I think we need some posters to volunteer to monitor any unfairness.

[Jitss617]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

 

[Jitss617]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

 

[Jitss617]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

If the owner is not making the rules, then someone he allows to make decisions for him are making the rules on his behalf.

Your claim that 99% of the members disagree is absolute bullshit. Got any actual evidence of that? lol Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

Oh, and as you are so fond of saying, if you don't like the way things are run, you are free to leave.

 

[Jitss617]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

If the owner is not making the rules, then someone he allows to make decisions for him are making the rules on his behalf.

Your claim that 99% of the members disagree is absolute bullshit. Got any actual evidence of that? lol Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

Oh, and as you are so fond of saying, if you don't like the way things are run, you are free to leave.

Yes and that’s why I have taken some
Actions behind then scene. And I speak up, you can censor me all you want.. im
Doing nothing different thank than anyone here . Neither are the other patriots getting censored.. freedom
Will rein

 

[beautress]

I'm sick of the little lefty dweebs that insult others and when they get it back they go running to the Mods. So OP, NO!!!

I had a very wise literature proffessor years and years ago. When someone wished out loud the story would have been better with such and such and so being a better ending. He reminded them they'd get a better grade on the exam if they allowed the author to speak and answered the quiz accordingly.

The real problem here is that our society prospered under the Constitution's guidance. We get in a lot less trouble when we heed its wisdom. Eisenhower era leguslation, based on stripes we took as a nation, banned communism by law.

Our current issues stem directly from the Pelosi push to inflict commie tactics on the masses. Commies replace decency and religion with the state exclusively. They have forced schools to cancel morning prayers and replace it with nothing. This was the beginning of communistic reps to rid themselves of praises to the Maker. Now, the push is against the second amendment, which is being gnawed away by misinterpreted events that show cops disciplining a lawbreaker, whilst ignoring footage of the grisly crime and disobediance and cop abuse that got the perpetrator stopped from doing further damage to not only the cops but to bystanders as well. The democrats are demanding cops to crater to criminal behavior. Letting bad behavior rule begs a terrible situation. Which often kills someone who is innocent.

I urge the cities who are letting bad people win to please reconsider traditional punishments that stop the behavior.

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

If the owner is not making the rules, then someone he allows to make decisions for him are making the rules on his behalf.

Your claim that 99% of the members disagree is absolute bullshit. Got any actual evidence of that? lol Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

Oh, and as you are so fond of saying, if you don't like the way things are run, you are free to leave.

Yes and that’s why I have taken some
Actions behind then scene. And I speak up, you can censor me all you want.. im
Doing nothing different thank than anyone here . Neither are the other patriots getting censored.. freedom
Will rein

First of all, I do not censor you. I argue with you directly. I may laugh at you, or mock you. But I do not censor you.

As for your "actions behind the scenes", I am sure your claim of 99% disagreeing with the new rules is met with much laughter and shaking of heads.

Freedom does reign (not rein). YOu are free to do what you want within the stated rules of this site.

And please tell me what new rules are causing you such problems?

 

[Jitss617]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

If the owner is not making the rules, then someone he allows to make decisions for him are making the rules on his behalf.

Your claim that 99% of the members disagree is absolute bullshit. Got any actual evidence of that? lol Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

Oh, and as you are so fond of saying, if you don't like the way things are run, you are free to leave.

Yes and that’s why I have taken some
Actions behind then scene. And I speak up, you can censor me all you want.. im
Doing nothing different thank than anyone here . Neither are the other patriots getting censored.. freedom
Will rein

First of all, I do not censor you. I argue with you directly. I may laugh at you, or mock you. But I do not censor you.

As for your "actions behind the scenes", I am sure your claim of 99% disagreeing with the new rules is met with much laughter and shaking of heads.

Freedom does reign (not rein). YOu are free to do what you want within the stated rules of this site.

And please tell me what new rules are causing you such problems?

I’m NK different thank most I just verbally execute my opposition hehe

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

If the owner is not making the rules, then someone he allows to make decisions for him are making the rules on his behalf.

Your claim that 99% of the members disagree is absolute bullshit. Got any actual evidence of that? lol Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

Oh, and as you are so fond of saying, if you don't like the way things are run, you are free to leave.

Yes and that’s why I have taken some
Actions behind then scene. And I speak up, you can censor me all you want.. im
Doing nothing different thank than anyone here . Neither are the other patriots getting censored.. freedom
Will rein

First of all, I do not censor you. I argue with you directly. I may laugh at you, or mock you. But I do not censor you.

As for your "actions behind the scenes", I am sure your claim of 99% disagreeing with the new rules is met with much laughter and shaking of heads.

