of your members are total fucktards. HTH
Re: Perhaps, perhaps not.
Date: 2004-11-04 07:48 am (UTC)That's what I don't miss about you.
Date: 2004-11-04 05:42 pm (UTC)Re: That's what I don't miss about you.
Date: 2004-11-05 04:10 am (UTC)Re: That's what I don't miss about you.
Date: 2004-11-05 04:12 am (UTC)