Opfactions reset

[gewoon_jayden2.0]

the reset of opfactions need to be earlier because there are no f top payments anymore actualy u needed to make the reset after all the payments where over

 

[Luppeeyz]

the reset of opfactions need to be earlier because there are no f top payments anymore actualy u needed to make the reset after all the payments where over

I don't even get a single word you meant above,
f top payments rewards already ended after season 1 ended (90 days). And it's just got reset for like 3 months ago and you're already asking for another reset...

 

[UpperGround]

I don't even get a single word you meant above,
f top payments rewards already ended after season 1 ended (90 days). And it's just got reset for like 3 months ago and you're already asking for another reset...

LOL
at least creative won't reset for a while

 

[Luppeeyz]

LOL
at least creative won't reset for a while

I also don't get a single word you mean by that
Ngl I prefer a serious reply other than just that

 

[UpperGround]

I also don't get a single word you mean by that
Ngl I prefer a serious reply other than just that

opfac got reset like 4 months ago and im happy that creative server wont get a reset for a long time

 

[Luppeeyz]

opfac got reset like 4 months ago and im happy that creative server wont get a reset for a long time

ye, your builds will be kept alive til the next reset

 

[UpperGround]

ye, your builds will be kept alive til the next reset

ya ik that's why Im happy

 

[gewoon_jayden2.0]

I don't even get a single word you meant above,
f top payments rewards already ended after season 1 ended (90 days). And it's just got reset for like 3 months ago and you're already asking for another reset...

LOL no 1 likes it like no 1 because the fking staff is lazy to reset opfac it is already 6 months ago go reset it because its trash asf and get staff every hacker ont he serv wont get banned

 

[Luppeeyz]

LOL no 1 likes it like no 1 because the fking staff is lazy to reset opfac it is already 6 months ago go reset it because its trash asf and get staff every hacker ont he serv wont get banned

Are you dumb in the head? If you think so then what about Creative, KitPvP, CSB? They got reset WAY WAY sooner than OPFactions and dead already, but do staff reset it again?
Absolutely not, beside that, asking for Reset is just a waste of time cuz the owners aren't going to give YOU ANY CHANCES to give out opinion.

 

[Axteroid]

if they reset now it would be boring, they need new kind of plugin that gives people some kind of task and the reason to play, it would be stupid of them if they reset mid season. (also ik memefair got boosted by alts)

 

[gewoon_jayden2.0]

ye, your builds will be kept alive til the next reset

ye ok thats good or the people that plays creative it would be verry sad if all their builds were gone

 

[Luppeeyz]

ye ok thats good or the people that plays creative it would be verry sad if all their builds were gone

Well idfc about my builds

 

[UpperGround]

Well idfc about my builds

i do

 

[Luppeeyz]

i do

Then too bad it will be gone, you won't be able to keep an forever

 

[UpperGround]

Then too bad it will be gone, you won't be able to keep an forever

can save them with schematica maybe idk

 

[TheSavior]

lupeeyz replies are so fcking stupid holy sht

 

[Luppeeyz]

lupeeyz replies are so fcking stupid holy sht

Morning,
And your reponds are so damn fcking toxic, either way.
And feel free to read this and make up your mind and think about who you are

According to research on computer-mediated communication by Lincoln Dahlberg and others, trolls were originally understood as mischievous tricksters trying to be annoying or disruptive. In early Internet culture trolls created false personas to integrate into an online community and ultimately derail group conversations. Since then, however, the term has become a catchall to describe any sort of antisocial or disruptive online behavior. A term now heavily used by reporters, “trolling” is frequently used interchangeably to refer to bullying and hate speech, muddying the waters around the word’s definition and descriptive power. As a catchall media label, “trolling” invokes a kind of nebulous Internet folk devil rather than an actual person or persons behind the computer screen. It obscures the underlying hate speech. If observers were to shift away from such uses of “troll” and “trolling,” they could actually name specific toxic behaviors the sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, that they actually represent.

Toxic behavior is pervasive in every online environment. Maeve Duggan’s “Online Harassment,” a study released by Pew Research in 2014, leads with the finding that 40% of internet users have faced harassment and 73% of users have seen others get harassed. Although physical threats were only witnessed by a quarter of respondents in this study and only 8% said they were physically threatened, these numbers misrepresent experiences online. Seven in ten of Internet users aged 18 to 24 have been harassed while online; and 26% of women in that age group report being stalked online. Such statistics provide a first glimpse at the scale of the problem of the toxic online environments, and they show that common practices of community self-selection fail to address harassing online behaviors.

Recent research shows that toxicity also exists across online gaming groups, and is not isolated to a particular game or specific player community. Alexis Pulos’ research finds that player posts to online forums like the World of Warcraft player community often create a culture of hostility toward gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Similarly, Kishonna Gray’s ethnography of the Xbox Live gaming community reveals a constant barrage of gendered and racially motivated harassment directed at women of color who opt to communicate with teammates via voice chat. Problems are worsened by gaming community leaders who claim that gender-based harassment is a “non-issue” and dismiss their responsibility for fostering rape cultures. As these evasions show, the industry will likely be resistant to change unless external pressure is applied. Yet unless hostile online behaviors are reduced, vulnerable people, marginalized groups, and the public generally will all be further harmed.

Recent efforts to understand and respond to such pervasive toxicity include a 2015 panel on online harassment convened by Caroline Sinders at South by Southwest; the 2017 workshop on Abusive Language Online held at the annual conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics; and the “Notoriously Toxic” project funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities that brought together a working group of game developers, legal experts, social scientists, computational linguistics, and humanists. Also relevant are experiments like Google Jigsaw’s Perspective, which attempts to use a machine learning classifier to classify text strings on a scale from “very toxic” to “very healthy.”