Freedom does reign (not rein). YOu are free to do what you want within the stated rules of this site.

And please tell me what new rules are causing you such problems?

I’m NK different thank most I just verbally execute my opposition hehe

Are you try to say "I'm not different than most. I just verbally execute my opposition"? Wow, just wow.

 

[Jitss617]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

If the owner is not making the rules, then someone he allows to make decisions for him are making the rules on his behalf.

Your claim that 99% of the members disagree is absolute bullshit. Got any actual evidence of that? lol Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

Oh, and as you are so fond of saying, if you don't like the way things are run, you are free to leave.

Yes and that’s why I have taken some
Actions behind then scene. And I speak up, you can censor me all you want.. im
Doing nothing different thank than anyone here . Neither are the other patriots getting censored.. freedom
Will rein

First of all, I do not censor you. I argue with you directly. I may laugh at you, or mock you. But I do not censor you.

As for your "actions behind the scenes", I am sure your claim of 99% disagreeing with the new rules is met with much laughter and shaking of heads.

Freedom does reign (not rein). YOu are free to do what you want within the stated rules of this site.

And please tell me what new rules are causing you such problems?

I’m NK different thank most I just verbally execute my opposition hehe

Are you try to say "I'm not different than most. I just verbally execute my opposition"? Wow, just wow.

Are you try

Huh

 

[WinterBorn]

Ok, Jitsie, let me offer you a simple challenge.

Explain why you call me a communist. YOu have done it repeatedly. If it is not just name-calling, give me valid reasons you insist I am a communist.

See above.. wow.. anyone that defend censorship the way you do wants control of human beings. Power is addictive to some people I don’t want it. Maybe it’s in your blood it’s not in mine let freedom reign I will die for it.

I defend people right to do what they choose to do with their own property. You are welcome to stand on a street corner and say anything you want. But someone purchases the bandwidth and the technology to provide this web site. You pay nothing. Yet you want to tell them what they can and cannot do with their property.

And what censorship? They deny you the "right" to harass people? They deny you the "right" to lie? You have no argument. This is private property, and you can follow the rules of the people who own and run the property, or you can face the consequences.

If you are calling me a communist because I believe in the rights of private property and the right of the owners of private property to do with it as they see fit (within reason), then you need to educate yourself on what a "communist" really is.

I’m not gonna debate with you for your romance of censorship I’m against it you’re not.. I agree to disagree on censorship and I think your fallacies about what Is said on this board is extreme. And not engaging. I just say way when freedom comes your way accept your fate.

How about if someone decides they want to go on some Christian tv show and talk about Hinduism? Are the Christians censoring them? Are they prohibiting their free speech? No. They own the station or the program, so they get to decide.

I accept and revel in freedom. I celebrate being able to own property, either real or intellectual. If you don't like the rules here, buy your own equipment annd start your own site.

I understand that you do not want to debate this. You have no argument.

I’m not debating censorship with a communist take a hike you fucking loser

I see that you disagree with privately owned property. Sounds very much like a communist ideal to me.

I will stay where I choose to stay, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. If you don't want to debate, go find a site where personal attacks and harassment are encouraged.

Ok turn down the propaganda machine lol. Anti free speech anti second amendment. Bad combination

No propaganda. Just facts about private property that you want to ignore. You obviously have no respect for someone owning property and making their own choice about how it is run.

I am a firm supporter of both free speech and the 2nd amendment. Statements to the contrary are lies.

I’ve never made a comment about the person that owns this site at all what are you talking about I don’t even know who it is. Slow down your propaganda

You want to remove their control over their property. When you first signed up for this site, you were encouraged to read the rules. You did and then decided they shouldn't apply to you, and that they should maintain the equipment and bandwidth for you to use without you being willing to follow their rules.

I don’t even know who owns this site what are you talking about how can I tell the owner he has no ownership if I don’t know who it is

You are saying your right to free speech trumps his ownership of this web site. You don't need to know who owns it to say they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property. You are just saying they don't have the right to decide what happens on their property.

If you go on to someone else's land or in their house, they can forbid you to carry a gun. That does not take away your right to bear arms. It simply means they decide what happens on their property.

If you go into someone's house, they are not obligated to allow you to worship as you choose. They are not revoking your 1st amendment rights. They are simply choosing what happens on their property.

I still don’t know what you’re talking about the owner of the site is not making the rules I’m trying to let him know that 99% of the members disagree with the new rules. New rules are meant to pacify left-wing people who are going through a hard time that they can’t win an election

If the owner is not making the rules, then someone he allows to make decisions for him are making the rules on his behalf.

