4 Forum Posts by "InfectedPickle"
That's a hell of a big baby, Wade. Congratulations!
Everything looks and sounds good a little bit sooner over here.
There are a lot of reasons the American administration is angry with France: 1) after weeks of personal conversation and debate with Colin Powell, the French and German secretaries to the UN went behind Powell's back and made a pact to veto any motion towards military action. This was as an embarrassing situation for Powell, who felt betrayed and compromised by two people whom he had a trust with. 2) Jacques Chirac's actions can be linked to personal problems as well. Having been in global politics since the 70's, he felt he was an elder statesman in in the world, especially because France has such close ties to most Middle Eastern nations, (including Iraq.) The American administration never consulted with him on their plans or opinions towards Iraq, and he felt personally slighted by it. He felt he had earned a place as a decision-maker and advisor towards relations with the Middle East, and his knowledge and expertise were being ignored. Consequently, he attempted to block all U.S. action.
In the end, the animosity is the result of people being unable to act like adults, (much less world leaders), and communicate their ideas and opinions in an open forum without worrying about petty, high school type social dynamics.
America is mad at France because they talked behind our back... so we aren't talking to them anymore. Tell Britain to tell France that I want an apology.
It seems a little strange to me that such guidelines exist in regards to voting. If one person blams an animation, regardless of how good it is, wouldn't the honest votes prevent its deletion from the website? Isn't that the reason for having a voting system in the first place, so that a single person can't be responsible for deleting a quality animation?
I admit, I vote harshly on animations I don't like. I also vote very high on ones that I do. There is going to be a trend towards "dark" voting on entries under judgement simply because there is so much more poor work being submitted there. Unfortunately, a lot more crap gets submitted than gems, so I don't see why I, or anybody else for that matter, should be punished for trying to thin the herd.
Also, I agree with the other user who brought up the point about displaying someone's blam statistics. If its bad to participate in blamming, then why is it public knowledge? Why is it something that someone can flaunt?
Besides, this very website discusses negative voting on its description of auras: "Dark: A user with a dark aura has a tendency to vote low on movies. Keep in mind, they don't have a dark aura because they vote low on bad movies - they have a dark aura because they vote low on movies that most other people find good. Users like this are either very critical or just plain mean and bitter. There is a lot of crap in the Portal that gets high marks, so just because someone has a dark aura doesn't necessarily mean they are an asshole. Heck, they might be helping clean out the crap."
If I am one of these Naughty Voters, then there are probably quite a few others out there like me, and I think we deserve the benefit of the doubt rather than a deleted account. At the very least, we deserve a personal notification, (a warning, a reminder of the voting guidelines), in our email accounts before we kicked off the website.
