Forums > Submission Feedback > pickhut's Portal 2 review

I would hope that we could still see valid and intelligent points as being valid and intelligent, even if they come from an "extremist" (aka, someone whose opinions and/or approach differ from the site's norms).

You cross a line at some point. I imagine many see me and some others in the same light, but there isn't one that disregards anyone entirely, especially if we make a valid point or decent criticism. And that is because this site is comprised mostly of intelligent, balanced individuals who don't always agree but share that one common passion. We argue and bicker, but I can't remember a time where we've written anyone off for good.

You ever see that episode of South Park where they all stopped talking to Cartman and he thought he was dead? This whole situation reminds me of that.

And I just felt the need, however futile its outcome may be, to give him one last warning and maybe inspire other users to take that step. I really don't see any other way of stopping it.

I just feel bad for Pickhut that he has to weed through this fool's crap in hopes that he's going to get some feedback.

If I Offended You, You Needed It.

Replicating a predictable event happens in real life all the time. It's called exploiting weakness.

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

*sigh* Look at all the creative names that have to be banned now. How sad. Someone more important and useful could have used those accounts...

[Eating EmP's brain] probably isn't a good idea. I mean... He's British, which means his brain's wired for PAL and your eyes are NTSC. - Will

I want to say something witty and D&Dish about trolls and their ability to regenerate, but I just woke up.

The only thing my milkshake brings to the yard is a subpoena.

Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Very appropriate to this situation. Definitely more so than the "exploiting weakness" deal, as that would require more than:

1. A completely subjective "argument" based upon (a) a reviewer reviewing a game this person doesn't deem worthy of coverage AND/OR (b) a reviewer either discussing aspects of a game this person doesn't view important or taking an opinion this person disagrees with.

2. A reaction that can best be summed up as "*yawn*...guess who's back...".

I'm not afraid to die because I am invincible
Viva la muerte, that's my goddamn principle