 

[BestPikaPlayer]

Morning,
And your reponds are so damn fcking toxic, either way.
And feel free to read this and make up your mind and think about who you are

According to research on computer-mediated communication by Lincoln Dahlberg and others, trolls were originally understood as mischievous tricksters trying to be annoying or disruptive. In early Internet culture trolls created false personas to integrate into an online community and ultimately derail group conversations. Since then, however, the term has become a catchall to describe any sort of antisocial or disruptive online behavior. A term now heavily used by reporters, “trolling” is frequently used interchangeably to refer to bullying and hate speech, muddying the waters around the word’s definition and descriptive power. As a catchall media label, “trolling” invokes a kind of nebulous Internet folk devil rather than an actual person or persons behind the computer screen. It obscures the underlying hate speech. If observers were to shift away from such uses of “troll” and “trolling,” they could actually name specific toxic behaviors the sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, that they actually represent.

Toxic behavior is pervasive in every online environment. Maeve Duggan’s “Online Harassment,” a study released by Pew Research in 2014, leads with the finding that 40% of internet users have faced harassment and 73% of users have seen others get harassed. Although physical threats were only witnessed by a quarter of respondents in this study and only 8% said they were physically threatened, these numbers misrepresent experiences online. Seven in ten of Internet users aged 18 to 24 have been harassed while online; and 26% of women in that age group report being stalked online. Such statistics provide a first glimpse at the scale of the problem of the toxic online environments, and they show that common practices of community self-selection fail to address harassing online behaviors.

Recent research shows that toxicity also exists across online gaming groups, and is not isolated to a particular game or specific player community. Alexis Pulos’ research finds that player posts to online forums like the World of Warcraft player community often create a culture of hostility toward gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Similarly, Kishonna Gray’s ethnography of the Xbox Live gaming community reveals a constant barrage of gendered and racially motivated harassment directed at women of color who opt to communicate with teammates via voice chat. Problems are worsened by gaming community leaders who claim that gender-based harassment is a “non-issue” and dismiss their responsibility for fostering rape cultures. As these evasions show, the industry will likely be resistant to change unless external pressure is applied. Yet unless hostile online behaviors are reduced, vulnerable people, marginalized groups, and the public generally will all be further harmed.

Recent efforts to understand and respond to such pervasive toxicity include a 2015 panel on online harassment convened by Caroline Sinders at South by Southwest; the 2017 workshop on Abusive Language Online held at the annual conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics; and the “Notoriously Toxic” project funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities that brought together a working group of game developers, legal experts, social scientists, computational linguistics, and humanists. Also relevant are experiments like Google Jigsaw’s Perspective, which attempts to use a machine learning classifier to classify text strings on a scale from “very toxic” to “very healthy.”

You are toxic.

 

[TheSavior]

Morning,
And your reponds are so damn fcking toxic, either way.
And feel free to read this and make up your mind and think about who you are

According to research on computer-mediated communication by Lincoln Dahlberg and others, trolls were originally understood as mischievous tricksters trying to be annoying or disruptive. In early Internet culture trolls created false personas to integrate into an online community and ultimately derail group conversations. Since then, however, the term has become a catchall to describe any sort of antisocial or disruptive online behavior. A term now heavily used by reporters, “trolling” is frequently used interchangeably to refer to bullying and hate speech, muddying the waters around the word’s definition and descriptive power. As a catchall media label, “trolling” invokes a kind of nebulous Internet folk devil rather than an actual person or persons behind the computer screen. It obscures the underlying hate speech. If observers were to shift away from such uses of “troll” and “trolling,” they could actually name specific toxic behaviors the sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, that they actually represent.

Toxic behavior is pervasive in every online environment. Maeve Duggan’s “Online Harassment,” a study released by Pew Research in 2014, leads with the finding that 40% of internet users have faced harassment and 73% of users have seen others get harassed. Although physical threats were only witnessed by a quarter of respondents in this study and only 8% said they were physically threatened, these numbers misrepresent experiences online. Seven in ten of Internet users aged 18 to 24 have been harassed while online; and 26% of women in that age group report being stalked online. Such statistics provide a first glimpse at the scale of the problem of the toxic online environments, and they show that common practices of community self-selection fail to address harassing online behaviors.

Recent research shows that toxicity also exists across online gaming groups, and is not isolated to a particular game or specific player community. Alexis Pulos’ research finds that player posts to online forums like the World of Warcraft player community often create a culture of hostility toward gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Similarly, Kishonna Gray’s ethnography of the Xbox Live gaming community reveals a constant barrage of gendered and racially motivated harassment directed at women of color who opt to communicate with teammates via voice chat. Problems are worsened by gaming community leaders who claim that gender-based harassment is a “non-issue” and dismiss their responsibility for fostering rape cultures. As these evasions show, the industry will likely be resistant to change unless external pressure is applied. Yet unless hostile online behaviors are reduced, vulnerable people, marginalized groups, and the public generally will all be further harmed.

Recent efforts to understand and respond to such pervasive toxicity include a 2015 panel on online harassment convened by Caroline Sinders at South by Southwest; the 2017 workshop on Abusive Language Online held at the annual conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics; and the “Notoriously Toxic” project funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities that brought together a working group of game developers, legal experts, social scientists, computational linguistics, and humanists. Also relevant are experiments like Google Jigsaw’s Perspective, which attempts to use a machine learning classifier to classify text strings on a scale from “very toxic” to “very healthy.”

how much fking time do u have in ur hands to do pikanetwork forum replies. jesus ur life is sad.

 

[Luppeeyz]

You are toxic.

And I'm :)
What other can you do other than saying that?

how much fking time do u have in ur hands to do pikanetwork forum replies. jesus ur life is sad.

It's copyrighted bro, totally I won't waste bunch of my time on such things