I've never had an issue with F2P, what I do avoid on the other hand is games that have you spam your FB contacts. I've been playing "The Last Stand: Dead Zone" for working on two years and not once have I ever been prompted to invite a friend to "recharge your power" or some other nonsense.

Really? Feel free to skip to the 5 minute mark.

"What do "you" gain...?" I believe he said he runs popular twitter accounts, not fake accounts. Or did you mean to ask what would "someone" gain from running fake twitter accounts?

When calling out other people's "stupidity," you might want to ensure that you're using correct grammar.

"Watch Dogs releases next week"

In high school when I got home in the afternoon I'd have a quick snack and watch bob ross to wind down for a nap until evening track practice. When I went to Uni I had to take art appreciation and we were all asked who our favorite artist was. Everyone was pandering with the typical classic masters, but not me, Bob…

There are three game forms. Player w/ AI vs. Computer, Player w/ other players vs. AI and Players vs. Players.

Honestly? Not particularly bad. I'd merely suggest that the authors do as suggested and interact with the readers for a period after they post an article as per what Stephen Totilo announced they'd be doing. If the author isn't in control of their own article less than a half hour after it's posted, it's on their…

Unfortunately as I have no knowledge as to whether there is someone other than the author who edits the articles; which it wouldn't surprise me if there were, I can only direct this to the person who has their name attached to the piece.

There's a post within this discussion tree that has the ToS listed, that basically echoes your sentiment. Feel free to read the ToS and my response to the limitations of the ToS.

Regarding the author's ability to do whatever they want. I agree, I have no ability to force them to anything. What I can do on the other…

I do believe it was within just the last year when Stephen Totilo made an "Editor" post regarding changes to the site. One of which was how the authors of the articles were going to be far more active in the articles that they post. Replying to commenters and interacting with the community because we're "what makes…

If it were merely my comment I could rationalize that he didn't like something specifically about my comment. He deleted an entire discussion tree that was discussing critiques about the pictures shown.

If the discussion tree had turned into; or was beginning to appear as if it were being slanderous or hateful that would be one thing. At the time of the removal there were no such posts.

General constructive critiques. I've posted a handful of examples in response to other people asking what they were.

There were no, "fuck she's ugly" or "why the fuck would she even try" etc. It was merely commentary regarding poor symmetry of the embellishments, the water scum on the concrete, etc.

I believe the comment "approval" system works based on how many times your posts have been starred in the past. If you have a higher ratio of starred posts, your replies become priority posts that are instantly white instead of gray. I can't say honestly, all my posts have been white since day one of this system.

The discussion tree of critiques that were removed covered a number of pictures. The Zip tie, the door handle, the water scum on the concrete, the armor under her arm cause her side to bunch up, the poor choice of focusing on her ass/legs when they aren't particularly ideal areas on her, the tackiness of the tattoo,…

I'd wager a good bit of article leads are provided by readers who are either in the industry or are merely in the know members of the site for other reasons.

I found it vastly more disrespectful for the author to simply delete an entire discussion tree worth of posts because he simply didn't like them.

The site is designed around an understood back and forth. Articles are posted, we reply to them and thereby generate ad hits to pay for the site. When you heavy handily…

If it were someone railing into their articles and being completely outlandish and slanderous, I get it. If it's correcting incorrect statements in the article, tough it up. If it's disagreeing with view points, big deal. But when people are critiquing cosplay, that's part of cosplay.

Hence my strong articulated response.