I don't understand where VGChartz censoring limits are. Confusing!

Sexual threads... Everything's fine! No locking.

Global Climate Change and Scientology is wrrrrroooong! Bad members! Don't talk about it!!! Shut up!!! Thread locked.

We weren't even insulting each other and sure it can get intense... But it makes an intelligent discussion and raises a certain interest.

I don't see how it's worse than debates about Wii, 360 and PS3. People do get carried away but that's what mods are there for... No?

ROFL @ this thread.

That's funny that you accuse me of being a homophobe?

Where do you get that from?

I never even took a stance on the subject, I merely stated that one could easily make an arguement against homosexuality without religious law as their basis.

I don't know if you or anyone has heard of the band Sigur Ros, but they are probably one of the bands I admire most out there.  Their lead singer, Jonsi, is gay, but what comes out of his mouth is the most beautiful thing I've ever heard.  I think it's funny that you are accusing me of being a homophobe when one of the people I look up to most is, in fact, gay.

You should really watch before you start making accusations towards other people, you'll end up making yourself look silly.

most religious discussions usually go no were, i still think we should talk about it though as long as no one insults anyone or a religion, same for any other controversial discussions.

the problem is how do you define an "insult" and how do you define an "opinion" users may differ on there interpretation of posts

Fish Joes pretty strict

that is up to the mods lol

only partically, users can help define the differences forcing us mods to moderate those user defined differences.

ssj12

without knowing how you were using the term cult and without knowing your particular thoughts on religion...i really cant determine if you are being wrongfully censored.

What i know is... that the last scientology thread was not conducive for a healthy discussion. So it seems unlikely a future one would go much better.

And that you are likely over-reacting about the universe topic. (Unless you had wanted to tell people that everything but what you think is stupid)

I don't want to be nagging, but Naz did mention earlier that he wanted to make a rule where you couldn't edit posts you were quoting. I don't know to what extent he was talking about (like bolding, coloring?) but he seemed rather serious about it.

To be honest I don't see the problem with it, it's not harming other people. Just because naz finds it annoying, we should make it law?

I'm all for warning people for doing MEAN edits to posts they've quoted, but getting warned/banned just for changing part of the quote? What if it's too long and you are only addressing part of it? What if you just want to make a humorous remark?

Worst idea for a rule evarrrrrrr.

I still love you naz.