K then. Investigative-hippy time.
Also thank god. If only the other people that post a bunch were all banned for a week I wonder what would happen.
Alright, an opinion.
Dumbasses like you would ruin the forums
Random. :o
That doesn't even make sense
He could have left, but alright, not really a fight.
Provoking on Kev's part.
Posting my opinion makes me a dumbass. Saying someone that is noncontributive to the forum should be banned makes me a dumbass. Yes that makes sense.
Providing reasoning
People that post a bunch are non contributive?
Semantic - THIS is where it started. Kev looked into the post thinking Grumpy felt that everyone over a certain limit should be banned. While Grumpy stated exactly this, it isn't difficult to understand that he meant people who don't
contribute should be banned.
Then, he elaborated. >.>
His elaboration brought up the literal meaning of his initial post, which I don't think he really believed, he just didn't say "I meant". Unless he did, and Kev just ignored him:
I find contributing to have a positive connotation. Also the forum is called the BLOCKLAND forums, you are ment to contribute to Blockland. I agree that off topic is the most active section so you almost always have the most posts their but, Dkamn has under 50 posts that are in the blockland section of the forum. Also that post was incredibly rude and stupid.
How I see it, Grumpy was originally talking about those whom don't contribute, and stated those who post a lot do not contribute. I think, however, he was implying those whom post a lot of useless, rude things should be banned. However Kev read it differently.
Basically, Grumpy [may have] worded his initial post ("Also thank god. If only the other people that post a bunch were all banned for a week I wonder what would happen.") poorly, leading Kev to misunderstand, then leading Grumpy to then prove a point which he never really believed in the first place.
Or I could be totally wrong.
