Log In
Normal Weather Castform Don't have an account yet? Register now!
.

Forum Search

I'm Feeling Lucky

Searching for: Posts from CarpetMonster.
Posted: Sun, 17/04/2016 01:06 (6 Years ago)
My favorite is Nidoran! <3

[Read more]
Posted: Sun, 14/02/2016 23:45 (6 Years ago)
Huh, that's weird. This page claims 5355, but I just checked its own page and it does say 4080. The error is definitely on Bulbapedia's end.
Thanks for pointing that out! o.o

[Read more]
Posted: Sun, 14/02/2016 23:38 (6 Years ago)
I was just asked which out of Mawile, Corphish and Barboach hatches at 4080 EHP. None of them do according to Bulbapedia. (All three should be 5355.)

[Read more]
Posted: Tue, 19/01/2016 00:55 (6 Years ago)
Oh wow, I forgot about this. XD Bump?

[Read more]
Posted: Thu, 31/12/2015 15:44 (6 Years ago)
I guess I'd like to claim Zygarde, given that it's the origin of my username and kind of my "thing" here on PH anyway. XD
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]
Posted: Tue, 29/12/2015 07:56 (6 Years ago)
I personally support the original, not just a popup, because the whole point is that you would be clearly told what you are selling on a new page, which would be harder with a popup because you can't scroll down with popups.
But yes, I support the original suggestion~
(Just not Cliff_Armor's modification. Sorry!)

[Read more]
Posted: Sun, 27/12/2015 08:32 (6 Years ago)
When you're making a suggestion, the question you ask shouldn't be "what's the loss," but "what's the gain?"
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]
Posted: Fri, 25/12/2015 00:21 (6 Years ago)
Canonically, Shadow Pokémon don't even look different from normal Pokémon... so what would be the point?
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]
Posted: Tue, 03/11/2015 22:17 (6 Years ago)
The word "context" means "the parts of something written or spoken that immediately precede and follow a word or passage and clarify its meaning."
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:
Quote4.1 Cheating includes the use of external software to simplify any feature in this game, but also taking advantage of any kind of bug. It is absolutely forbidden to cheat in any way to ensure fairness between each player.
4.2 Do not spoil information about how to obtain badges to other members. It is likewise forbidden to ask other users for any kind of information regarding that matter. Getting badges is meant to be a personal goal that every user should accomplish for their own sake.

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]
Posted: Tue, 03/11/2015 02:37 (6 Years ago)
Reklaw, you obviously didn't read my post.
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]
Posted: Tue, 03/11/2015 00:20 (6 Years ago)
Trollkitten and Loketoke summed up my thoughts on "cheating" perfectly. I honestly don't care about not getting the Darkrai because I probably wouldn't have won it anyway, but I'm extremely bothered by the amount of bashing these so-called "cheaters," including myself, are getting. Riako, I get that English isn't your first language, so obviously I don't blame you for the rather ambiguous wording, but for future reference, if you say "be careful" and then elaborate on why it isn't in someone's best interests, that generally means a given command is advice, not a rule. So please, I don't expect you to redistribute the Shiny or anything like that, but at least make this clearer in the future and try to intervene in regards to the constant "I'm so disappointed in the cheaters," "ban the cheaters from all events for six months," "this community is saddening" and so on, all of which are ACTUAL THINGS that people have said.

[Read more]
Posted: Thu, 22/10/2015 00:51 (6 Years ago)
Everything in the Game Center is supposed to be luck-based, because making them exclusively skill-based would make it too easy to get a surefire way to get the prizes. This is already the most skill-based game in the Game Center. Being able to know for sure how to win would make it way too easy. And let's remember that there are prizes for this game. Making it any easier than it is now by letting people know what all of the cards are (and, as has been mentioned, easily being able to cheat by screenshotting them) would make it blatantly overpowered - you would be guaranteed Game Chips in higher quantities than any other game, without any risk at all - and it's already so much so that you have to wait between rounds because of how incredibly high the payout is compared to other Game Center games. No support.

[Read more]
Posted: Wed, 21/10/2015 04:07 (6 Years ago)
One of my friends is actually really shy and is legitimately stressed over having to post in the forums. Unfortunately, she needs to do so to complete the tutorial, and parts of the site are (understandably) restricted until you finish the tutorial, regardless of Trainerlevel.
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]
Posted: Wed, 21/10/2015 03:47 (6 Years ago)
7894!!

[Read more]
Posted: Mon, 19/10/2015 00:41 (6 Years ago)
You might be mistaken in your notes. Given that Latios and Latias are only one letter off, it's not that hard a mistake to make. I have been doing exactly the same strategy and this hasn't happened to me at all.

[Read more]
Posted: Thu, 15/10/2015 02:05 (6 Years ago)
7.5k for the Jack-o-Lantern one?
IT'S SO CUTE AAA

[Read more]
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:55 (6 Years ago)
Dhoulmagus, your only explanation was "The premise behind the idea is so you have more control on how to interact with people other than sit and wait for a message back."
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]
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:50 (6 Years ago)
You can explain what led you to believe that any of us was trying to get you banned. If I understood correctly, you said someone told you we said that? Who told you that and can you provide a screenshot?

[Read more]
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:48 (6 Years ago)
We're not "slandering" the idea; we're disagreeing with it and explaining why.
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]
Posted: Wed, 22/07/2015 21:43 (6 Years ago)
Dhoulmagus, we're all trying to make you see our argument just as much as you are yours. We're just not insulting you and are actually explaining our points.
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 -->