Forum Search
I'm Feeling Lucky
Searching for: Posts from CarpetMonster.
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Sun, 17/04/2016 01:06 (8 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Sun, 14/02/2016 23:45 (8 Years ago) |
Thanks for pointing that out! o.o [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Sun, 14/02/2016 23:38 (8 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Tue, 19/01/2016 00:55 (8 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Thu, 31/12/2015 15:44 (8 Years ago) |
So, uh... Just like this? Zygarde --- CarpetMonster --- December 31st, 2015 (The rules say there can be one person per form, but then the Kalos list just says Zygarde once. If it matters anyway, I think 50% Forme because it's the one that directly inspired my username in that it vaguely resembles a carpet. cx) [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Tue, 29/12/2015 07:56 (8 Years ago) |
But yes, I support the original suggestion~ (Just not Cliff_Armor's modification. Sorry!) [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Sun, 27/12/2015 08:32 (8 Years ago) |
It might just be because I legitimately don't understand much of the suggestion, but I don't see any benefit to this...? Could you please try to elaborate on what you're trying to suggest? [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Fri, 25/12/2015 00:21 (8 Years ago) |
Unless you mean turning everything into an XD001-style thing, which I don't support at all. That just... what? First of all, why would you be hatching Shadow Pokémon? From what I know of Colosseum and XD, that's not how it works at all. And second, why would they all be Shadow to the point of appearance changes? Shadow Lugia was not only a unique experiment that was never reproduced, but also a failure, as you CAN purify it (that's how you get a Lugia with Psycho Boost!), while the experiment's point was to create something you couldn't purify. So it was a one-off thing, and it was also unsuccessful and not intended to be reproduced. And it also wasn't hatched from an Egg as a Shadow Pokémon. Not to mention that there's no actual benefit to making closed-hearted, evil Pokémon on an adoptable site wherein they would be desirable to PokéHeroes. Even in Colosseum and XD, your main objective was to purify them, so to collect them and make their shadow forms somehow more desirable isn't logical. So yeah, no support, sorry. [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Tue, 03/11/2015 22:17 (9 Years ago) |
You keep citing the "Do not tell anyone your code word," but deliberately excluding the context. The CONTEXT was "Be careful!" and "Remember that the more users who submit the correct word, the lower are your chances to win." I know that you are not a native English speaker, so you might not have realized that this context indicates advice rather than a rule. But when five people tell you that it was unclear, and clearly point out that it was the CONTEXT, you don't just cite the quote without context yet again and act as if it proves your point. And I've already said I don't care about the raffle. What I care about is how many people are being criticized as cheaters and repeatedly bashed, insulted and claimed to be "ruining the community" and how many oh-so-perfect people have apologized to you that we exist. This is clearly a violation of SITE RULE #1, which is PLAINLY stated and which is ALSO given the context of being on a Rules page. And yet no intervention is occurring, because it's okay for them to insult these "cheaters" who violated a rule that, as five people have pointed out, was very clearly in context that contradicted its status as obligation. And again, you keep citing the quote without context as if somehow that "undoes" the context around it. So yes. I think this is absurd. By the way, Reklaw: "Be careful! Don't go out in the rain. You'll get wet." "Do not" and "you shouldn't" are exactly synonymous. And by the way, cheating on the SATs is actually illegal. That would be more akin to a situation in which the site rules prohibited it, which they don't - they only mention Badges. EDIT: And, in fact, cheating IS clearly defined ON the rules page: Darktober is not on the site rules - in fact, cheating is defined there and literally doesn't mention events - and the only place it WAS mentioned AT ALL, as I've pointed out, was with context that implicitly contradicted it being a mandatory command rather than advice, and no, it's not just me saying this, because four other people have said the same, so obviously you should at least consider the possibility that your English might have been a bit unclear and do SOMETHING about the people who ARE violating site rule 1 and actively insulting people. [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Tue, 03/11/2015 02:37 (9 Years ago) |
If you understand the difference between "advice" and "rule," you should have no trouble understanding why saying "BE CAREFUL to not reveal the code word BECAUSE IT MAY NEGATIVELY IMPACT YOU" (advice, to be followed at the user's discretion) is different from "you are not ALLOWED to reveal the code word" (rule, to be followed with no questions asked). The wording was the former. It doesn't matter if one of the words is a command if the context clearly dictates that it is advice. I could say "Be careful! You shouldn't go outside, because it is raining!" This is advice. If you don't care that it's raining, you're going to go out anyway, right? Now, if I said "You're not allowed to go outside during this game," and you went outside, you would be cheating. But if you were just given advice and an example of what might happen if you don't follow it, without actually being told it's mandatory (and with it being implied that it's not if Riako is going to say "this will lower your own chance of winning" rather than "this isn't allowed"), then that's NOT cheating. Keife, the same goes for you. It was NEVER stated that you cannot, only that you should be careful not to if you don't want your own chances being lowered. Your example doesn't apply because we're not debating whether it should have been allowed, but whether it's at all okay for people who did it, when it was allowed, to be being treated as cheaters and repeatedly bashed and insulted. See the explanation above. [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Tue, 03/11/2015 00:20 (9 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Thu, 22/10/2015 00:51 (9 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Wed, 21/10/2015 04:07 (9 Years ago) |
Since I know she can't be the only shy person on the planet, and there IS a lot to do on the site that doesn't require public communication with people she doesn't know, I was thinking it might be a good idea to make that part of the tutorial optional, since it's currently barring site features? Maybe just having to go to the forums (so they know they're there) without having to actually post or something would help. Does that seem like a good idea to anyone? If not, is there a particular reason you're against making it optional? Thanks for your feedback! [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Wed, 21/10/2015 03:47 (9 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Mon, 19/10/2015 00:41 (9 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Thu, 15/10/2015 02:05 (9 Years ago) |
IT'S SO CUTE AAA [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:55 (9 Years ago) |
I already explained why that doesn't make sense, why that isn't the premise behind the idea (using the posts from the one whose idea it actually WAS to prove it) and also why that doesn't make sense or have anything to do with a public message board on everyone's profile. Beyond what I already explained to be false, you've said nothing BUT insulting us. [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:50 (9 Years ago) |
[Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:48 (9 Years ago) |
You're not "sticking up for" the idea; you're just insulting everyone who doesn't. You haven't actually provided a valid reason why it should be implemented. [Read more] |
CarpetMonster OFFLINE Forum Posts: 1,134 |
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:43 (9 Years ago) |
And you need to stop calling us stupid and intellectually inferior. DoncleCore, nobody is trying to get you banned. Almost everyone here has told you that already. [Read more] |
<-- Previous site || Next site -->