Originally Posted by Yoda
I've made no effort to contain, Gols. If I wanted to contain, I'd simply warn him to stop immediately...which is what I'll do if he continues.
oookay. You
are running a practicing democracy style of site, which is all much appreciated (until some become more equal than others under the starring system. Heheheh, only joking green-one, tis your site. Your star system would indeed make cyclical arguments like this one with you and akS far less likely. i.e. neither of yous is going to back down, or do more than name call really it seems, so what's being acheived? Won't talk about the tangent thing going on here coz i'm a tangent-monster meself. Oh yeah, and I know, i know, the equality thing is from communism. Damn. Frigging tangents)
Originally Posted by Yoda
As for Django: he wasn't banned, and anyone who regards the moderators here as "very unforgiving" probably hasn't been to many forums. I've been involved in quite a few boards, and I've never seen a group of forum managers put up with as many direct insults and attacks as this gang has.
I know Django wasn't banned, you don't ban, but i can imagine it appeared that way to anyone just reading the recent posts.
Originally Posted by Yoda
What the?
Heheh, thought the other stuff wouldn't go down to well (erm, i was well off on the not-posting thing tho
. A bit of "who's online" amateur sleuthing gone wrong)
I know you're a busy man, arguing about the nature of maturity and all that, but i'll stand by the "sam-isms" claim. It refers to your belief in Bush the second being a reasonable man who is doing and has done no real wrong. I won't bang on about it, and you don't have to come back to it, but some of the reasons for me believing him to be a bit iffy (man, i'm so damn polite
) are still hanging around on one of the Iraq threads. Like i said b4, i'd appreciate your views (and am open to being convinced that Bush is indeed an upright and positive influence in society, if you can negate or counter-balance those and other points that i have against him)
Again, your perogative.
The "general derision" comment feels a bit out of order now, considering that this is an open forum and you are a reasonable guy most of the time, but occasionally there is a bit of "rail-roading" into submission by regulars rather than triumph by debate which goes on. Still, pretty inevitable. Very well, have at those that spite thee (or ignore them if they're just out of nappies
)
Oh, dammit, you're gonna tell me you don't "have at them" at all now and other point-by-point refutations aren't you. Come to the Iraq thread. Cooooome. We should really change it to the why-bush-is-a-bit-iffy thread, but coooooome anyway. I can show you why the Bush/Enron relationship was dubious/highly-unprofessional/bad for the nation. I can tell you many intriguing and no-doubt infuriating things. Coooome. When you've calmed down