Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Dude, it's a thread from January and you're complaining about a lack of images you could easily Google. And I really don't see how you can say this is a "recently revived" thread when yours is the first post in it since January.

But whatever. I'm trying to help you understand why people get annoyed with you. Shan't bother again. Hope you enjoy it the next time you get banned for this sort of crap.

omega666 wrote:I think old pictures are not loading up. Probably because of what happened to the site a couple of weeks ago. Also, I noticed random threads being bumped up WITHOUT people posting on them.

Anyway, I still see these two figures at TRU.

Thanks. It's nice to hear from sane people. Especially those that are not Judges.

If this was really a January 2008 old thread, i wouldn't even see it on page 1 of forum. Therefore, there should be no chance for me to ... uh... "bump it up"?

Clearly, it's NOT from January. But rather, it losts a number of its most recent posts. It must have been recently rescued.

Sledge wrote:Dude, it's a thread from January and you're complaining about a lack of images you could easily Google. And I really don't see how you can say this is a "recently revived" thread when yours is the first post in it since January.

But whatever. I'm trying to help you understand why people get annoyed with you. Shan't bother again. Hope you enjoy it the next time you get banned for this sort of crap.

"Recently revived" means the thread was fixed and made available by the admin or the mods. NOT revived by members/posters. SheesSH!

Your "why people get annoyed with you" generalisation is laughable. Although, i don't wanna laugh to retain the seriousness of this issue. Your "people" word basically means YOU, YOU and YOU, plus a few of your allies. I would term that as a "tiny vocal faction" rather than "people".

If you don't try to blow up and exaggerate cutie accusations, i think i'd be safe. Especially so that i'm not doing anything wrong. Sans your skewed interpretations, of course. And that i was erroneously banned before, due solely to your exaggerations. Ah.. "your" means YOU and a couple of your teammates.

A lot of images are missing. You could have asked the question without bumping an old and outdated thread.

Auto Bot wrote:
Thanks. It's nice to hear from sane people. Especially those that are not Judges.

If this was really a January 2008 old thread, i wouldn't even see it on page 1 of forum. Therefore, there should be no chance for me to ... uh... "bump it up"?

Clearly, it's NOT from January. But rather, it losts a number of its most recent posts. It must have been recently rescued.

Speaking as a sane person, this thread clearly IS from January, and you too can see that if you look at the forum index page. The thread was created on January 27th, 2008, and unless I am indeed not sane, the 27th of January does reside in the month of January. In fact, if you look at posts throughout this thread and not just from these last couple of days (for reasons unknown), you'll see posts from January and on.

Well, i wouldn't know where to ask. I can't just go about all the other "lively" threads and ask questions about this thread.

Not all missing pics are due to the crash. I understand that some were pulled out due to requests of some big shots. Some pics could have been changed. Some could due to a slight coding error.

There's lots of possible reasons.

I don't really know what's the reason for this thread. So i asked.

I don't have the habit of concluding or judging by myself.

The point is that you could have simply created a new thread asking "Why are the images missing?" instead of digging up an old thread and bumping it. It's not that big of a deal; it's just forum etiquette; don't bump old threads unless there's a good reason. [peace_sign]

Dagon wrote:

Auto Bot wrote:
Thanks. It's nice to hear from sane people. Especially those that are not Judges.

If this was really a January 2008 old thread, i wouldn't even see it on page 1 of forum. Therefore, there should be no chance for me to ... uh... "bump it up"?

Clearly, it's NOT from January. But rather, it losts a number of its most recent posts. It must have been recently rescued.

Speaking as a sane person, this thread clearly IS from January, and you too can see that if you look at the forum index page. The thread was created on January 27th, 2008, and unless I am indeed not sane, the 27th of January does reside in the month of January. In fact, if you look at posts throughout this thread and not just from these last couple of days (for reasons unknown), you'll see posts from January and on.

Ok. Nice that you pointed it out that it was created in January.

Then? What's the connection?

