ChatPS Watch News and Information Board

Gavin Scott · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.21

WillPS wrote: I mean that it seems fairly obvious to me that there is some [deep-]rooted resentment against those involved with ChatPS by the higher-ups on here.

Well you used Metropols chat facility for a long time - Jon and David did certainly. It was turned off because it had an impact on the main site - the speed, bandwidth, whatever. We expected you to find another one, and you did one better and opened your own.

Where would the logic be in having resentment about that?

I wasn't overly keen in the signatures you adopted because those spoof topic titles did appear on the face of it to be taking the piss out of the eclectic discussions held here.

Or am I mistaken about them?

In any event, if you have a chip on your shoulder about what the "higher ups" think about ChatPS, I can tell you I really didn't give it much thought.

bilky asko · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.37

Gavin Scott wrote:I wasn't overly keen in the signatures you adopted because those spoof topic titles did appear on the face of it to be taking the piss out of the eclectic discussions held here.

Or am I mistaken about them?

You are mistaken. The signature denotes the topic of discussion. Several recent examples include "SAVE CLIVE HOLLAND!", where we were talking about Clive Holland's unfair dismissal; "Why does Jon Wells use a Mac when they're awful" (or words to that effect), as we were talking about Jon Wells's Mac being poor at compressing video and; "You might not know it, but we're not a clique", as we were discussing the unfounded allegation of being a clique, which happened to be just after some Peter Simon discussion the night before.

James L H · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.42

bilky asko wrote:
Gavin Scott wrote:I wasn't overly keen in the signatures you adopted because those spoof topic titles did appear on the face of it to be taking the piss out of the eclectic discussions held here.

Or am I mistaken about them?
You are mistaken. The signature denotes the topic of discussion. Several recent examples include "SAVE CLIVE HOLLAND!", where we were talking about Clive Holland's unfair dismissal; "Why does Jon Wells use a Mac when they're awful" (or words to that effect), as we were talking about Jon Wells's Mac being poor at compressing video and; "You might not know it, but we're not a clique", as we were discussing the unfounded allegation of being a clique, which happened to be just after some Peter Simon discussion the night before.

Maybe the situation could be rectified with a signature like this being used?

Gavin Scott · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.43

And tonight's topic title, "Cyberbullying" - care to elaborate there, or is it implied?

bilky asko · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.47

Gavin Scott wrote:And tonight's topic title, "Cyberbullying" - care to elaborate there, or is it implied?

Let me change that for you.

Gavin Scott · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.50

So you are suggesting you're being cyber bullied?

bilky asko · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.53

Gavin Scott wrote:So you are suggesting you're being cyber bullied?

It was a reference to you telling me to shut up and fuck off. I think it's akin to it, if not cyberbullying itself.

James L H · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.54

Gavin Scott · Sat 23 Feb, 2013 23.56

Are you serious? A direct disagreement and a swear word and you'd cry bully against me in a public banner?

I'm absolutely gobsmacked that you'd say that

bilky asko · Sun 24 Feb, 2013 00.03

Gavin Scott wrote:Are you serious? A direct disagreement and a swear word and you'd cry bully against me in a public banner?

I'm absolutely gobsmacked that you'd say that

Don't try to ameliorate what you've said after the fact.

James L H · Sun 24 Feb, 2013 00.06

Image re-hosted from this link (saved onto Metro for prosperity): http://chat.willps.com/tonight/hoy.png