This is just WRONG!!!!!!!!!

Only because the forum officers started the group; they are truly a group of peers coming over from the forums. Last I checked the "leader" of the other forum (LowTax) doesn't play SL, and he would be considedred their "leader", I guess.

They do, and then they laugh because it's funny while everyone in here tears their hair out over some temporary social numbers.

Really? What else have they done? Give me a list.

Second Life Is Serious Buisness.

you got me! Your out of context quotation has proven that W-Hat is an indefensible trainwreck.

This is such a bogus discussion that it's hard even call it a "disagreement." You and Shiryu finger-point at W-Hat for various things, in particular you claim that W-Hat members team up and "internet fight" as a single entity, and then vehemently deny that we have any affiliation with the members who were causing trouble. Now, look over this whole thread. Take a good look. Where in this thread did any W-Hat member defend any of the actions of the people accused to "bad behavior" in the original discussion? This entire argument has revolved around the fact that you guys have this endless, completely bogus idea that W-Hat is some monolith of griefing, or even just of working together. I've explicitly stated the reasoning behind the many griefing incidents in W-Hat, in the post you quoted out of context I might add, and you completely ignored my argument. The fact that none of us have done the thing you are claiming we do (gang up and defend our W-Hat "bretheren" doesn't make a shred of difference to you, apparently. The entire reason why any W-Hats are in this discussion at all is because W-Hat was blamed for this incident from the second reply. I already said it, but I'll say it again: some W-Hats are going to be griefers. So are some new, non-W-Hat Secondlife players. All it means to be a W-Hat is to have been introduced to Secondlife through the SA forums. We are as much a "single entity" as the group for people who came to SL from Uru Live. If you started accusing Uru Live players as a whole of being responsible for something that some Uru Live players did, wouldn't you think they'd be defensive? Why is it that if we're defensive, that's a different scenario? It's not. We're from an internet forum: end of story. If you cannot accept that fact, if you insist on believing we IM each other to argue with you in coherent unison, then you are simply delusional.

This doesn't mean they don't have a group structure and can't ban griefers from their numbers if they wanted to.

Actually no, alli read around here is "you can't hold us responsible for what some of our members do", well, if they don't do anything or shun their actions, sure as hell i can.

Read the thread better, i'm sure you can find quite a few examples if you exercise your reading ability.

LF, why is it that YOU get to decide what is humor and I cannot? You have obviously decided it's humor, completely disregarding the feelings of those who may be the targets of said humor. That's pretty selective reasoning in my book.

Maybe they're laughing at this entire thread?


LF

I wish I could script a bomb that would wipe over the entire grid and neg rate every one once.

The following drama, If harnest could provide power for generations to come!

I wish I could script a bomb that would wipe over the entire grid and neg rate every one once.

The following drama, If harnest could provide power for generations to come!

Define "griefing".

Now, tell the W-hat "leaders" what "griefing" is.

All I see are threats, vague assumptions, and calls for banning.

As far as the acting in coherent unison part, it could not have been more obvious than it was a 4 AM today. When 95% of the people in general chat are members or defenders of W-hat at 4am when there just so happens to be a thread about a w-hatter, I see it. You aren't going to convince me otherwise. I am in here every morning at those hours, and amazingly enough, there is never 95% w-hatters in here. I guess it was all an accident. I have seen the way you all act in conjunction on SLHerald and these forums. It's not happenstance.

The usual "define" request is quite a weak argument. I brought examples. UIf you don't find them enough it's your problem.

Sup Mendel

STOP FUCKING DANCING AROUND DIRECT QUESTIONS WITH BULLSHIT AND ANSWER THE MAN.

Key word being "was". Now it's an attempt to stir up more forum combat by demanding the castration and removal of a group of people in SL because of the "neg rate attack".

If you're being backed up against the wall because a few of your friends are throwing eggs at cars, aren't you going to be flippant?

PArdon my lack of logical arguments, but I have no idea what this has to do with anything.

I usually err on the side of freedom of expression.

Pot to kettle, come in kettle, black, etc. etc.

Of my 1600 posts I've used that phrase maybe inside of a dozen times. You're easy to tire.

Stop telling what a group in SL should do, grandpa. If you dont' like what they're doing, you know what to do.

I always err on the side of freedom of expression. Maybe the W-hats responsible thought it would be funny to neg rate someone JUST TO SEE if it would make it to the forums? Maybe they're laughing at this entire thread?

Maybe we should too?

LF