Are threads in January supposed to be receiving posts within January only?

There's several threads here that lasts much longer.

It was created in January. But it could have posts till September. Perfectly possible. Then the crash. After the thread's been rescued, the Feb to Sept posts could have been wiped out. Like most of the other rescued threads.

It's a possibility. There's no way for me to know if the original last post was from January, from May or from September before the crash.

Do you know? Can anybody confirm with certainty and tell me? So that i may know that i did something terribly terribly wrong this time?

Please?

As I said above:

GuyIncognito wrote:The point is that you could have simply created a new thread asking "Why are the images missing?" instead of digging up an old thread and bumping it. It's not that big of a deal; it's just forum etiquette; don't bump old threads unless there's a good reason. [peace_sign]

GuyIncognito wrote:The point is that you could have simply created a new thread asking "Why are the images missing?" instead of digging up an old thread and bumping it. It's not that big of a deal; it's just forum etiquette; don't bump old threads unless there's a good reason. [peace_sign]

Let's make one thing clear first. I'm NOT bumping threads. Don't get carried away by the wild goose chase of Honorable Judge Sledge. He's been tailing me and doing that all the time.

Now that that is cleared up, let's go to the issue.

I'm not really sure if it's ok to create what could sound like a worthless "Why are the images missing in a particular thread?" thread.

You know, it will give these Honoroble self-appointed Judges (NOT refering to mods) more ammo to push for their favorite tag-line "you're just doing that to increase your post count".

I hope you understand. (If you try to look at the other previous threads on how they tail me and constantly fire the "increase your post count" bullet.)

THERE! Pics of Jetstorm and Wingblade.

omega666 wrote:THERE! Pics of Jetstorm and Wingblade.

Thanks, man. You really know how to solve problems and issues.

If more people are like you, there'd be less problems in this world.

Again, thanks.

Hold on a sec.

I thought that figure is Jetfire? So Jetfire and Jetstorm are one and the same?

You know? After getting these figure, I don't think they are that great. I will repaint these and make them better.

Pls bear with me. My knowledge of TF characters isn't complete. Not even in the vicinity of half way complete.

I'm generally familiar with G1, then missed everything, and came back with the 2007 Movie.

I'm especially not familiar with the Armada-Cybertron-Energon series.

I thought that cargo plane TF, of Cybertron or Energon series, was Jetfire.

Is Jetfire and Jetstorm one and the same?

Auto Bot wrote:Pls bear with me. My knowledge of TF characters isn't complete. Not even in the vicinity of half way complete.

I'm generally familiar with G1, then missed everything, and came back with the 2007 Movie.

I'm especially not familiar with the Armada-Cybertron-Energon series.

I thought that cargo plane TF, of Cybertron or Energon series, was Jetfire.

Is Jetfire and Jetstorm one and the same?

No man. It's a repaint. The cargo plane was Jetfire in Cybertron, and is just repainted. They're two different characters.
If you want to get down to it, Jetstorm was a Vehicon general from Beast Machines, and was the altered version of Silverbolt. Since then they've just been reusing the name, just like every other TF character. But, in all honesty, if you don't know the difference between Jetfire and Jetstorm there's no hope you'll grasp the whole lineage of Sparks corrupted during Beast Machines. Not being a prick there, but serious nonetheless.

Ok. So they came out with a repaint of Jetfire mold into Jetstorm character.

Hmm.. Now i see the link on how they arrive at using the 2 names into a twin character in TFA.

Thanks for sharing the background of these characters.

I find it a bit creepy to see a combiner split up midway vertically. With each half the exact copy of the other, but of different color.

Yeah, It's kinda a coincidence that Jetstorm is a Cyb Repaint of Jetfire. They are both quite dull repaints, but they are still great molds.

I don't see a problem with bumping the thread.. bar the huge argument, this has lead into a healthy discussion, has it not?

Yeah.

If we just skip the arguments, a healthy discussion is where the fun is.

Plus i get to learn a few more things about the TF saga.