POLL:Chat Room:Should Access Be For Registered Members Only

brain_cloud wrote:

Jaylee wrote:Off to time out with you, Dr. Cloudy. I will come with you though, so you wont be bored.

I wonder if I could induce you into hyperventilating.

I haven't done that since 3 PM today.

I have been meaning to ask you, Dr. Cloudy, do you like pineapples?

jules wrote:What he created, I assume to deal with problems in chat, has attacked someone who was only guilty of using a name other than their registered forum name. If he were to follow the logic that "if someone who uses a nick other than their own in chat, then they should be removed", then his bot should go in a kick his bot as well as a few others out including Madalot who was in there under a pseudonym.

I want to confirm what Jules has said here -- I WAS in chat last night under a pseudonym. I did that because I have found, especially in the evenings, logging in under my regular user name frequently attracts "moderator" and the issues that arise. I didn't want to disrupt a calm chat session by encouraging "undesirables" into the chat room.

I never felt the need to use a name other than my regular name before the problems with calist and moderator. But if a person wants to use a name other than their name, that's fine by me, as long as it isn't another registered user's name.

Jaylee wrote:

brain_cloud wrote:

Jaylee wrote:Off to time out with you, Dr. Cloudy. I will come with you though, so you wont be bored.

I wonder if I could induce you into hyperventilating.

I haven't done that since 3 PM today.

I have been meaning to ask you, Dr. Cloudy, do you like pineapples?

A fruit that tastes good on a pizza--what's not to love?

Madalot wrote:

jules wrote:What he created, I assume to deal with problems in chat, has attacked someone who was only guilty of using a name other than their registered forum name. If he were to follow the logic that "if someone who uses a nick other than their own in chat, then they should be removed", then his bot should go in a kick his bot as well as a few others out including Madalot who was in there under a pseudonym.

I want to confirm what Jules has said here -- I WAS in chat last night under a pseudonym. I did that because I have found, especially in the evenings, logging in under my regular user name frequently attracts "moderator" and the issues that arise. I didn't want to disrupt a calm chat session by encouraging "undesirables" into the chat room.

I never felt the need to use a name other than my regular name before the problems with calist and moderator.

I wish to add although I think I said it earlier, I have used the nick "who knows" before usually with a smiley on it but not always I have now registered the name "who knows " . The nick "who knows" does belong to someone else who has made one post. I had used "who knows " in chat many times before that name was registered.

jules wrote:

Madalot wrote:

jules wrote:What he created, I assume to deal with problems in chat, has attacked someone who was only guilty of using a name other than their registered forum name. If he were to follow the logic that "if someone who uses a nick other than their own in chat, then they should be removed", then his bot should go in a kick his bot as well as a few others out including Madalot who was in there under a pseudonym.

I want to confirm what Jules has said here -- I WAS in chat last night under a pseudonym. I did that because I have found, especially in the evenings, logging in under my regular user name frequently attracts "moderator" and the issues that arise. I didn't want to disrupt a calm chat session by encouraging "undesirables" into the chat room.

I never felt the need to use a name other than my regular name before the problems with calist and moderator.

I wish to add although I think I said it earlier, I have used the nick "who knows" before usually with a smiley on it but not always I have now registered the name "who knows " . The nick "who knows" does belong to someone else who has made one post. I had used "who knows " in chat many times before that name was registered.

I want to let you know that I asked somebody who you were last night. They said "I think it's Jules" and offered to double check. They said it was you. When I asked you outright -- you said it WAS you. I have no problem with that. Pseudonyms are fine -- it's those that log in under another KNOWN registered user's name that I find distasteful -- meaning one that uses the board a lot and has many friends here.

This thread is fascinating. Chat should not be so serious. I feel like I need popcorn or something.

is it beach bonfire time? we got a lot of new driftwood to burn out here and the shape of this keeps changing

oh I picked up a few pieces of coal for someone's Christmas stocking today out there - will the 20 lb piece my husband got today be big enough?

jules wrote:is it beach bonfire time? we got a lot of new driftwood to burn out here and the shape of this keeps changing

Finally a bonfire...but jules, don't you have snow there?

Not us - rain yes but no snow out here today and Mt Rainier was even out today. We are mid 40's so upper single digits right now and some wind.

jules wrote:Not us - rain yes but no snow out here today and Mt Rainier was even out today. We are mid 40's so upper single digits right now and some wind.

Sounds much better than here--blizzard conditions yesterday and -18 Celsius. It took me an hour to dig a path out and by then, the first part was covered up again...

Bonfires work well in the snow.

r

jules wrote:is it beach bonfire time? we got a lot of new driftwood to burn out here and the shape of this keeps changing

Some of the finest bonfires in the country are lit on the shore of the Mississippi River in Cajun country in Louisiana on Christmas Eve. They light the way for Papa Noel to come down the river delivering gifts. It's sight worth going to see.

M.D.Hosehead wrote:

brain_cloud wrote:
A few old ladies began to hyperventilate.

what I said happened is what happened.

Just curious...

Can you prove those statements objectively and,

In what sense is the poll "otiose"' considering its stated purpose:

Let us find out how many are for the Chat Room being restricted to Registered Members only, and how many are against.

Well, it is pointless. If your host has decided on a dessert, then to canvass the rest of the guests as to their dessert preferences is vain at best.

There's no irritation or hostility on my part; it's just banter to keep you on your toes.

Same here.

jnk wrote:I will not defend brain cloud...

Too late! Let the record reflect that jnk just gave me a wet, sloppy, smooch, and that I liked it--I really liked it!

brain_cloud wrote:

jnk wrote:I will not defend brain cloud...

Too late! Let the record reflect that jnk just gave me a wet, sloppy, smooch, and that I liked it--I really liked it!

Jaylee wrote:

brain_cloud wrote:

jnk wrote:I will not defend brain cloud...

Too late! Let the record reflect that jnk just gave me a wet, sloppy, smooch, and that I liked it--I really liked it!

Yea, just when you thought you knew someone?