Your claim that 99% of the members disagree is absolute bullshit. Got any actual evidence of that? lol Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

Oh, and as you are so fond of saying, if you don't like the way things are run, you are free to leave.

Yes and that’s why I have taken some
Actions behind then scene. And I speak up, you can censor me all you want.. im
Doing nothing different thank than anyone here . Neither are the other patriots getting censored.. freedom
Will rein

First of all, I do not censor you. I argue with you directly. I may laugh at you, or mock you. But I do not censor you.

As for your "actions behind the scenes", I am sure your claim of 99% disagreeing with the new rules is met with much laughter and shaking of heads.

Freedom does reign (not rein). YOu are free to do what you want within the stated rules of this site.

And please tell me what new rules are causing you such problems?

I’m NK different thank most I just verbally execute my opposition hehe

Are you try to say "I'm not different than most. I just verbally execute my opposition"? Wow, just wow.

Are you try

Huh

LMAO!

 

[WinterBorn]

Here are the "new rules" you are throwing a fit about:

from flacaltenn's thread Yes.. USMB Moderation is Asking for Discussions..


"Titles and Opening Posts
1) Title must contain sufficient clues about the ACTUAL expected discussion. Titles like "How stupid are These People" can't be SEARCHED or indexed for search for the use of members or mods to find and manage existing active threads.

2) Titles must be free of INFLAMMATORY words, name calling or "pet names".. Those things are what make a title "baiting".

3) The "user content" in OPs that the existing rules require needs to be "stepped up".. "Get a load of this" -- is no longer sufficient topical content"... Must be 2 lines or more.. The more the better.. Must SUMMARIZE the topic to be discussed and why you think it NEEDS discussion..

To sum that up.. We're REQUIRING the Original Posters to START a clean topical discussion.,. No more juiced incendiary titles and ranting OPs.. If it's important enough for you to dash to a keyboard to poke it in -- need to put in the effort to start the discussion with YOUR views of the topic..

Post Content
Currently the Rules require "specific topical content" in EVERY post.. And the moderation method for that is stone simple..

Post has "specific topical content" --- stop reading, ignore the rest, it's legal.
Post LACKS "specific topical content" -- It's illegal.. Delete and/or warn...

1) That rule will edited to read "must contain substantial and relevant topical content".. This means that unsubstantiated generalizations about groups or political opponents is NOT ALONE sufficient as "specific topical content" anymore.. Yeah, you have to stop and think and spend a few calories composing a post..

2) Repetition, badgering, harassment, and repeatedly ignoring requests to clarify or answer questions MAY get you booted or warned... This may be specified in the official rules in the coming days.

3) Meme pics are OK - if they are about topic and NOT just personal and fit the definition of substantial and relevant.

4) Posts on the 1st two opening pages of a thread will be CHECKED by moderation when they visit.. These will be HIGHLY moderated, because the course of thread is determined largely in the 1st pages... If you're caught dropping into a brand new topic just to attack or flame -- you'll be warned and banned for one day.. Assuming there isn't more damage to the thread later on.. If you don't care to DISCUSS the topic first -- DONT DROP IN.. This is probably the most common issue we have with "tone", anger, and stinkyness of this place lately. It's a personality pile-on on Pg1.. Not happening anymore.. Keep a distance from members you consider "retards or morons".. Just ignore what you consider to be crap.. Don't prance thru it barefoot.. "

What is the problem? You want to reserve the right to attack people without commenting on the actual topic? You want to be able to call people names in the OP of a thread? Such lofty goals.

 

[Jitss617]

Here are the "new rules" you are throwing a fit about:

from flacaltenn's thread Yes.. USMB Moderation is Asking for Discussions..


"Titles and Opening Posts
1) Title must contain sufficient clues about the ACTUAL expected discussion. Titles like "How stupid are These People" can't be SEARCHED or indexed for search for the use of members or mods to find and manage existing active threads.

2) Titles must be free of INFLAMMATORY words, name calling or "pet names".. Those things are what make a title "baiting".

3) The "user content" in OPs that the existing rules require needs to be "stepped up".. "Get a load of this" -- is no longer sufficient topical content"... Must be 2 lines or more.. The more the better.. Must SUMMARIZE the topic to be discussed and why you think it NEEDS discussion..

To sum that up.. We're REQUIRING the Original Posters to START a clean topical discussion.,. No more juiced incendiary titles and ranting OPs.. If it's important enough for you to dash to a keyboard to poke it in -- need to put in the effort to start the discussion with YOUR views of the topic..

Post Content
Currently the Rules require "specific topical content" in EVERY post.. And the moderation method for that is stone simple..

