Motion Fails

No way. Without haters this place is a mogue

Blanch32 wrote:No way. Without haters this place is a mogue

The fuk is a mogue?

No to all bans. Bunch of assholes.

DWags wrote:

The fuk is a mogue?

I say ban blanche's ass until he learns how to to fuking spell

DWags wrote:No to all bans. Bunch of assholes.

I'd go with bunch of middle school girls.

Wait, #NotForbin

NigelUno wrote:

Are you raising a motion?

Why are you constantly posting questions?

NigelUno wrote:

I don't know?

Don't Ephors know everything?

Just another example of how Nigel is ruining this board with his attention whoring. Off to tcock.

Not even interested in the "Its all about Nigel" thing. Later. Going to tCock to talk football.


Lame...........................

63% for. Lol

Why are you guys doing this to the tSwill?

For fun.

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:For fun.

Looks like Nigel's schticks are going to save him.   

Tanfan! wrote:

Looks like Nigel's schticks are going to save him.   

There have been 32 votes in the Ban Nigel vote. I think SRC posted recently that there were 200 members of the Germans and you need to have half of them vote and have 2/3 of that number vote for a banning.

So I don't really think it's happening. But **** Nigel, I hope that motherfucker burns in hell and gets banned. When we only get 45 votes this time, I say we propose it again and maybe we'll get 50 next time. Oh, also I changed my vote to No. I think that might be a pretty big swing. I might change it back tomorrow, though.

Like I said, more and more posters are realizing just how bad Nigel is.

NigelUno wrote:Bump.

Don't forget to vote.

Are any of these ballots getting anywhere near the vote totals needed?

Jake from State Farm wrote:

NigelUno wrote:Bump.

Don't forget to vote.

Are any of these ballots getting anywhere near the vote totals needed?

No, and that's kind of by design. It's not supposed to be easy to boot people. Although the Nigel vote might serve as an interesting kind of "opinion poll" indicator. A "no confidence" vote if you will. Sends a stern message.

Heat Miser wrote:

#ff0033]]No, and that's kind of by design[/size]. It's not supposed to be easy to boot people. Although the Nigel vote might serve as an interesting kind of "opinion poll" indicator. A "no confidence" vote if you will. Sends a stern message.

that's your answer to everything.


 

Toe wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

#ff0033]]No, and that's kind of by design[/size]. It's not supposed to be easy to boot people. Although the Nigel vote might serve as an interesting kind of "opinion poll" indicator. A "no confidence" vote if you will. Sends a stern message.

that's your answer to everything.

 

When things fall under "No censorship" and/or "No banning" (subject to provider terms or other extreme circumstances), yes, that is my answer. Those two rules are pretty much the entire reason for tSwill's existence and the essence of the "design" IMHO.

Toe wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

#ff0033]]No, and that's kind of by design[/size]. It's not supposed to be easy to boot people. Although the Nigel vote might serve as an interesting kind of "opinion poll" indicator. A "no confidence" vote if you will. Sends a stern message.

that's your answer to everything.


 

Well considering the questions that get asked, it usually IS the answer.

Heat Miser wrote:

When things fall under "No censorship" and/or "No banning" (subject to provider terms or other extreme circumstances), yes, that is my answer. Those two rules are pretty much the entire reason for tSwill's existence and the essence of the "design" IMHO.

designed indifference?????

how Nigelesque.