[mtbr]

hurley_108 wrote:

mtbr wrote:

I said it yesterday ..

post1280489#p1280489

Holy shit, man, that was pretty weak what you did to Mr. Canada.

I gave him a neg rep point because his posts sucked and Streaker rewarded him because of his usual anti'american bullshit.

is there a problem with that?

Maybe we should get rid of neg points and only offer positive ones.

[hwacker]

Nope, not when they do the same in return

[sandorski]

MTBR: I just gave you a Negative, because your whining about Rep is annoying.

[hurley_108]

mtbr wrote:

I gave him a neg rep point because his posts sucked and Streaker rewarded him because of his usual anti'american bullshit.

is there a problem with that?

Yea, there is. It's a problem because the comment "streaker gives I taketh away..get a Job" speaks NOTHING to ANY issue you have with the post you applied it to, let alone any other post. It's a problem because if you have a problem with Streaker's use of rep, YOU TAKE IT UP WITH STREAKER, not Mr. Canada.

[mtbr]

hurley_108 wrote:

mtbr wrote:

I gave him a neg rep point because his posts sucked and Streaker rewarded him because of his usual anti'american bullshit.

is there a problem with that?

Yea, there is. It's a problem because the comment "streaker gives I taketh away..get a Job" speaks NOTHING to ANY issue you have with the post you applied it to, let alone any other post. It's a problem because if you have a problem with Streaker's use of rep, YOU TAKE IT UP WITH STREAKER, not Mr. Canada.

why as I said his post(s) sucked, am I not entitled to offer my opinion about anybodies posts?

[mtbr]

sandorski wrote:

MTBR: I just gave you a Negative, because your whining about Rep is annoying.

oh crap you just ruined my day

if I really gave a damn I would just turn it off.

Maybe I'll just see how many negs I can collect first

[hurley_108]

mtbr wrote:

hurley_108 wrote:

mtbr wrote:

I gave him a neg rep point because his posts sucked and Streaker rewarded him because of his usual anti'american bullshit.

is there a problem with that?

Yea, there is. It's a problem because the comment "streaker gives I taketh away..get a Job" speaks NOTHING to ANY issue you have with the post you applied it to, let alone any other post. It's a problem because if you have a problem with Streaker's use of rep, YOU TAKE IT UP WITH STREAKER, not Mr. Canada.

why as I said his post(s) sucked, am I not entitled to offer my opinion about anybodies posts?

You're "allowed" to do whatever you want, just as I'm allowed to say it's incredibly cheap, childish, and poor sportsmanship for you to give someone negative rep because you disagree with the way someone else is giving positive rep. It's also incredibly difficult to believe your story now, that you think "his posts sucked," when the comment you gave at the time had nothing at all to do with the content of his posts.

[mtbr]

hurley_108 wrote:

You're "allowed" to do whatever you want, just as I'm allowed to say it's incredibly cheap, childish, and poor sportsmanship for you to give someone negative rep because you disagree with the way someone else is giving positive rep. It's also incredibly difficult to believe your story now, that you think "his posts sucked," when the comment you gave at the time had nothing at all to do with the content of his posts.

gottchya..maybe I should have just posted some spam pictures instead.

[ridenrain]

mtbr wrote:

sandorski wrote:

MTBR: I just gave you a Negative, because your whining about Rep is annoying.

oh crap you just ruined my day

if I really gave a damn I would just turn it off.

Maybe I'll just see how many negs I can collect first

See comrade. You're being punished for not thinking of the party first.
No chocolate rations for you!