Good Sir Knight Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 and SkinWalker apparently has no love for any of the religions in the world. They have different religions, both of which deserve ridicule as all religious superstitions do. He censored almost every single one of my messages and of course I have no proof of it because he erased it. Go ahead and take a look at his last post in the genocide thread, he slams on the 'new commers' and espouses the brilliance of Nancy's supposed openminded thinking. He then deletes two of my messages in there and then subsequently deletes another one of mine while competing with my reposts. Honestly, if there was a thread in here that asked if gay's should be put to death there would be a different reaction. Why? Because SkinWalker holds someone's sexual preference over an entire society/race/religion. I think both are equal but SkinWalker holds things to a different standard I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 This issue is soooo 4 hours ago. Why don't you drop it? The posts were deleted and the thread was closed. You won, as evidenced by that fact that you wanted the thread closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good Sir Knight Posted August 1, 2006 Author Share Posted August 1, 2006 My posts were deleted. You don't see them because they're deleted. :| If anyone else was censored, they probably agreed with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancy Allen`` Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 Awww, you don't like how your flame bait is deleted? Well, tough. Follow the rules and you wouldn't have a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 Considering LF is privately owned they have the right to control content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 It occurred to me that having closed this thread, there were still going to be those that would be intrigued to read it until it made its way off the page. Since I've closed so few threads in this forum in the years I've been moderating it, and since I've had to actually modify, delete or otherwise censor so few members in that same period, regular posters here will undoubtedly wonder, WTF? and SkinWalker apparently has no love for any of the religions in the world. Correct. I am, however, fascinated by religions. But it is correct to assume that I have no love for superstitions. Stating the obvious notwithstanding, others might wonder what's GSK's point? It would certainly be a non sequitur to assume that because I've no love for the religious, I, therefore, feel the need to censor GSK's posts. The posts were not of religious nature; other religious people don't get their posts modified by me; and I've no way of knowing what GSK's religious beliefs are. He censored almost every single one of my messages and of course I have no proof of it because he erased it. So? This isn't a democracy. Its a message board. I deleted/censored your messages for the reasons already specified in the threads or via PM. Since I don't routinely delete, modify or censor the messages of others I disagree with here, it follows only that the reasons for censorship are because of rules violations. Go ahead and take a look at his last post in the genocide thread, he slams on the 'new commers' and espouses the brilliance of Nancy's supposed openminded thinking. "Espouses?" By saying that I adopted (this is what 'espouses' means) Nancy's "openminded thinking," GSK is acknowledging her open mind? More likely, what he wants to say is that I'm critical of him but not her. What GSK chooses to ignore is the fact that I addressed the thread in the only other post I made in it and that I praised nearly every member that posted in it up to the point that GSK posted. He and one other made some very personal, very rude, and very ugly comments that simply weren't warranted. Moreover, they were comments that attacked the person rather than the topic (ad hominem). These rules violations were deleted/censored and the thread was locked because: 1) the civility broke down, which I warned in an earlier post within the thread would be a reason to close it; 2) there is already another thread that can be used to discuss the topic Honestly, if there was a thread in here that asked if gay's should be put to death there would be a different reaction. Why? Because SkinWalker holds someone's sexual preference over an entire society/race/religion. This would be an example of a non sequitur as well as a straw man, and another example of GSK's desire to attack the individual (ad hominem) rather than the topic. I think both are equal but SkinWalker holds things to a different standard I guess. Both? GSK named four things: 1) sexual preference; 2) society; 3) race; 4) religion. One is left to wonder which of these GSK sees as equal and by what standards. Economic? Cultural? Moral? Should GSK desire to start a proper thread to discuss these or any other topic of debate, he is more than welcome. Soapbox threads like this one, however, will remain closed. If GSK or others have an issue with how the Senate Chambers is moderated, they can PM me directly. If they are uncomfortable with this because they think I'm being biased, unfair, Machiavellian, etc., they can PM a SuperModerator or an Administrator. Kurgen reads this forum regularly as do several SuperMods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.