Lucky

[Noirceur]

Are we to understand that we may not mention him and pedophilia in the same sentence and that we also may not make any reference which jokingly pokes fun at him? I ask because I've not only seen a lot of mods make the references themselves but because I always make those jokes. But, of course, there is no outlash against cripple remarks nor is there an outlash against gay remarks...which is strange, not that I don't welcome those in the same way that I welcome lucky pedo jokes. It just doesn't seem to add up and I'm curious as to why that one type of joke is the one that gets picked up on while others are left to be told. IMO anyone that can take them should be able to dish them out.
~E~
Not meant to be a "fuck the rules" post; if I wanted to go experience a completely orderless OTF I would have already gone to Rob's OTF or the FA:S OTF. It would just be nice to have some concept of what is allowed and what is not allowed. I actually don't like flagrant and offensive flaming but I just don't see Lucky jokes fitting that description.

[killerfluffy]

Making fun of the mentally-handicapped pisses me off. I suggest you desist, because I have a sharper forum-knife than most of you. You wanna poke sticks? Fine, poke them at people who can poke back. Poke them at people wearing figurative handcuffs, and I WILL take that stick and shove it all the way up your sorry ass.
i love it. we can't promote hate against blacks, hispanics, jews, gentiles, muslims or countries, but by god, those with GENETIC DISORDERS are fair game for this community. the mentally handicap have zero control regarding their mental faculties, and yet you find it to be their fault for trying to eke out a living in a way that provides them something other than staring blankly at the white walls of a home/sanitarium? your contempt for people with no control over their situation is revolting. this isn't like the backwoods redneck yokels here in texas that live off welfare with their nine children out of wedlock and no child support who made the decision to create their poverty or lack of education.

these are people who had no say in the hand life dealt them. might as well blame an albino for being sensitive to sunlight or those born blind for their inability to navigate a crowded room unaided.

i'm all for hardnosed, conservative attitudes towards helping people who refuse to help themselves, but not towards those who are unable to help themselves. if you're responsible for your despair, i have no empathy, compassion or pity for you. but i find it hard to hold you to account for something you do not and did not ever have control over. mental retardation is not a learned behavior, it's a chromosomal anomaly.
Edit: It would be a shame to waste the one sensible post from that thread, so here.....

This is taken from the "There are rules here, deal with it" post at the top of the OTF.

As far as the Lucky jokes go I believe, and I may be mistaken, that there is a consensus amongst the mods that the whole "LOL PEDO" horse is dead and has been kicked to the point where it's resembling a pile of low quality ground beef more than anything else. As such, we're less tolerant of them than we are of other things.

That aside, we don't abide by ANYONE getting flamed, even when they do quite a bit to earn those flames. Lucky, as a forum goer, is going to protected from being flamed by the community and you guys have shown in the past that you're more than willing to go after him with a vengeance.

If you'd like, we can begin cracking down harder across the boards on jokes about you being in wheelchair or the use of words like faggot, queer, gay etc.

This help at all?

[MeanPatrick]

This help at all?

Yes. I do love a good threatening. :)

[killerfluffy]

I should probably point out, that the "this help at all" was more of a summation of the entire post rather than a direct continuation of thought in the preceeding sentence. I had thought this was achieved by using a line break. I guess I was wrong. :P

[MeanPatrick]

I should probably point out, that the "this help at all" was more of a summation of the entire post rather than a direct continuation of thought in the preceeding sentence. I had thought this was achieved by using a line break. I guess I was wrong. :P

You weren't. I just quoted the last one as it was a question. Even if you weren't wrong, when you end a post/letter with an implication or directive then a question the question's emphasis is generally lead more towards the last statement of any post or letter, as the last section of writing is generally seen as the pillar or no non-sense part of a message.

Anyways, you have to admit to a group of paranoid posters that last one would sound like a death threat.

[Noirceur]

This is taken from the "There are rules here, deal with it" post at the top of the OTF.
That's great, but Lucky isn't retarded, nor is he unable to respond to or see what we say, seeing as we've recently established that he actually is on here from time to time. I'm almost certain that he really couldn't care less about being jokingly referred to as a pedo.

If you'd like, we can begin cracking down harder across the boards on jokes about you being in wheelchair or the use of words like faggot, queer, gay etc.
Well, like I said, I think that if you can take them you should be able to dish them out. I don't want you guys to crack down on other things, I was just using that as an example as I was wondering why that particular instance of jokes at others' expense is a problem.

