Kinda colorful, though we hate to admit it

Join a laid-back, close-knit community of mixed interests Get a free account!

99th percentile

This user hasn't setup their profile yet. What a shame!

Gargron joined on May 2nd, 2010, since that has made 1249 posts that are still accessible today, 158 of which are threads. Helping shape the community, Gargron has given 2259 upvotes, and was last online on Jun 14th, 2014.

  • In The Oculus Rift: 4D gaming is the Future!

    RIP Oculus Rift

  • In CL is Still Alive CHORUS project! HUGE SUCCESS! Video done +bonus track.

    @Ecstasy :D


    Here is a probably helpful article about the Ukraine situation (written pre-Crimea though):

  • In CL is Still Alive CHORUS project! HUGE SUCCESS! Video done +bonus track.

    I've done the recording. Screenshots though, that's one hell of a task. I wrote a script to post the lyrics to the chat automatically, but screenshotting it programmatically made my laptop run out of memory. I'm not sure if optimizing that would be worth it. Are these screenshots really needed? Are you sure you can't just, I dunno, generate the chat bubbles that you know you'll montage in on your end?

  • In Math/Programming jokes
  • In CL is Still Alive CHORUS project! HUGE SUCCESS! Video done +bonus track.

    I think leaving them as is will make the project run much more smoothly. Imagine the overhead of writing fitting lyrics content-wise and rhyme-wise. And then everyone learning them. And then the recording thing too. It's not worth it, we just want to have fun, I think

  • In CL is Still Alive CHORUS project! HUGE SUCCESS! Video done +bonus track.

    I'm going to sing. Have at ye, Kirn, betcha you didn't expect that!

  • In Time to look at the rules. (Meta)

    Remember on site image storage? 90%. Not labeled or tagged. No, we will not forget. So no, read the disclaimer and cry a bit.

    That was waaaaaay before the rule. And it was on the image boards. And it was tagged NSFW.

  • In Time to look at the rules. (Meta)

    I second the idea of making drug/alcohol discussions NSFW and forbidding witch hunt material. Arguably that might be part of the "do not harass anyone on and off-site" rule. I agree with Kirn that currently stuff might be a bit vague. On the other hand, you can't spell every edge case out, either, most real-life jurisdictions rely either on case-by-case judgment or precedents when applying laws.

  • In Time to look at the rules. (Meta)

    You have to keep in mind that the terms of service is legalese with the sole purpose of preventing anyone from suing the site. The "rules and guidelines" are the one thing humans are supposed to read and follow. Redundancy between them is a-ok. I would also argue that the terms should be more broad and restrictive than the rules, because one thing is getting banned from the site, and a whole different level of suck is getting brought to court over something.

    Other than that I don't have much to add. The "act without limiting the fun of another" rule is a direct reference to Rousseau's social contract. Clearly constructive criticism is distinguishable from flamewars.

    At last, personally, I suggest removing the reference to me under the NSFW rule. I have never posted anything NSFW outside of a NSFW-labelled thread after the rule was introduced (by me, iirc). Rules and laws are not retroactive. That's just libel.

    Edit: I have to address the "no meta discussions" rule. You have to understand the context of it. We had a lot of threads talking just about the site itself. That's not interesting to anyone but the participating members, you can as well just forget about ever getting new users in. And rename the site to r/circlejerk instead. That's why it is required, I believe.