[Joe Forster/STA]

I first asked you to rephrase slang in your posts in the other thread because h4x0r especially does not understand them - you surely knew that - and, as you can see, it resulted in a flame war without any real reason. Have you filled my request? Nope. Have I banned you? Nope. Have I banned h4x0r? Neither but, believe me, he got his warning from me because, although I understand his anger when people start bashing him, his way of answering provocations with provocations is not tolerated. (He already got banned for a few months once.)

Then I tried to reason with you in this thread, asking you to drop the attitude because it's not tolerated here - not against me, against anyone! -, but it was also in vain. STN wrote down his opinion in an acceptable style, you didn't. If you always have to insert personal insults into your discussion then you're on the wrong forum. We're, at least, trying to be very open-minded about opinions and I was interested in yours, too, but did you know that, on some other forums, you would've been banned the first time you criticized a moderator? (Actually, it's also in our forum rules but we don't enforce it, only against stiff people like you seem to be.)

We're not affiliated with CheatHappens, Deviated, h4x0r or any other trainer maker. Empire's principle - which you don't seem to know or, rather, are ignoring on purpose - is that it is in GCW's visitors' interest to offer as much stuff as possible. Yes, even stuff whose authors, distribution methods etc. we personally don't agree with. Why? Because visitors righteously don't give a fuck about our opinions, they only want free downloads which is what GCW has been providing for a decade and a half. That also shows our impartiality.

Have you seen me criticizing h4x0r's DRM? Have you read about my frustration that he wouldn't listen to me? (You haven't seen my similar PM's to him, though, and there were a lot of them! You also haven't seen our private correspondence with the other moderators.) Or are you ignoring those on purpose, too? If you think I'm banning people simply because they don't agree with me then that's a serious accusation. However, your questioning my competence as a moderator results only in a laugh from me because I know it's false and I cannot be bothered with such insults anymore.

As for protecting software, it is invariably always cracked. (The only exception could be when noone, not even crackers, are interested in a piece of software because noone uses it.) Devising extremely sophisticated protections only delays cracks but not inhibit them. You, with your opinion of protecting everything as much as possible, are on one extreme end of the spectrum; I, on the other hand/end, say: release the whole source and then, by definition, noone can steal from you, thus drawing the teeth of the problem so simply. (I already mentioned this before in one of our announcement.) I assume you won't comprehend the point of this but that's only because of your narrow-mindedness, which I can do nothing about except giving you such a lecture to ponder upon. And, yes, open source software also gets "stolen" (read: included in commercial software without releasing the full source, which violates the original licence, e.g. GPL) but curious people find that out, too.

As you can see, I avoided personal insults. However, I find it ridiculous that when I threat you with banning you for your style (not your message!) then you threat me with becoming a martyr, to be followed and worshipped by the poor other non-agreers, on the altar of free speech if you do get banned. It not only doesn't make me "more of a man" to ban you, I won't even raise my eyebrow because there will be nothing to be surprised about for either of us.

Finally, I have a strong déjà vu feeling. Isn't that you, DABhand?