Man of Honour
It's not that kind of place...that's for the super special section by invite only.Cant wait to get on to MM to see if anyone wants my junk....
It's not that kind of place...that's for the super special section by invite only.Cant wait to get on to MM to see if anyone wants my junk....
Oh can't go linking my onlyfans?It's not that kind of place...that's for the super special section by invite only.
Bumping a one year old thread with an irrelevant single word answer isn't a good start btw.... Just sayin'Oh wow. I've always maintained a quality > quantity stance. Gutted that I'm going to lose access to MM after all these years, but not willing to spam just to maintain it.
What are you even talking about? Don't be unreasonably trying to make me look like a fool Feek. I'll risk getting banned before taking that kind of punking lying down.Bumping a one year old thread with an irrelevant single word answer isn't a good start btw.... Just sayin'
Careful @Feek we got a hard man over hereDon't start with me. I'm not the one.
I'm not a hard man, but I'm not about to take disrespect quietly. Talking about resurrecting threads. I'm ready to start typing battle raps like it's 2008 in here.Careful @Feek we got a hard man over here
It is almost as if you are behaving like you haven't been a regular contributor to a forum for a decade plus.I'm not a hard man, but I'm not about to take disrespect quietly. Talking about resurrecting threads. I'm ready to start typing battle raps like it's 2008 in here.
It was a totally irrelevant response to a thread that was over a year old.EDIT: do you mean when I replied "...extinguish" to the post about the SystemD guy moving to Microsoft? If so, I didn't even notice the age of that thread, and that comment is perfect in the form of a singular word. Don't start with me. I'm not the one.
You bumped a year old thread with a single word and I pointed that out.I'm not a hard man, but I'm not about to take disrespect quietly. Talking about resurrecting threads. I'm ready to start typing battle raps like it's 2008 in here.
Next time you delete one of my comments I expect to see stronger justification, unless you want the community to think you are a hypocrite.
Let's let sleeping dogs lie.Oops
Not necessary, but that is the politest way, I've ever been told to STFU. Thank you!Petition to exempt DeeJay-Mo from the rule change and re-grant his access to MM without the need to post any further.
Is it not possible to take into account members who have high trust feedback too?
It seems a bit unfair to remove for those who have dozens of solid items or purchases over the years.
Is it not possible to take into account members who have high trust feedback too?
It seems a bit unfair to remove for those who have dozens of solid items or purchases over the years.
Imo your "reputation" and general interaction across the forum is part of the access requirements. If you aren't active then how can people see that you will be around to handle any transactions/problems. Equally if you aren't "invested" in the forum then losing access isn't really a deterrent for bad MM behaviourIs it not possible to take into account members who have high trust feedback too?
It seems a bit unfair to remove for those who have dozens of solid items or purchases over the years.
I guess that comes down to interpretation of the term 'active'.Imo your "reputation" and general interaction across the forum is part of the access requirements. If you aren't active then how can people see that you will be around to handle any transactions/problems. Equally if you aren't "invested" in the forum then losing access isn't really a deterrent for bad MM behaviour