Congrats to Shady Acres's Jukebox on achieving Godhood!!!!

Post by **_JonasS** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:10 am

Ray A wrote:
JonasS wrote: And one could even go as far to say that some of those who achieve Godhood can barely be considered persons themselves.

Priceless :)

Shhh... I am trying to convince shades that is is Ok to idolise a thread!

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:16 am

JonasS wrote:Shhh... I am trying to convince shades that is is Ok to idolise a thread!

Community spirit and morale are important, Jonas. There are a number of "fake" threads on the front page of this board, I don't see any admonishment for that. The Juke Box is a positive and unifying factor on this board. Thank you for acknowledging that.

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 4:30 am

Shades does have a point. I mean you're talkin bout exhaulting a message board thread...what's next? I think this could be a slippery slope towards watering down the importance of exhaultation on this board. Let us not do this, for the sake of purification of the diety ranks. I mean, we're basically letting a machine into an exclusive country club...do we really want this? Shouldn't we keep our ranks pure and delightsome? Just to avoid encouraging those machines from delusions of grandeur. That's the untold story in the Terminator movies you know...between Arnold's nude butt part 1 and 2 a machine was given encouragement to reach beyond it's place as a slave to humanity, doing our bidding and taking up space in our lives until we replace them with newer more efficient versions [who will probably exterminate us eventually anyway :/]. But we can't encourage technological units at all, because one "good job" and next thing you know...T-1000s morphing and whatnot. That's where you're taking us with these exhaulting thread threads. Think about it. Think. Think. Think about it.

Post by **_Scottie** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:04 am

Ironic that smilies would have saved so much confusion here... * sigh *

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:10 am

Bond...James Bond wrote:et us not do this, for the sake of purification of the diety ranks. I mean, we're basically letting a machine into an exclusive country club...do we really want this? Shouldn't we keep our ranks pure and delightsome?

Right. I can't imagine a mere message board thread being taken to the Goddess Suite, either.

Scottie wrote:Ironic that smilies would have saved so much confusion here... * sigh *

How so?

_Ray A · Post by **_Ray A** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:17 am

Dr. Shades wrote:How so?

I agree with Scottie here, Shades. I didn't read your post as being angry at Jonas, but without the offensive smilies it's much harder to detect "tone". They say a picture paints a thousand words, and a simple :) would have conveyed your intention, but you seem averse to even using :)

It's called "Internet body language". That's why they are also called emoticons. To convey emotion not obvious in writing.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:23 am

Oh dear god.

Shades did use a smiley in one of his posts.

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:32 am

Jersey Girl wrote:Oh dear god.

Shades did use a smiley in one of his posts.

I'm not averse to using them; I'm merely averse to them being abused.

Unlike most people, I can pull off the former without overstepping into the latter.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:43 am

Dr. Shades wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:Oh dear god.

Shades did use a smiley in one of his posts.

I'm not averse to using them; I'm merely averse to them being abused.

Unlike most people, I can pull off the former without overstepping into the latter.

Most people probably wouldn't abuse them either and then again, what constitutes "abuse" is a matter of personal opinion.

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:19 pm

Jersey Girl wrote:Most people probably wouldn't abuse them either . . .

I categorically disagree with that. Restraint and Smilies almost never go together.