It was also mentioned that Knightress was told by a 15 year old girl I believe, that nemesis was talking dirty to her, noone mentioned that Nemesis was 15, and yea I think he is 22, that's why this phone thing was so totally rediculous, because it was between a 22 year old and a 35 year old. It proved absolutely nothing, except that Knightress and Nemesis likes to talk dirty on a phone, whoooopeeeee...they are 2 consenting adults, and it isnt illegal. It wasnt sexual harrassment or anything like that because Knightress kept proding him to talk dirty until he finally did (listened to some of the mp3's). Knightress got exactly what she expected to get from all of this....Nemesis went nuts, and did bad things, no excuse, just how it was, while she sat back and laughed.

(still waiting for my banning on Archaic to be explained)

I think you're thinking of Tyne. Tyhm never worked on Providence.

But I did. :D The reason it wasnt going any where when you worked there was the FTP was messed up for months even with continually e-mailing Stefan about it. As for levels your levels where pretty good but no where near the graphic skills you have now. :)

Not sure if you know its me from providence but I'm the person you played that other game with that had a TBS System and you clicked where you wanted to walk.

I have to take Moonies side on this, i would not want to be banned/jailed when i have not done anything on the server, i mean i like having a good record.

Please if you intend on quoting me at least try to get it right, I said nothing about Knightress or Nem , what I was talking about was in the news lately and this is from my post.

Me also...

You know from expariance, women with power on graal is a bad thing...and the only 3 women on graal i trust with a high position of staff are Lyndz, Angel, and well, was Moony

I'm not completely misquoting you. Because wether intentionally or unintentionally by making that quote you made the implication that such was the case with Knightress which is definatly not considering Nemesis is 22.


Also whats that url thing thats in what I said in your post? Wierd...

the thread that was deleted had alot of talk about adults having sexual relationships with children, as well as the nem/knightress situation, which is said to have come about because a 15 year old girl accused nemesis of talking dirty to her. This poll stems from that thread which was deleted. What MG posted was a general post of something which we are both concerned about both in real life and on graal

I never made any such implication you are taking things I said and misapplying to what you want them to say which is a lie , plain and simple. I did not mention Nem or Knightress in my post for a reason it wasn't about either one of them so don't flame me by trying to put words in my mouth. There is a trend to such activity going on in real life, which does not have a anything to do with these two. I as a concerned parent only expressed my concern over these things and not over what these two did or did not do. DO NOT PUT DAMN WORDS IN MY MOUTH I DID NOT SAY the implication is nothing more than your adolescent over active imagination. Neither are schoolteachers and never have been so you to jump to a conclusion like that is very wrong on your part to say I even said anything remotely to what you said. Try watching the news sometime you may learn something because that story was on the National news.:grrr: :rolleyes:



One other thing tell me if this sounds odd to you , I have never been on this server ever but just tonight I sign on it and get this


http://www.graal-npulse.com/images/archaic.jpg

Now just how can a person be banned from a server you have never been on? Can anyone answer that for me? Thanks!

And the award for most convincing argument in the thread goes to...

This was uncalled for..:\

Actually, it was. As I said, this post has no use, eveyone knows the truth. If I remember right, you banned like 9 of her accounts on Npulse after "Moon Goddes" or w/e quit. What happened to that? Did you fall under her spell too?

You can't make a thread basicly on the same subject and expect it not to go the same way...

I'm taking it to PMs, like we're supposed to.

If you notice the thread's shorter, it's because I'm deleting the outright flames again.

To MG:
"Does not the [graal] rules state "all rules are subject to change without notice to Members"? New rule [MG] doesn't get on there. "
:asleep:
lol, anyways... maybe you'll be unbanned... but there's a lot of private worlds that are banning people for no reason at all, or just because they only want their friends on there... Is there even a rule saying you can not ban people, unless you have a good reason? =x I know it sounds like common sence, but if there isn;t a rule against it... I don;t see what's stopping them from banning you.

Ok do you feel better after that tempter tantrum? I expected better from you. I wasnt making any attempt to flame you, I dont even know you. But I guarantee if I had any distaste for you I wouldnt have offered levels I had made to N-Pulse when you and Moongoddess where managing it. Nor would I have stated the possibility of it being unintentional. Which I specifically stated. You posted that information in a thread with no prior references to it. So to me at least and if me I'm sure others that you where emplying something. Like I said maybe you didnt mean to with what your wife stated. (politly and calmly I might add) I'm inclined to believe was the case. But when you just up and mention something about 15 year olds and adults and I dont see anything in what it might be in relation to outside of the main topic its very easy to draw conclusions as to what you're referring to. I dont check the forums at home or over the weekends. So I missed the entire previous flame war. I can to an extent understand why you would fly off the handle with the way people like to target other people for flaming on the forums. But you shouldn't assume that this is always the case. It's always good to try and set an example not easy believe me I know. (Yea I fly off the handle too some times) Any how what I was trying to state was with your post is it isnt comming out the way you intended it as it looks like you're flaming Knightress. Like I said previously probably unintentionally.

