Digilady | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:17 pm  You mean, other than Tal works for the board & lied? Is in the Game, moreover? In chat, there were JOKES about ballot stuffing. Someone leave out your humor gene or what? False outrage - when it isn't yours, of course. |
Nikkid | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:18 pm  LMAO - Again - bring out the notes!!! Until then you are just a windbag blowing out foul-smelling air. |
Petunia | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:19 pm  You're full of crap, Nor. You started this thread by trashing Arreal AGAIN and then decided you'd milk it to get people to respond. I've been on this board for a while, and I was there last night and I can assure anyone that's reading that the discussion of the polls came about because we wanted a re-vote and as soon as Neil decided to cancel the vote, the subject was dropped. This is bullshit and you know it, Nor. |
Norequerdo | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:19 pm  hello..... deal with the issue. Its smoke screens again. Tell me why talis should be booted. |
Petunia | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:22 pm  Are you being deliberately obtuse? |
Nikkid | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:26 pm  Jeezus! To beat a dead horse: 1. (whack!) she used wet as a verb. 2. (whack!)She only talked sex to the audience - didn't see it in the house except for the wet verb. 3. (whack!)She's a moderator that misused her powers and posted and read out here. 4. (whack!)Claims no responsibilty for her actions (soul sister eh, nor?) and blames them on someone who asked if she could tell and then apologized profusely. 5. (whack!)She also did not tell wg's that she came out here (lying by omission). |
Lafatme | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:27 pm  nor, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! we tried to give you the benefit of the doubt because you were new here. your need to constantly post hateful, threatening, and rude messages is getting tiring. talk about hypocrisy? what was that "i support you arreal" banner all about? why don't you go away to wherever you are "old" and try to combine all your faces into one before you come back? you used to be annoying, now your just tired, and OLD news. |
Katie | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:29 pm  Tell me why ArReal should be banished for what she did? You know it seems to be as if you are try to do the same thing that ArReal did. You think you see some wrong doing and are trying to expose it just like she did. Why are you so on her about it when you are doing the same thing? |
Norequerdo | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:31 pm  Yes but the players dont have a problem with her do they. The players want her in the game. I dont believe that I started out the thread bashing arreal. I made a snide comment that she would be labeled an ArReal basher. That was not directed at ArReal but rather at peopole on the boards who take any criticism as bashing. I will have to check back on that. This has nothing to do with ArReal. Why do you feel a driving need to drag ArReal into this??? |
Sbw | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:36 pm  Nor, you left me off the list for last night, I was there. I think you have a few of your facts wrong again. Before you start posting you need to make sure you have things in order. For instance, this morning you even wondered how Gail could be reading this board. But yesterday you were running around posting everywhere about the incident... now today it is obvious you didn't have a clue about what was going on and from this thread it is obvious that you still don't know. As far as who said what last night... you were the one that was doing the most talking about how you could vote more than once. Everyone was upset about the situation with Gail/Talisker and you took it and ran with it. You were the one that was trying to get everyone to figure out a way to vote more than once. I didn't/don't know if that is even possible, unless we have friends that will vote too. Oh well..since you still new, I guess all can be forgiven. When are you going to be a regular here? |
Nikkid | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:37 pm  Ok (sigh) now we know your new spin... Back to square one. It's not about arreal as was posted numerous times - It's about talis not taking responsiblity for her actions and blaming them on someone else. But f*ck it... you will then turn this back to the voting issue! Just show us your damn notes... This is tiring and played out... I'm sure you will disregard the notes part -- AGAIN -- So C U Next Tuesday! |
Norequerdo | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:39 pm  I agree its played out. No problem there. |
Lafatme | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 09:45 pm  does that mean you're finally done? |
