Zealous moderator? What the heck...
 

OK... so "clearify..." And when was "the first time?" :confused:

What was the problem with my post? Is quoting an article all of a sudden taboo?

What the heck Mulletman. Way to go, buddy... :mad:

You posted quotes from the interview that alone sounded biased were taken out of context. Whether it was on purpose or accidental, those remarks would cause more harm then good. Once the fire dies down, you guys can speculate over whatever. Please do not place the blame on anyone until both parties have spoken.

Tell me which quote I took out of context, my good man. The content of the interview/article was pretty much all against Stapp.


There was no "speculation" in my post. If you didn't notice, they were all quotes taken directly from the interview.


Quoting an article (that was already posted on the site) does harm? Help me understand this. Trem/Flip essentially placed blame on Stapp for the breakup. That's not wild speculation, that's right out of the interview. Have you not read it?

Using your logic, the article should also be censored from creedfeed.com because it does not represent "both parties." To be consistent, you would also need to censor Mark if he comes on this board and repeats what he did in the MTV interview. If you are unwilling to censor the article, then kindly refrain from needlessly censoring my posts and overstepping your bounds.

FYI: here is a copy of my wildly speculative post:

Some key quotes from the MTVNews interview/article I found interesting.

What lead to Creed's dissolution

Who the 'quarrel' was with

Conflict during the Weathered Tour

On Scott's mindset



The infamous Chicago concert

Tremonti's mindset

Plea for history

Velocity, we're all capable of reading the article in its entirety and drawing our own conclusions. We don't need selected quotes highlighted for our edification. State your opinion and move on. The whole post seemed to be bait, and thankfully, not many bit before your post was edited.

No, quoting an article is NOT taboo, however, picking it apart and only posting those points YOU deem interesting may cause more harm than good in this case. Yes the article is one-sided, but we don't want any rumor or speculation to come from it. I'm sure there will be plenty but we're trying to keep it to a minimum on Creedfeed. If that is a problem, go post your points elsewhere.

1) Are you sure you wanted to say "we?" Do you speak for all members now? Do you you feel that you should be taking it upon yourself to decide what members should or should not read?

Heaven forbid anyone read selected quotes (taken in context) to highlight some interesting points made in an interview...

2) You say "state your opinion and move on." How is that possible when you delete my posts?

So I can't point out what *I* find interesting? Am I supposed to pick out what *you* find interesting? I can't see how that argument works, unless your goal is to censor any opinions or information that run contrary to your views.

Again, you can't keep on that "speculation" mantra. You're all scared of speculation. Only problem is, there was NO speculation in my post. You are excercising pure censorship for no valid reason. Is this how you treat all longtime members that don't subscribe to your views?

Why not just be direct and say "shut up or get out."

You stifle members and then try to rationalize it. Could ANYONE bring up the facts (as voiced by Mark/Flip) contained in that interview in ANY form? Answer me that and then jive it with the logic you used to repeatedly censor my posts.

Just cram a sock in the guy's mouth, say "I don't think your post was good" and then "move on" as if nothing happened. I don't appreciate this at all.

The reasons your posts were edited were given by the other mods. If you don't agree with them either let it go or post elsewhere. Rather than let rumors spread that have no bearing, we want to keep the discussions to a respectable level. Instead of discussing the article you simply posted individual quotes. Postint quotes from the article is fine, but follow up the quote with a discussion about it. Why did you post it. What is your feeling about it? Please understand that by pasting single quotes from the entire article can make your post appear to have a certain meaning one way or another. That is what we want to avoid here.

Funny, the reason I didn't post any extra remarks was because I figured (from past experience) that the post would be censored due to "speculation." So you're telling me that if I post the same text with my opinions, it will not be censored by mods?

Forgive me ever so kindly :rolleyes:. I meant that in general, people can make their own conclusions. By posting the way you did, without comment, you did something similar to what you are accusing me of, namely taking it upon yourself to decide what members should or should consider interesting.

See above.


I didn't delete your post, but I would have if I'd gotten to it first :D.

