Thumbs up to Firaxis!

[yin26]

Isaac was indeed warned by Markos in the past, something to the effect of: "I'm tired of seeing that kind of language from you. Do it again and you'll earn a vacation."

Markos is right. Try your luck again, Isaac, and see how long your NEXT vacation will be. Lord knows I criticize at times, but I find cursing at people the way you did to be way out of line.

[isaac brock]

I admit it was out of line. A strict warning would be just as effective though. If he had a problem at any time he could say "I'll ban you if you use that language again." And, as a result, I would have stopped doing that. I was getting carried away. Mark G, however, isn't a benevolent administrator. He's a swift vengeance, old-testament kind of administrator. Is he fair? Not as much as he could be. I'm not asking him to bend over backwards for me. Mark G would spend no more time warning me than banning me. I didn't think of the word pr*ck was as offencive as he did. As a result I was banned for a week. Fair? To those like you, who tremble before the mighty name of Sir Isaac Brock, I suppose it was. But to all those who have well-meaningly offended on the forums, understand my plight.

[Nemo]

to chop liver...errr, i mean Dan Magaha for keeping us updated and interested in his spare time!

for bringing the castle and replay back!
diplomacy
resourse usage and trade thereof
for all the other cool stuff that i forgot to mention (except map and unit graphics/coloring ...my opion there is still out to lunch until Oct 30)

[yin26]

Well, now you know that pr!ck is not a socially acceptable word. This is a good thing. Maybe saved you some trouble later on in life.

He's a swift vengeance, old-testament kind of administrator. Is he fair? Not as much as he could be.

He's generally fair...but his stripping me of my moderator status in the way he did does give some support for what you are saying. Yes, he can sometimes appear that way. In your case, however, I think it was fair.

Anyway. No harm no foul. You're back and all is well. It seems you are sincere about know you were out of line. As far as I'm concerned, then, it's good to have you back (did I say that? LOL!).

[SITS]

dp

[SITS]

Originally posted by isaac brock
I admit it was out of line. A strict warning would be just as effective though. If he had a problem at any time he could say "I'll ban you if you use that language again." And, as a result, I would have stopped doing that. I was getting carried away. Mark G, however, isn't a benevolent administrator. He's a swift vengeance, old-testament kind of administrator. Is he fair? Not as much as he could be. I'm not asking him to bend over backwards for me. Mark G would spend no more time warning me than banning me. I didn't think of the word pr*ck was as offencive as he did. As a result I was banned for a week. Fair? To those like you, who tremble before the mighty name of Sir Isaac Brock, I suppose it was. But to all those who have well-meaningly offended on the forums, understand my plight.

I don't it was so much the word pr!ck but the context you used it in. It was uncalled for.

Anyways as Yin says Welcome Back! And I hope your stay isn't interupted by forced vacations!

[Nemo]

hey, stop hijacking the thread already!
go make a new thread about how the admins are not good to the users, and i'll join you

[isaac brock]

Well, it's good, to be back, I'll admit, but it's for the last time. As I respond to my thread, it seems more and more ridiculous to bother. It is ludicrous to spend time on this speculatory and useless forum about a game no one owns. As a result, Sir General Isaac Brock, the late saviour of Upper Canada, must retire from these forums. Loved by many, whether openly or privately, I was driven out by a heartless half-mule, half-moderator, and many possibly well-meaning, but mostly evil naysayers. I won't miss any of you, the time I wasted on you has been more than any mere mortal could bear. Good night, and good luck.

[SITS]

Originally posted by isaac brock
Well, it's good, to be back, I'll admit, but it's for the last time. As I respond to my thread, it seems more and more ridiculous to bother. It is ludicrous to spend time on this speculatory and useless forum about a game no one owns. As a result, Sir General Isaac Brock, the late saviour of Upper Canada, must retire from these forums. Loved by many, whether openly or privately, I was driven out by a heartless half-mule, half-moderator, and many possibly well-meaning, but mostly evil naysayers. I won't miss any of you, the time I wasted on you has been more than any mere mortal could bear. Good night, and good luck.

Don't forget to shut the door after you.

Edit: Mark posted on 1/9/01 'isaac brock, the next time i see a comment like this by you, you'll find yourself on a "vacation" from the forums' when you refered to someone as an 'ass rapist.'

That to me seems like a clear warning. Thread can be found here.

(Nemo - threadjack over)

[jerkwaterbox]

How do you all feel knowing you have driven a fellow member off of the forums? I for one am saddened by the loss of Isaac. He brought some goodness to these here forums by contributing to discussions and voicing his opinions. Even though he used inappropriate language to get his point across, does that make what he has to say less important then yours? Does it make his opinions less valid? I say shame on you all, especially you SITS for taking pleasure in his departure.

Shame on you all.

[SITS]

Originally posted by jerkwaterbox
How do you all feel knowing you have driven a fellow member off of the forums? I for one am saddened by the loss of Isaac. He brought some goodness to these here forums by contributing to discussions and voicing his opinions. Even though he used inappropriate language to get his point across, does that make what he has to say less important then yours? Does it make his opinions less valid? I say shame on you all, especially you SITS for taking pleasure in his departure.

Shame on you all.

I took pleasure in his over dramatic departure - not the departure itself.

Please read what I wrote before about how valid his opinions were.

Nemo - Sorry about this...


er, to Firaxis for improving trade model...

[jerkwaterbox]

I personally see nothing wrong with the way he expresses his opinions. There is nothing wrong with swear words, we only think there is. There is no difference between swear words and regular words. We have been taught by society that swear words are wrong and should not be used. Think about it. If throughout the ages 'hog' had been considered the most offensive word out of them all(like the f word today), do you think we would use so freely it today? I know you all think I am just a jibber-jabbering moron, but when you sit and think about it, it might make more sense.

