Did you forget again that your thread got locked because of the hysteria and the fact that there was already a thread made for people to post their reviews, negative and positive?bjmdds wrote:I authored a thread with 3048 responses at MI6 before the Mods locked it at MI6, while it was going strong, so his arguement does not hold water.
Overdramatic? I am anything but. I stated a fact Stocks. Vine is not enjoyed at MI6, he is kept on for levity by the overwhelming masses,and is never taken seriously. I did not realize Tubes was referring to me per se, in his comments, but it does me no enjoyment, to be one of only 3 remaining in a site that boasts over 10,000 members Stocks, at MI6, that gets no respect from it's opposing members. You are 1 of the 3, at best here as you say, among less than 300 members. You have contrary opinions to this site. How are you treated here?stockslivevan wrote:Did you forget again that your thread got locked because of the hysteria and the fact that there was already a thread made for people to post their reviews, negative and positive?bjmdds wrote:I authored a thread with 3048 responses at MI6 before the Mods locked it at MI6, while it was going strong, so his arguement does not hold water.
You're being overdramatic as usual BJ. That's why Tubes said you had no balls, because you don't stay over at MI6 and keep defending your opinion. Look at Lazenby and Charles Vine. They have negative opinions of CR but do they back down because of the overwhelming majority? No. They keep standing and stick to their guns instead of hiding in a place where virtually every member (except three at best) agrees with eachother while patting eachother on the back.
Don't cower. If I were to doing that, you guys wouldn't even be talking with me.
Yet you twist them by not acknowledging the fact that there was already a sticky thread for people to post their reviews in. Your thread would have been locked if it had only five posts like every other one that contradicts the rules. But because your thread had a lot of posts, MI6 mods gave it pass and let it go one for awhile until ranting ensued that they had to close it down.Overdramatic? I am anything but. I stated a fact Stocks.
Simon™ wrote:God d**nit this topic is p*****g me off. A lot of small people with big words and and even bigger egos. Debating is one thing, arguing is another. Its a fine line that has been crossed by a long way far too many times. If you want to repeatedly argue, bitch and fight the same points, with the same people, day in, day out, get MSN and take it elsewhere. At its lowest level its mere spamming, which is as good a reason as any for ANY other topc to be locked. Quite why this one has not come up for the same treatment I dont know, however, lets make some things nice and clear and final:
* Insults are not allowed
* Personal Attacks are not allowed
* Flaming/trolling or leading others into doing so is not allowed
* Saying the same thing over, and over, and over, and over, and over where not meaningful, on topic, or after warnings is at best spam (ie, up to interpretation), and at worst, against the very rules each and every member agreed to upon registration
This isnt a place for craig haters or craig lovers to group out and fight. Its not a place for any people to group out for anything. This is a part of MI6Forums like any other, and frankly I'm sick of it bypassing the rules. This topic is now CLOSED. If any of the few genuine posters in this topic wishes to start a new thread to discuss weather or not people will boycott CR, as the original topic was, then by all means do so. Just do it in the knowledge that if it, like any other topic, descends into childish bickering, personal insults and any other content that has scant regard for forum rules and policies, it will be closed, too.
If he enjoys 'getting a rise' out of anyone, he should not be a moderator Stocks, for that is like being a judge in someone's own trial, and not impartial, agree?stockslivevan wrote:Was it Luds? I'll admit he is a loose cannon and he loves to get a rise out of the anti-craig and Brosnan supporters. But don't let it end like that. Just keep posting on the sticky thread and if Luds messes with you again I'd be right beyond you (believe it or not). You're only letting Luds win by backing out.
When all this occurred, he gets pissed off. Why shouldn't any mod?* Insults are not allowed
* Personal Attacks are not allowed
* Flaming/trolling or leading others into doing so is not allowed
* Saying the same thing over, and over, and over, and over, and over where not meaningful, on topic, or after warnings is at best spam (ie, up to interpretation), and at worst, against the very rules each and every member agreed to upon registration
I agree that MI6 isn't corrupt, but Luds is. You didn't answer, but was he the one that deleted your "democracy" post?bjmdds wrote:If he enjoys 'getting a rise' out of anyone, he should not be a moderator Stocks, for that is like being a judge in someone's own trial, and not impartial, agree?stockslivevan wrote:Was it Luds? I'll admit he is a loose cannon and he loves to get a rise out of the anti-craig and Brosnan supporters. But don't let it end like that. Just keep posting on the sticky thread and if Luds messes with you again I'd be right beyond you (believe it or not). You're only letting Luds win by backing out.
