Rayman Pirate-Community

Adsolution wrote:- For fuck's sake people, what has been gone over countless times in other game threads about being creative? That's right, be creative. 'Adding too many solutions" or 'living in Bagina Town" as well as every reply after them is about as uncreative and nonsensical as it gets. Think of the first reply I made here as sort of a guideline to add a level of challenge ane amusement to this thread so that it can warrant its own existence as a legitimate game thread.

Hey, you aren’t the owner of this game. Don’t enforce rules.

Adsolution: banned for trying to enforce rules on this thread.

Mods can enforce rules generally on the board, but I don't see that as a rule that would make much sense in this topic.

It's clearly turning out to be a fun thread, it's got super popular already.

They're called games or a reason

suggesting they're fun

obviously quality is important, but high standards are maintained throughout threads, and where APPROPRIATE. As explained in my last post.

rolesfamily wrote:The reason for 'banning' people is bound to come from an actual trait of their character. Or the reason is bound to be from something they've done/said/are.

Yes, and it should be a trait that you could actually picture some idiot getting upset over. For instance, there is literally nothing upsetting about owning a Murfy rank, especially considering that the people who would be banning you created that rank. For the mock reaction I gave to Imco's signature, for instance, that's not even a super uncommon reaction for some people - look at Feminist Frequency. Now maybe them having a Murfy rank isn't the sole reason you want to ban them, maybe the Murfy rank combined with a few other completely unrelated but coincidental traits all work together to make it seem as if he's part of the Illuminati or something. That one's a little complicated, but that's the whole point, be creative, and a part of that also means being creative enough to assume the role of hyper-offendable or paranoid, power-hungry fool who landed an elite position.

Fifo wrote:Hey, you aren’t the owner of this game. Don’t enforce rules.

Hey, you aren't in charge of maintaining this forum's quality; if you aren't going to enforce any quality rules, I will. Without setting any rules that define some kind of a challenge, something you clearly have no intent on doing, it doesn't even fit the definition of a "game", it's just random nonsense.

rolesfamily wrote:It's clearly turning out to be a fun thread, it's got super popular already.

Aye, but nothing I'm suggesting would diminish the fun factor. If anything, it'd make the thread a whole lot more funny to read in the long run.


For note, I'm not trying to cause an argument here, I'm just catching hold of the thread before it becomes an utter spamfest.

Adsolution: Banned for having decapitated 8 mean, unknown to me, and putting their heads in his signature

(Yeh, that's legitimately funny!)

Imco: Banned for trying to take over as the board's local composer just to spite me.

Adsolution: Banned for being such a mad baby and for still not having a site for ROTD

Imco97: Banned for asking three questions in the space of an hour, having specifically stated that he would not do anything of the sort, and for randomly introducing a colour-code without the approval of staff whose usernames use the same colours.

PluMGMK: Banned for not reading my statement correctly, as I stated I would only do the every whole hour thing one day, but it didn't really work out for me. Also banned for photoshopping on a Rayman 2 plum in a Rayman 1 picture

Imco97: Banned for abusing the "Photoshop" trademark, doubly offensive since that image was made using GIMP; also for appearing to generalise a specific statement about the running of a prestigious forum activity.

Adsolution wrote:

rolesfamily wrote:The reason for 'banning' people is bound to come from an actual trait of their character. Or the reason is bound to be from something they've done/said/are.

Yes, and it should be a trait that you could actually picture some idiot getting upset over. For instance, there is literally nothing upsetting about owning a Murfy rank, especially considering that the people who would be banning you created that rank. For the mock reaction I gave to Imco's signature, for instance, that's not even a super uncommon reaction for some people - look at Femenist Frequency. Now maybe them having a Murfy rank is't the sole reaon you want to ban them, maybe the Murfy rank combined with a few other completely unrelated but coincidental traits all work together to make it seem as if he's part of the illuminati or something. That one's a little complicated, bht that's the whole point, be creative, and a part of that also means being creative enough to assume the role of hyper-offendable or paranoid, power-hungry fool who landed an elite position.

Fifo wrote:Hey, you aren’t the owner of this game. Don’t enforce rules.

Hey, you aren't in charge of maintaining this forum's quality; if you aren't going to enforce any quality rules, I will. Without setting any rules that define some kind of a challenge, something you clearly have no intent on doing, it doesn't even fit the definition of a "game", it's just random nonsense.

rolesfamily wrote:It's clearly turning out to be a fun thread, it's got super popular already.

Aye, but nothing I'm suggesting would diminish the fun factor. If anything, it'd make the thread a whole lot more funny to read in the long run.


For note, I'm not trying to cause an argument here, I'm just catching hold of the thread before it becomes an utter spamfest.

With an explanation like that, it makes it a lot clearer to what you meant earlier. So really it's really a case of adding something like 'because' at the end of a reason. Like you said, lets take my avatar for example:

rolesfamily: Banned for having a Murfy rank. Because Murfy is an encyclopedia, and I hate smartasses.

- Something along the lines of that? So that basically means you can pick up on a somewhat generic obvious thing, providing you combine it with a decent and CREATIVE reason. Now I'm understanding where you're coming from!

Thanks for explaining (you've added a solution!)

Rolesfamily: Banned for having drunk way more plum juice than even Globox, and for showing his level of drunkenness by undressing himself publicly on a website.

o/.

Sugar wrote:I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS IT! Well, yeah. Look my epic answer:
The Xowar is a scrapped creature in Rayman 3. You can access it having exact scores in the chapters. It cames along with separated other scrapped stuff.
wut.
iHeckler9: Questioning a Sugar's awesome knowledge powers.

>blorf<
Saerleiya: Banned because I don't understand your name. Boosh, layin' down the law.

iHeckler9 because your sig says that you current rank is a JumpingEye but it isn't! ÒmÓ

Sny: Banned because you love rainbows and ponies.

(Disclaimer: if you really do, it was only a coincidence. It's just I like to make fun of MLP because ponies and rainbows :3).

(I actually am... But I'm not offended, don't worry ^^)
saerleya: Because you discovered my super dark pegasis-secret *vanishes in a dark cloud and hisses*

Sny: Banned because she'll kill me if I say her name out loud again XD

Imco97: Banned (and tortured) because you already said my name more than 10 times ÒmÓ

Sny: Banned for illegally having a 3 lettered username that contains no vowels at all.

Bradandez: Banned beca- Wait... Someone already banned him because of his signature? Damn >.<
Banned because......because the font in your signature is blurred. Who knows what terribly dark secret you may have written there? OmO

Bradandez wrote:Sny: Banned for illegally having a 3 lettered username that contains no vowels at all.

Bradandez wrote:vowels

Sny wrote:Sny

ROFL

Sny: Banned for having already created a honest trailer about Elem.