[Sarxis]

Wow! How on topic on we?

My earlier post about the whole American/British thing was in response to some earlier conversation here. To me, it doesn't really matter if the English are called 'English', or 'British'. But if any English people (or is that British?) have a preference, I would just call them whatever they wanted to be called.



But what does everyone else think about the Aerial View for cities? I think it is a nice extra

[yin26]

jerkwaterbox: You are right, of course, only in theory. Walk to a black inner-city neighborhood in Chicago and yell: "Hey ni**ers! Watermelon on sale today only!"

Hope you have some good handouts ready to explain your theory then.

[Faboba]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
Look- they called the U.S. 'Americans', even though the United States of America is a nation IN the Americas (and so is the Iroquois in a sense). So, they are calling the 'English'- Britains. Is this not true? Aren't the English also Britains? So what? Get over it please. Either way- Americans vs U.S.A.; English vs Britains; why does it matter?

Well as I said in another thread -----

Ironwood had made the comment -

Militaristic: A society can be considered "militaristic" when it considers military prowess to be a virture, usually a "manly" virtue. A culture that values the ability of raiders to defeat their tribal enemies would be considered militarist. A culture that believes every able bodied male should maintain some sort of military training, and his own weapons, would be considered militarist. The Greeks had a code like this (brought to it's full measure in the Spartans), as did the Germanic tribes (and the Germans up until after WWII). The Romans were like this (only warriors could vote in Rome). Once could say that while the Anglish were like this (continued in the attempts to force a militia system on the populace in their early days) the English (or rather, the British) were not.

Hense my reply --------

Excuse me for just a wee second.......


..... anglish...... sigh...... I don't know what's with people these days......

Now I vill say zis only WANZE

The English, being people from England are called English.
The Scottish, being people from Scotland, are called Scottish.
The Welsh, being people from Wales, are called Welsh.
The Northern Irish, being people from Nothern Ireland ( that is to say Nothern Ireland rather than northern ireland as it is a name not a description ) are called Northern Irish.
The church of England is the Anglican church.
The forfathers of those currently living in the land we call England, they themselves being called English, were called the Angles and the Saxons.
The Forefathers to the Scots, those being the people living in the lands we call Scotland, were the Scots....... from Ireland.

The British, being people from the united body reffered to as Great Britain are called the British, NOT the English.
The English, being people from England are called the English, NOT the Anglish.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, that being the generally recognised greatest authority on the English Language, that being the English mode of English, spoken by those in England as opposed to the American mode of English, spoken by those in America, has NO, I repeat NO, record of the word Anglish EVER having existed.

British can be used to describe someone from Great Britian. English can only be used to describe someone from ENGLAND. People from Great Britain CAN be English, but not all people from Great Britain are English.

Great Britain is the term now used for what was the British Empire. The majority of it's lands, that is not to say those oweing allegiance to the Crown on Great Britian, it's sovreign being Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, that is just to say those land currently conisder to be Great Britian, the majority of those lands are in the British Isles.

The largest single governing body within the British Isles is the United Kingdom of Great Britain ( or Great Britain, The United Kingdom, Britain or the UK if you prefer )

When the British Empire was the largest single governing entity in the world the parts of it were NOT part of the United Kingdom. They were part of the British Empire.

A citizen of the British Empire is British.
A citizen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, that being the large governing body in the British Isles can also be refered to as British.
Members of the British Empire, that being the empire not inclusive to that which is refered to as The United Kingdom of Great Britain, when the Empire was still in existence were all either conquered by soldiers acting on behalf of the Sovreign and Government of The United Kingdom of Great Britain as it existed at the time or had been colonised by order of Sovreign and Government of The United Kingdom of Great Britain as it existed at the time comprising mainly of citizens of The British Empire.

Which is why they were British.

Anyone in the British Empire was British.

They were subjects.

Scotland, was never conquered.

The United Kingdom is called the United Kingdom because it is a Monarchic Political Entity comprised of Unified States.

Those Unified States of the United Kingdom are England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Those from England are English and British.
Those from Scotland are Scottish and British.
Those from Wales are Welsh and British.
Those from Northen Ireland are Irish and British.

Those from Wales are British but not English.
Those from Northern Ireland are British but not English

And of most personal importance to myself, given I am from Scotland is;

Those from Scotland are British BUT NOT ENGLISH.

The English are British and speak English.
The Scots are British and speak English.
The British are British and speak English.

But the British are NOT all English

AND OF MORE PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE -

The Scottish are NOT ENGLISH.

And with that in mind I would prefer if you did not make comments as :

quote:

Once could say that while the Anglish were like this (continued in the attempts to force a militia system on the populace in their early days) the English (or rather, the British) were not.



When it should be;

Once could say that while the English were like this (continued in the attempts to force a militia system on the populace in their early days) the British were not.

THERE IS NO RATHER ABOUT IT.

Also I am pissed enough as it is at Firaxis for making the civilization 'The British' and not 'The English' right now so......

No, it doesn't make sense to you but thats cause you aren't Scottish. That being someone from Scotland ( meaning I don't care if all four of your Great Grandmothers were, it doesn't mean you are. )

Sorry to go on but really....... ANGLISH!!!!!!! To Describe the English. Because you were saving up English to describe those from Great Britain.

___________________________

People from the USA are called Americans.
The USA is called America
People from the USA are Americans ( all )
People who are American are from the USA.

( we're talking America the short form you United States of America as opposed the the continental landmass )

However as I said you can't just pretend the English and British are exchangable terms meaning the same, they DON'T.

You'll probably never understand..........