Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentAuthorchris g
    • CommentTimeDec 17th 2009
    can we has a thread to talk about Warren's new Iron Man issue?
    • CommentAuthorOda
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2009
    Will I live to see the IDNNTST imagethread resurrected?
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2009 edited
    Will I live to see the IDNNTST imagethread resurrected?
    Probably not.* It turned into an idiot magnet every time.

    (*Unless Warren wants to gather all the idiots in one place at some point in the future so I can weapons test. In which case, even if it does come back, you may not want to trust it.)
  1.  (5.304)
    Can I please get a definintion of "Arsehole" I'm British so i'm have a pretty good Idea, but I just want to know the difference whether calling someone a neferious cunt makes me an "Arsehole" because I used the word Neferious before Cunt or because I used the word "Cunt".
  2.  (5.305)
    "When in doubt: just don't be an arsehole."

    I think calling someone a cunt is a somewhat arsehole-ish thing to do, personally.
  3.  (5.306)
    Mister Farrar, using the word cunt makes you an arsehole, using the word "neferious" merely makes you less literate than you think you are.
  4.  (5.307)
    Question: There were some people who were talking about going to C2E2 (now ~2 weeks away), but the thread got mummified. [EDIT:] Since I'd like to meet up with other Whitechapel people there, [END EDIT] should I just make another C2E2 based thread OR can the original thread be resurrected?

    I'm not sure who to direct this to, so I'm putting it in here. Thanks.
    • CommentTimeMar 30th 2010
    This is actually a really good example of why it's not a good idea to start an even thread until, you know, closer to the event. Even threads that don't auto-lock often get buried and forgotten when they're posted months out. Why don't you start a new roll-call thread the actual week of the convention since, honestly, there's sure to be people that don't even know if they're going yet, especially during tax-return season.
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2010
    @Ariana and Warren (possibly more Ariana)

    Just a suggestion: After having noticed the absurd amount of posts attached to THE RULES, and wading through 16 pages of comments on THE RULES, including essential repetition of the same questions (and an alarming obsession with eels), I'm just wondering if it'd make sense to separate THE RULES from the questions by creating a FAQ section?

    THE RULES could simply list the rules (which, let's face it, are fairly straight forward) without all the clutter. While the FAQ section could cover all the other bits and pieces, many of which could be (and have been in this thread) fielded by other WHITECHAPEL folk who know the correct answer. Then, if people read the FAQs first, this thread could be less than 16 pages long, especially when you consider how little space the rules actually take up.

    I also propose a blanket ban on "why was my thread canceled?" as a legitimate question, a moratorium on questioning THE RULES (there's only 5 and they're noy confusing!) and suggest the first post in FAQ be "If YOU think you have reason to question if you're being an arse-hole, perhaps you should re-think your post". I know it's not an actual question but valid, nevertheless.

    Odds are you've probably considered this already, but I've not seen any other mention of it.

  5.  (5.310)
    Funny, I'd been thinking about something similar.

    That said, ANY thread on here will end up 16 pages long...!
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2010
    Yep. After I posted the above I had a look at the HOW TO USE WHITECHAPEL thread and that's 20 pages dealing with the same sort of stuff.
    • CommentTimeApr 15th 2010
    I assume our ever-vigilant hosts would notice eventually, but I wanted to point out that new user louisvuitton is on a minor spam-rampage (a spampage?).
  6.  (5.313)
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2010
    > a moratorium on questioning THE RULES (there's only 5 and they're noy confusing!)

    There was a 6th rule too, added on page 4 -- "New rule: THERE IS NO CRYING IN WHITECHAPEL".
    • CommentAuthordr.miklow
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2010 edited
    Ah, I may have just broke the personal fiction rule, but am not sure (it sadly isn't really fiction, just some non-sense I wrote) Sorry, long-time fan but new to whitechapel. I just found this thread. Like an arse I posted before reading the rules, apologies. Won't happen again. I would like to delete but am not sure how.
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2010
    > I would like to delete but am not sure how.

    At the top-right corner of each post is a number like "(5.315)".
    If the post is yours, then it also says "edit" next to this number: you can click on the word "edit", to edit an existing post.
    You can't delete the post, but you can edit/delete the post's content: replace the post's content with a remark such as "Edited to remove fiction".
    • CommentAuthordr.miklow
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2010
    • CommentTimeApr 27th 2010
    Oh dear...I could be wrong, but I suspect Blogs: Reviews may just be spam...
    • CommentTimeApr 27th 2010
    It may my faulty brain that's to blame here, but did my last post (about Mike Skinner) from the Matt Smith Who thread get deleted for some reason? If so, apologies if I got too much nerd stank over the place - I like it here and it'd be nice to avoid repeating whatever it was I said that was out of line, so any feedback would be much appreciated. Thanks.
  7.  (5.320)
    Wasn't me.