In regards to being banned? I agree its not right and not exactly mature either and if some one is banning people unjustly I recommend taking it up with the manager and or Graal Admin. (assuming you havnt already)

To Tyhm: Thanks for deleting my last post, I got a little bit annoyed at some one going off on me over a miscommunication when I wasnt trying to flame any one. I know there are rules about not posting deleted things. But I felt you deleted it not because of the information but more in how I posted it. I hope this is more acceptable. If not I guess I wont be seeing it later. :p

Read the rules of the forum

To ETD, My common sense tells me that we should all still be following the general graal rules, even the rented PW's because it is still using the graal client, I dont understand why it is so hard for some of these other PW's to use the same common sense, and just assume that they are special or something, and have no rules to follow...it will all be cleared up soon though

You know I would not have been annoyed at all if you had taken to heart what I said when I posted again on what I said and then for a 3rd time you said I meant something else , this I am sorry to say is quite annoying when I tried once again to explain it to you and you again said the same. The last thread (you did not see) if you had seen what I posted in it really wouldn't have helped you here because I stayed netural in that thread as I am trying to do here . I do not intend to take sides in this publicly as I have stated before. I asked you politely to please not misquote what I said , did I not? Now I'm sorry if I lost my temper with you but how many times must I explain the same thing over and over again?

If you want to Forum PM me about something feel free too if it still seems to be unclear to what my meaning is. I don't want to argue with you or anyone else here but you completely took what I said out of context and tried to make it look like I was saying something else. If you were in my shoes would not this tend to grate on your nerves if you have already made another attempt to explain with no avail? But I will say again I'm sorry and I guess I will try to explain it 3 or 4 times if someone doesn't get it. *shrugs* look back at my post and what I said , I clearly started what was meant by it and it was a news article, did I not? So how can you take it to mean Knightress and Nem is somewhat beyond me. If the post is unclear please point out what was unclear in the second post about it.




No I haven't nor have I attacked her here. My personal feelings about Knightress will not be debated on these Forums by me nor will I take part in bashing here regardless whether I like her or not. Just for the record I don't care much for the woman but that does not excuse rude behavoir because you don't like her.

What's he point of this thread? To renew an argue, that's exactly what it's for. This thing is over with, what's the big trend on Graal of always critisizing people and their past as a last resort, it's pathetic. This thread should have been created right after the deal with Knightress and Nemesis happened, not stirred back up right now. It's pointless. :(

Sure I can. Thread 1 started with Knighress accusing her accusors of lying, and her accusors calling her names in response. This thread, the ground rule is no personal attacks. She can say it's not true and vouch for her own character, and anyone else can say it is true and present evidence of same, but no You're a liar, well you're a pedophile, well you're corrupt, well you're a ****, well you're a...

But why make a thread solely on Knightress?
There was more to the other thread then just Knightress...

lol, the thread was started by knightress, and was all about knightress.

This thread is supposed to be a more controlled discussion of the last thread.

So why is there a poll about Knightress?

I'm not siding here, but this seems a little too directed at one party.

Never read the other thread past page 2. Start a new thread if there was another topic brought up worth discussing. All's I saw was flames.

There wasnt another topic. The thread was about Knightress trying to clear her name by saying I gave her a bad name....plain and simple. The whole thread was nothing more than people taking sides, and flaming each other, and I would hope that it wouldnt be allowed to be started again.

There shouldn't really be a poll to judge her in the first place.

Wow , took the words right out of my mouth. :o

She wanted to clear her name. It's a fair intention. So fine. Here's her chance to clear her name without attacking Moony. Here's a poll to see how well she's doing. Simple.

I'd agree with you, if Knightress wasn;t the one who brought this up in the first place...
I agree, why is the poll even there? polls like that shouldn;t even be allowed on the forums anyways
:\

She wanted to know how many people forgive her. That's the only sensible result from opening such a thread in the first place. Now there's an easily quantifiable way to tell how she's doing.

umm... forgive her? I don't remember that in her post.. then again, I can't re-read her post, since it was deleted
=x
which is, I think, the biggest problem... the post in which she explains everything is now gone... so how is this thread, and poll helping anything? her explanation is gone, so only those who happened to read it before would know what she had to say

If Knightress were bothered by the poll she would have said so, trust me, but she didnt.
She posted in this thread, and seemed bored with it, not bothered

One thing bothers me about the banning of Moon Goddess off Archaic. (Waits for my account to be banned now for saying something)
Anyway, from what i can gather from reading through, Moonie was banned off Archaic for what she said on the forums
if that is the case there should be an awful lot of people banned.
It was my belief things said over aim/msn instant message programs could not be used against you on Graal.
How much more so should that apply to the forums?
Blookat has obviously proved that he is not going to follow Graal rules for banning someone off his server for something said on the Graal forums.
I look forward to trying to log on one day and finding my account banned too, just to prove it.
;)