This is what I don't get. You say "people can make their own conclusions." In the next breath, you then say I should have included comments & analysis to avoid censorship. That doesn't make any sense.

I took nothing upon myself other than posting what I found interesting in a reasonable tone and manner. But almost everyone does that... that's what message boards are all about. If you didn't find it as interesting as I did, you could have replied in kind. You could have given others the chance to agree/disagree with how interesting I found the quotes to be.

By not censoring the post, you allow everyone to decide. By deleting the post, you decide for everyone.

Well, I'm sorry you don't get it. I explained my reasons, you explained yours. This bickering is pointless.

Omg Revolution!!!!!1

I think what the mods are trying to say is that they don't mind if you state your opinion, but when you use your opinion in a post that is obviously pointing out the negatives in your quotes and then going into detail as to why is, when you get down to it, merely trolling.

It's one thing to make quotes and explain your opinion of them, it's another to do so in such a blatantly negative way. Perhaps if you posted it and stated your opinion in a less enflaming way you'd meet with better results from the mods.

Just my 2 cents, take it for what it's worth.

Rune pretty much summed up what I couldn't express in words for some reason. Thank you. That is exactly what I was trying to say in my original post.

maybe Velocity you realize this is *NOT* a personal attack but more of a action for the good of all...Mullet was just doing what he thought was right...sometimes arguing with those in authority is a pointless venture...

*anyone besides me hate it when your brain moves faster than your hands and then you have to edit...damn it...lol... :rolleyes:** just trying to lighten it up...

Velocity -- this is not a good place to practice freedom of speech, you know. Blasphemous remarks liek yours will get shut down by local otakus lol

Talk to the hand Lech. By the way, what's otakus?

STEVE MAKE ME ADMIN OF CREEDFEED AND I WILL BRING THE BBS TO NEW HIGHTS

its not a good word, but ill take it as a compliment.

Otaku is someone who devotes too much time to their obession.
it is generally used to refere to people who watch and rewatch every single anime possible, analyzing and overanalyzing it. Subsititute anime with creed and you get the picture.

P.S. in Japan this word means nerd/looser (taku = home, hence otaku -- someone who stays at home all day). It drifted to English with similar but different pening of overzealous fan.

its like every Lord of the Rings and Matrix fan.

No more extreme. Noone can obesess ovr something as crazily as japanese do. America's SvC2 (main tournament level arcade fighting game at the moment) team has lost horribly to Japaneese one, cuz they didnt practice 10+ hours a day like their opponents did.
I am LOTR (book ONLY!) fan, yet if I was an otaku i'd know name of every insifnificant charcter, would write/speak fluently in elvish, etc. Big difference. Like elementaly school football and NFL.

So like the Star Trek fans? Yea i've never heard of that SvC2 thing you were taking about. Worst Ive done is debate about the Matrix and occational overnight LAN party. Man, and I thought 64 people playing Battlefield 1942 all night long was bad.

CvS2 = Capcpm vs SNK 2.
There's a glicth there. If you played Street Fighter you may understand it: you have to cancel roll (light punch + light kick) into any special move. Trick is -- youhave 3 frames (1/16th of a second) to do it. Rollcancel gives you a special move during which you're invincible. Problem is -- 1/16 of a second is very short time. To rollcancel Iori's Rekka, you have to do halfcircle back + fierce punch, and light punch+ligth kick withing given timeframe. And time them in between nicely. That's 180 degree joystick movment and 3 buttons in 1/16th of a second. In- fucking-sanley hard. Otakus do it all the time.

You seem to know a whole lot about that. lol

i am street fighter & its clones fan after all
we got CvS2 and Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike machines on campus so I waste my $ these quiet often.

I never got into the arcade fighters, mainly because it was over before it even started.

I think Lech is an Otaku of Otakus!

You have to meet a real otaku first. I know some. Scary people =(

anyways i think the point of this thread is that mulletman is a bad mod so he should be demodded emidiatly and should be replaced with me.

ill take your word for it.