Then he should have reprimanded ALL those who did that and thrown them off of the forum, as would have been fair, correct? My contention was to maintain the most popular thread by eliminating those who lowered the debate. The problem is, they wanted a reason to lock it due to it's obvious popularity.stockslivevan wrote:I never said it was related to you, I was addressing why the thread was closed, the one that made that big count of 3048 responses, a majority of them getting out of hand. Simon had more reasons other than "pissing me off" and it is on the same quote I put up.
When all this occurred, he gets pissed off. Why shouldn't any mod?* Insults are not allowed
* Personal Attacks are not allowed
* Flaming/trolling or leading others into doing so is not allowed
* Saying the same thing over, and over, and over, and over, and over where not meaningful, on topic, or after warnings is at best spam (ie, up to interpretation), and at worst, against the very rules each and every member agreed to upon registration
Not surprised.bjmdds wrote:YES
I'm sure you've learned never to underestimate again. Do you think Bond 22 will do fairly the same as CR or do you predict it will make as much as you suggested on that old quote?bjmdds wrote:I am as outraged as is 78% of the people polled on AOL that Craig has been selected, or has he, as the next Bond. He is a cross betweenn an ugly Steve Mcqueen and Yasser Arafat! It is ridiculous to think women find him attractive. Martin Campbell, the director, showed no direction, wanting Goran, the croatian, to play Bond. Ms. Brocolli, showed no logic, in wanting Craig, her cheaply priced croney, to play Bond. Mr. Wilson, showed no touch of reality in wanting a 22 year old Cavill play Bond. Sony got it right: Brosnan for this film, decide in 2008 who is next. Craig's Bond will gross under 100 million in the USA, and under 300 million worldwide. Campbell said one thing correctly; we, the paying public, will hang them from the yardarm if they get it wrong.....guess what, get the noose ready!!! Craig will be fired after this film flops, and 54 year old Brosnan will be begged by Sony to come back for Bond 22, to once again, save the franchise.....remember Barbara, never....never say never again...never say never again......I will stay away from this movie with Craig, as will MILLIONS of other fans......this is an insult to our collective Bond intelligence.....I rest my case.....
Of course, and it did happen to certain members, especially a fairly very infamous one known as bond_fan.bjmdds wrote:Then he should have reprimanded ALL those who did that and thrown them off of the forum, as would have been fair, correct?
Yet Simon was willing to let another BOYCOTT thread be made so the slate would be clean without any dour posts making up most of it. It's not like you weren't allowed to make another boycott thread unless it got filled with trollery.My contention was to maintain the most popular thread by eliminating those who lowered the debate. The problem is, they wanted a reason to lock it due to it's obvious popularity.
I agree. The US has been very fickle to the point of having really dour films break box office records like Spider-Man 3. I still can't believe stuff like Wild Hogs and National Treasure make a lot of bucks.bjmdds wrote:Internationally Bond 22 should equal CR, but it will be tough to pass it, even given slighter higher ticket prices. I do think that the USA total will be less than CR and DAD, for DC has not been received well here and CR was more hype than substance. But, who knows.
Bond_Fan was anti Craig. Name one pro-Craig member who was banned? Also, I returned recently to MI6's forum and started a new thread naming Bond 22 The Bourne Mimicry. It was locked within a short time as well.stockslivevan wrote:Of course, and it did happen to certain members, especially a fairly very infamous one known as bond_fan.bjmdds wrote:Then he should have reprimanded ALL those who did that and thrown them off of the forum, as would have been fair, correct?
Yet Simon was willing to let another BOYCOTT thread be made so the slate would be clean without any dour posts making up most of it. It's not like you weren't allowed to make another boycott thread unless it got filled with trollery.My contention was to maintain the most popular thread by eliminating those who lowered the debate. The problem is, they wanted a reason to lock it due to it's obvious popularity.
National Treasure? Nicholas Cage? Not for my taste. Did you see it? I have not seen the first one yet.stockslivevan wrote:I agree. The US has been very fickle to the point of having really dour films break box office records like Spider-Man 3. I still can't believe stuff like Wild Hogs and National Treasure make a lot of bucks.bjmdds wrote:Internationally Bond 22 should equal CR, but it will be tough to pass it, even given slighter higher ticket prices. I do think that the USA total will be less than CR and DAD, for DC has not been received well here and CR was more hype than substance. But, who knows.
It's no surprise to me that the US didn't embrace Craig as much as the rest of its neighbors. So perhaps the international audiences will keep the Craig films alive while Americans miss out on his era like they did with Dalton.