Yeah, you're not supposed to ban people off your personal server for personal vendettae. But right now there's no rule against it, so it's sliding for the moment - as it stands it's at the owner's discretion who he lets on the server. Safe bet that'll be the first thing audited though when we revise the rules...if Blookat can kick off all his enemies, then some guy could kick off all the jews...

or all the French/Germans

like omg that guys french/german ban him!!!

oops i think Blookat just banned Stefan ;)

Good point though Tyhm, yes, next it could turn into a racist war where they ban all the <enter nationality race colour here>
I sure hope its fixed soon.

edit: should add <enter Manager Ex-Manager of said name server here> ;)

And then we've got WWII all over again, but this time right here on Graal.

But, anyway, I did think that the point of her post was not to see how many people forgave her, but to clear the air of any rumors that were still floating around.

From what i gather, even though i only saw two pages, that other thread was WW2 all over again, thats why it was closed.
The only thing that was gained/lost was Moonie being banned on Archaic because Blookat didnt like what she said on the forums so like, omg can i ban <enter name here> he called me a name on the forums!? and he/she said bad things about my best friend! oh oh and he/she is a jew too, lets make this racist now.
Sometimes i'm glad i'm just an observer.

If a person shows (him/her)self to be disruptive and unsuited to fair, friendly play then it's not unreasonable to ban him/her, regardless of where they displayed the behaviour.

On the other hand, if we allow bans to be based on personal judgement then we open the door for situations such as those already described in this thread. So it's not inherently wrong, but bad managers make it necessary to outlaw it.

I hope you aren't implying that a person can be banned from a server based on where they act via forums, email, other chat program, anywhere else on the web. None of which are affiliated with Graal. I could probably understand actions on this forum being included, because this is part of Graal, but not anywhere else.

People pay to play, Kai. If a server is going to ban a person from playing, then they better have a damn good reason, and not just use personal judgement. I see what you are saying, but with some of the Managers/Staff of these PW's being on some kind of power trip or something, using personal judgement, and common sense just kinda flies right out the window

Tifa:: Actually I was banned because I didnt apologize to Bloo Kat publically on the forums for some unknown reason, he flat said if I didnt apologize then I wasnt welcome there. MG was banned and has never stepped foot on that server. Knightress added something to the ban reason when Angel went on there to ask them what was up, which was a complete lie, and they have no proof because it was a lie

"Said, on screen "Your time is coming" to NyT"

Now, if I banned everyone that said something that simple to me, there would hardly be anyone left playing. Nevermind the fact that I didnt say it at all.

Tyhm, I really dont understand when Graal rules stopped applying to the PW's, just because they rent the server, they are still using the graal client. The same standard Graal rules should apply to all of them. They dont friggin own anything, they "rent" it.
Anyway, I will be so glad when these rules are done before I get banned on more servers for personal dislike

Oh, so if someone told me via AIM "I'm going to hack you if you don't do something corrupt and give me items," that that wouldn't warrant a ban? That's a chat program which isn't affiliated with graal. I'm sorry, but it appears as though you don't understand the basic reasoning behind a ban. Additionally, nowhere does it state that you cannot ban people from graal based upon how they act elsewhere. It does not exist, as it would be extremely foolish if it did. Else, how could people who run "graal hacking" sites be banned?

So paying money grants you some sort of immunity from server managers acting within the rules of the time? I really dislike it when people use that paying-to-play argument.

If playerworld managers were responsible, personal judgement would be sufficient. I've banned a couple people merely because if I had not banned them, they would have been a detriment to my server.

I do believe he wanted to reconcile with you.

Well, Bloo stated his feeling that your and Moon God's presence would be a detriment to his server. He believes that to be the case, and your main discussion should be with him - were i you, I'd attempt to find out just what his problem with you is, and straighten it out. However, it seems that you took the easier way out, and just brought your complaint to the forums.

They do still apply. However, you don't seem to understand what is and what isn't a 'graal rule'.

This is quite true.



While paying playerworld managers cannot do anything they want, they do have certain prerogatives - one at the moment is access control.

Why are you trying to make it look like I dont want any rules to be followed? I am about one of the most strict people on Graal. When I said you cant ban people for things outside of graal, I meant general behavior, as in cussing, and so on. As for Bloo trying to reconcile with me, no he wasnt. He was demanding an apology for a reason he refused to give when I asked, he completely ignored it when I asked what I was to apologize for. I have never done anything to either one of them on graal or on the forums, so dont give me that crap.

As for what I said about paying, I did not imply that just because people pay, they can do whatever they want. I simply said that people pay and should not be banned for no reason, and not get their full monies worth. If it is allowed to let people ban people just because they dont like that person, and these people pay for it, that ias completely unfair

You are making it look like I dont agree with these PW's following rules, when it is quite the opposite, I am pissed that they dont follow any rules at all