You could actually make this room with some walls, a column or two (they are free about) and Anton's furnature at Daz. The chair looks just like Daz's ornate chair.

Actually that looks more like Louis XIV, Victorian is much darker in wood and tone,

Isn't that from RDNA?

Can we add as a new feature an ignore button so we don't have to read posts from devout OT haters?

No he has said before that it cannot be done - that you just become an inactive member, thus staying in the numbers.

I think she wants more that to be inactive. Her request is to be totally deleted. That would mean she would no longer be one of Renderosity's numbers

Oh, a real personal attack. I see. Still doesn't explain why you banned him after he quit.

But you have to admitt, colonizing the orphan forums is pretty funny. Most members don't know it yet, but at the new site you get to work your way up to world domination.

Attached Link: http://digital-cheryle.com/Offtopic/index.php

It does seem ironic that no mod has anything to say about the comments and what is now clearly a personal attack ( negative comments about a group someone feels a part of) on the OT members. "It had become a place to let everyone else know just what morons they were, and just how much you hated their guts." "Don't let them use this website as a platform for their ugly prejudice." "I merely pointed out the fact that this implication prevailed throughout OT: members vs. members" Oh, I guess since the members vs members here are not discussing religion it's okay. You see why there is frustration. The rules change day by day, forum by forum. Spike, this behavior is what you claimed in OT closed down OT as you deemed personal attack includes a perceived notion that a member is attacked when a group they belong to is attacked.

You know what, this is a waste of time. Obviously some people only wait to yell lock the thread rather then question why the PTB have never clearly answered a simple question that they have been asked again and again, here and at OT. 86 posts before impatience set in. Yeah, those OT people must be rabid dogs that need to be destroyed. wait, is that a violation of TOS? I guess you win.

BDC, to be fair, you are pointing out one post where YOU is used, making it an obvious personal attack. (jettboy, you didn't help here). The mods can deal with a member for such attacks, that is there job. What is not apparent is that any implication of disaggreement or complaint about some so called christian behaviors VS claiming christianity as a free pass. Saying I am offended that you think the Bible wasn't written by the hand of God does not mean that thinking the Bible was not written by the hand of God and saying so is a personal attack. This is the truth of what was really going on in OT for the most part. This is why closing the forum has upset so many and why they can't understand where the TOS violation of personal attack was so violated the forum had to be closed. You would think there had been a virtual riot. I am not saying that you responded in such a way at OT, but comments like the one you cited were were much more clear than the type I am citing.

Apparently whether M3's testicles can move independantly of his penis is more the kind of thinking that represents what this site is about in some minds. Stick to the products.

Since there is no "official" answer to my question about what really constitutes as a personal attack here, and I doubt it was answered in OT before it was shut down, you leave me to believe I am correct to assume that if a negative comment is made about any group, no matter if it is backed up by fact and reference, anyone can claim through transitivity the comment as a personal attack. If that's the case then the forum part of OT died before the rest of us realised it. Maybe you should look up the word forum and google into the history of what forums are and you will see OT was not so out of hand as you want the rest of the community to believe. I do find it odd that some seem to have so little faith in their own beliefs that a few naysayers could so easily knock they off kilter and running for protection. As I said before, if someone wants to be persecuted they will find a way to be persecuted even if it's only in their own mind.

Sorry, as one person who has never personally attacked anyone, nor ever received any kind of warning ever, I am annoyed that by enjoying my Mother's Day I missed the answer to my question. It seems to me that many of the so called attacks were not intended against a particular member at all, but were perceived attacts because someone felt they belonged to a group who's ideas where being attacked. My question was, Is it considered a personal attack if someone writes ___________(fill the blank with Christians, republicans, dems, liberals, atheists, war mongers, or any other group that fits the thread) behavior is idiotic in the current situation because.... Now, is that a personal attack on a member or is it a perceived attack because someone relates themselves with that group? To discuss or blame a group for a behavior and add documentation to back you up is what debate in a forum is about as far back as forums have existed. The OT forum is a place where people went to vent sometimes and you get all opinions on the spectrum. Losing an arguement cannot all of a sudden be called foul. Now, I haven't read every thread and I am sure there have been cases of trolling and personal attacks. But in the threads that had the mod threats in them, it seemed that the nature of the debate was really the issue. If anyone says the christians might be wrong, some one is offended and it is now a TOS case. If my opinion is wrong, please state clearly how far the translation of personal attack goes. To be fair to the many people at OT who never personally attacked a member, I just think if you are going to annouce that you have shut down a forum you should give some of the details, not leave the rest of the community to believe that a bunch of animals couldn't control themselves. I am now offended!