[killerfluffy]

I suppose the fault lies with me for not explaining why I included Goat's post in there. I put that in there because we're not really supposed to let a lot of the things slide that we do. We moderate with a light hand, in all honesty we should be cracking down on a lot more than we do, but we don't. Why? I can't give you a good answer.

In regards to Lucky, I would suggest going down a few posts in this thread and skipping to the end ot the "Scav blames Lucky" thread. Prowl pretty much sums it up. Calling Lucky a pedo is flaming a charred horse, and we're not going to abide by it.

[Evil Superstar]

We moderate with a light hand, in all honesty we should be cracking down on a lot more than we do, but we don't. Why? I can't give you a good answer.

FOMG ADMIN ABOOSE!!!1#&one! :lincoln:

[Noirceur]

I suppose the fault lies with me for not explaining why I included Goat's post in there. I put that in there because we're not really supposed to let a lot of the things slide that we do. We moderate with a light hand, in all honesty we should be cracking down on a lot more than we do, but we don't. Why? I can't give you a good answer.
Heh, you probably could've picked a better selection for that. I think that you don't crack down on a lot of things because this is a forum full of not-so-mature people, mostly in their mid-late teens, and now it's a forum full of mid-late teens without a mod coming at the end. Even if you did crack down on other things, the posts will still be made, constantly. The thing is, this wouldn't be such an interesting forum without those kinds of people. If you start banning for immaturity then Rob's OTF and the FA:S OTF will become a lot bigger, taking into consideration the lack of a mod that I mentioned.

Personally it doesn't matter to me...if I feel that it's no longer fun to be here then I'll go somewhere else without making a dramatic "lol mods suck so I'm leaving" post.

Calling Lucky a pedo is flaming a charred horse, and we're not going to abide by it.
I'm pretty sure that we're just using different definitions of flaming, which is understandable.

[Walnut]

Prowl pretty much sums it up. Calling Lucky a pedo is flaming a charred horse, and we're not going to abide by it.

As far as I'm concerned, calling Lucky a pedophile is not flaming, but a statement of fact that has the potential to be amusing. If Lucky is so offended by it (I don't think he is), he could just stop looking at sexual drawings of young girls and the basis of our claims would disappear.

Honestly, most of the jokes are something like "lol lucky you're a pedophile", which is about as non-offensive as a joke of that nature could possibly be.

By now, most of us know the limits other members have for jokes about themselves. Lucky has never given me the impression that he's particularly offended by that level of joke. Sometimes people go overboard, in which case I think punishment is in order, but the Lucky jokes are, generally, reasonably tame.

[maggie]

if I wanted to go experience a completely orderless OTF I would have already gone to Rob's OTF or the FA:S OTF.

I can't even believe you would mention the FA:S OTF in the same sentence as Rob's. FA:S is anything but orderless.

[Dwin]

Ooh, that reminds me, haven't been over to FA:S in a while. Time to go sow anarchy! :fier:

[Noirceur]

I can't even believe you would mention the FA:S OTF in the same sentence as Rob's.
Fair point, but you know what I meant.

[Prowl]

As far as I'm concerned, calling Lucky a pedophile is not flaming, but a statement of fact that has the potential to be amusing. If Lucky is so offended by it (I don't think he is), he could just stop looking at sexual drawings of young girls and the basis of our claims would disappear.


Bant for polluting our gene pool? :rolleyes:

[SWATJester_os]

Isn't lucky gone? And as someone got wrong above, lucky DID get extremely sensitive about being called a pedo.

He's gone, it's a dead horse. Find a new meme.

[Psyche]

he's not gone he's been posting again lately. see: http://forums.worldatwarmod.com/showthread.php?t=47866

[MeanPatrick]

Isn't lucky gone? And as someone got wrong above, lucky DID get extremely sensitive about being called a pedo.

He's gone, it's a dead horse. Find a new meme.

Will you be our pedo? :kak:

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/6183/youngcutebikinigirlcq8.jpg

[Somedude]

Will you be our pedo? :kak:

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/6183/youngcutebikinigirlcq8.jpg

I'm on to you Chris Hansen!!! :arr:

[CaptCommy]

Man, I'll be the freakin pedo if I get women like that.
Or even just more pics.