Whit4you | Saturday, October 14, 2000 - 10:23 pm  Gawd the paraniao around here is making me paranoid!! All these posts regarding people cheating by multiple voting - make NO sense to me. THINK people THINK. IF you totally disagree with cheating - would you GO out of your WAY to CHEAT to vote someone out because they CHEATED??? "I do NOT believe cheating is right, so I WILL cheat and vote the cheater OUT because CHEATING is NOT RIGHT" Does this make ANY logical sense to you?? It makes NO sense to me. IF I believed that CHEATING was ok enough to cheat myself then who would *I* vote for? I wouldn't be voting for the person who openly and repleatedly cheated since I obvoiusly think that cheating was OK myself. Who would *I* vote for if I believed that cheating was perfectly acceptable and am going to do it myself?? The person who tried to make the cheater look like the bad guy? The person who exposed the cheater. I dunno - I just don't get it. I personally think that it will ALL come out in the wash. The board out here clearly shows what the majority of people think about a moderator knowingly and willingly cheating in more then one aspect of this game. I'll admit that I am very confused by the current vote - I'll be posting a thread shortly on the ramifications of ArReal being banished on this re-vote and the possible issues it will raise and possible solutions. This post however really is focused on this insane who's cheating/who's not and why they are all implying the cheaters are voting for Tali. Face it - logically anyone who thinks cheating is totally wrong - enough to vote out Tali - because they feel cheating is WRONG - um - just makes no sense to me. As far as why anyone would CHEAT to vote out ArReal um - uh ... got me on that one - I posted a thread trying to get the 23 people who have so far voted for her to explain to me why - totally confused. I've only seen a few who are really against her at this point -over here. Am I paranoid? Am I thinking uh anyone who thinks that Gail is being persecuted for Cheating - and doesn't deserve to be banished for cheating well - what would you read as their take on cheating and how acceptable that is? I don't see this as paraniod at all. Makes perfect sense to me - that if I feel that Gail should NOT be banished for cheating - enough to now vote for ArReal - what would this tell YOU that I believe about cheating? Does this mean that I think people ARE cheating and voting for ArReal? There is nothing to indicate to me that that is a fact. Nothing. I am really not even implying that I think that people are cheating to vote for ArReal. I am only stating that I'll withold judgement and see how many of the 23 who felt passionately enough about this to vote her out - respond to the thread. That will be telling I think. It might also be surprising. Because I am totally clueless at this point as to why she's in a close 2nd to be banished. Cheating has always been an issue online and at times like THIS it becomes a hotbed of contention. Really there is nothing you can DO about cheaters - accept try to prevent it as much as possible. I believe that Neil is an honest person (however a very tired person perhaps not thinking clearly today - trying hard not to judge him for a possible ethical breach in his choise of Banners - but THAT in and of itself is its own topic <sigh> ) And I believe he will carefully examine the ISP's / times logged in / and so on and so forth of all the voters - and HONESTLY and FAIRLY determine which he believes are "multiples" The majority of people who voted 2 days ago - will vote again - ok? THOSE he can count first. So those 80 (or however many that was) should be counted first. All "new" names - should then be counted and if enough of those new names actually determined a outcome change in the vote - then it's time to concider the options. I totally believe my boyfriend has a right to vote (we'd be happy to make a quick call on our dime to confirm we are two seperate people involved in this) Any other "lurkers" who were outraged enough by this to register and let their voices be heard. But IF the outcome of the vote is determined by this influx of new posters - some possible options need to be raised and concidered I think. What options? Don't know any ideas?? Well how about a VOTE on this board at the same time - stating something to the effect of... "There's been a # of concerns raised regarding possible cheating. We think this Banishment vote is important enough that we'd like to try to do the right thing. We believe the best possible solution under the circumstances and for all parties concerned - would be to count ONLY the votes of Registered users who were registered users at the end of the original vote. In addition any Registered users who were posting to this board - prior to the orignal vote but who hadn't voted yet would also be counted. While we regret those who just decided to step up to the plate not being able to get their voices heard - we feel it is IN the best interest of the game at this point - to make sure that nobody has any doubts that the outcome of this vote is not tainted. Please vote YES if you agree with this decision. ====== Yes, I know that would disqualify Rex since he didnt POST here prior to this vote - but he agrees with me on this as well. Look - am I making a big deal out of nothing?? I don't think so - the ramifications of ArReal getting banished here - and it not being a clean vote, really aren't something I would want to be a part of. I hope you can see what a slippery slope that would be. Whitney |
Ocean_Islands | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 04:50 am  Whit could you please try to be more concise and get to the point more quickly instead of these long messages all the time? |
Solos | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 07:42 am  Tali was not in The Game to win it ! She was put in there to further advance The Game....The Mole of sorts! Katie it seems to me that YOU have far to much contact with Arreal and are personally involved with her as her friend and supporter. Arreal is doing more harm than good to herself by continuing to contact people on the outside of The Game. Gail posted 2 days into The Game because she was in there as a Mole , not to ever win but to have some fun and play. Then on hindsight told the Host she wanted to play by the rules like the other BGs. wella and so she did...all three of them were exposed for chatting on IM. If one is guilty of cheating so all 3 are. BUT what was discussed about The Game ? NOTHING , Gail shared personal information of who she was with Arreal and Arreal made a mountain out of a mole hill, instead of confronting Gail in front of the other BGs. which might of been more appropriate.....keep thier business in the house and work on the problem from the inside...NOT e-mail the Host asking about RE: Mole ????? RE: Mole and put the Host on the defense. Then to take it a step further sending another e-mail telling a spectator she (Arreal) was asking for an exit to The Game???? Why e-mail anyone to tell them this ? Wait until you are out of the house and then the truth will be known. Then Katie confirms Arreal is having trouble with her computer ???? Ok thanks for valadating information of which I for one took Arreal's word on.Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm!!!! And so Nor I also have to agree to some level with you....alot of cheating going on ....dam can't even play a virtual game without cheating. Ocean I agree with you...and I apologize for a lengthy post. |
Teebird | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 07:49 am  Okay some think that ArReal blew things out of proportion and I am not here to argue. I have made a couple other post this morning and I failed to mention that I think ArReal is walking close to the line of cheating as well as Tali and Vykin. BUT, my question becomes this...if Tali/Gail is "playing" the game as a regular player NOW, then why is she not confronting this issue head on? I personally only found this board towards the end of BB so I don't know alot of the players. I wouldn't classify myself as a newbie, in the fact that I was here prior to The Game. And I am not here to bash, but I do have a problem with Tali/Gail right now because she is being "sneak." She has had no true interaction with any of the BG's since all the information came out and this makes me think she has something to hide. Now I am not saying she does, it is just that funny gut feeling. |
Wcv63 | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 08:30 am  I too was willing to let by and be bygones with Talisker. Afterall she can't win the grand prize what's the harm. But her continued sniping and digs at Arreal as if Arreal were the cause of all the problems is starting to piss my off. Arreal owned up to her part in this clusterphuck and apologized. Gail, instead of accepting the apology and playing the damn game, has taken every opportunity to snipe at Arreal. She has not once owned up to her own responsibility and involvement. She has not apologized for putting Arreal and Vykin in the position of having to keep a secret that made them uncomfortable. |
Digilady | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 08:35 am  IMHO, Tal is sniping at ArReal to get herself voted out. Honorable thing to do, but... caught! LOL |
Ocean_Islands | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 09:32 am  Why should Talisker be kept in? See thread on this subject. |
Katie | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 11:33 am  Need to remember that prior to this game, Gail and Kearie were having issues. Before the game started Gail started an BanishKearie movement. The sniping is real. |
Digilady | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 01:19 pm  Katie - I remember reading somewhere that Tal would "pick on someone" to get herself booted. What you said puts a whole new meaning... but, if they had issues, why would Tal invite her into a chat to discuss her mom? The plot thickens... |
Katie | Sunday, October 15, 2000 - 01:29 pm  The whole premise of picking on someone to get booted was to keep her from winning because she had to leave before winning because she can't win the prize. She herself changed that because she decided to play like everyone else. |