Post has "specific topical content" --- stop reading, ignore the rest, it's legal.
Post LACKS "specific topical content" -- It's illegal.. Delete and/or warn...

1) That rule will edited to read "must contain substantial and relevant topical content".. This means that unsubstantiated generalizations about groups or political opponents is NOT ALONE sufficient as "specific topical content" anymore.. Yeah, you have to stop and think and spend a few calories composing a post..

2) Repetition, badgering, harassment, and repeatedly ignoring requests to clarify or answer questions MAY get you booted or warned... This may be specified in the official rules in the coming days.

3) Meme pics are OK - if they are about topic and NOT just personal and fit the definition of substantial and relevant.

4) Posts on the 1st two opening pages of a thread will be CHECKED by moderation when they visit.. These will be HIGHLY moderated, because the course of thread is determined largely in the 1st pages... If you're caught dropping into a brand new topic just to attack or flame -- you'll be warned and banned for one day.. Assuming there isn't more damage to the thread later on.. If you don't care to DISCUSS the topic first -- DONT DROP IN.. This is probably the most common issue we have with "tone", anger, and stinkyness of this place lately. It's a personality pile-on on Pg1.. Not happening anymore.. Keep a distance from members you consider "retards or morons".. Just ignore what you consider to be crap.. Don't prance thru it barefoot.. "

What is the problem? You want to reserve the right to attack people without commenting on the actual topic? You want to be able to call people names in the OP of a thread? Such lofty goals.

Promoting censorship,, must be election season,, democrats protections their feelings.. 99% of the posters here prefer freedom.

 

[WinterBorn]

Here are the "new rules" you are throwing a fit about:

from flacaltenn's thread Yes.. USMB Moderation is Asking for Discussions..


"Titles and Opening Posts
1) Title must contain sufficient clues about the ACTUAL expected discussion. Titles like "How stupid are These People" can't be SEARCHED or indexed for search for the use of members or mods to find and manage existing active threads.

2) Titles must be free of INFLAMMATORY words, name calling or "pet names".. Those things are what make a title "baiting".

3) The "user content" in OPs that the existing rules require needs to be "stepped up".. "Get a load of this" -- is no longer sufficient topical content"... Must be 2 lines or more.. The more the better.. Must SUMMARIZE the topic to be discussed and why you think it NEEDS discussion..

To sum that up.. We're REQUIRING the Original Posters to START a clean topical discussion.,. No more juiced incendiary titles and ranting OPs.. If it's important enough for you to dash to a keyboard to poke it in -- need to put in the effort to start the discussion with YOUR views of the topic..

Post Content
Currently the Rules require "specific topical content" in EVERY post.. And the moderation method for that is stone simple..

Post has "specific topical content" --- stop reading, ignore the rest, it's legal.
Post LACKS "specific topical content" -- It's illegal.. Delete and/or warn...

1) That rule will edited to read "must contain substantial and relevant topical content".. This means that unsubstantiated generalizations about groups or political opponents is NOT ALONE sufficient as "specific topical content" anymore.. Yeah, you have to stop and think and spend a few calories composing a post..

2) Repetition, badgering, harassment, and repeatedly ignoring requests to clarify or answer questions MAY get you booted or warned... This may be specified in the official rules in the coming days.

3) Meme pics are OK - if they are about topic and NOT just personal and fit the definition of substantial and relevant.

4) Posts on the 1st two opening pages of a thread will be CHECKED by moderation when they visit.. These will be HIGHLY moderated, because the course of thread is determined largely in the 1st pages... If you're caught dropping into a brand new topic just to attack or flame -- you'll be warned and banned for one day.. Assuming there isn't more damage to the thread later on.. If you don't care to DISCUSS the topic first -- DONT DROP IN.. This is probably the most common issue we have with "tone", anger, and stinkyness of this place lately. It's a personality pile-on on Pg1.. Not happening anymore.. Keep a distance from members you consider "retards or morons".. Just ignore what you consider to be crap.. Don't prance thru it barefoot.. "

What is the problem? You want to reserve the right to attack people without commenting on the actual topic? You want to be able to call people names in the OP of a thread? Such lofty goals.

Promoting censorship,, must be election season,, democrats protections their feelings.. 99% of the posters here prefer freedom.

Vague attempts to cloak your whining as patriotism does not work.

What, specifically, do you have a problem with concerning these "new" rules? They have already been in place since I got here. They are just warning people that the rules will be enforced more.

But do point out which of the rules listed flacaltenn's post you have a problem with?

 

[Jitss617]

Here are the "new rules" you are throwing a fit about:

from flacaltenn's thread Yes.. USMB Moderation is Asking for Discussions..


"Titles and Opening Posts
1) Title must contain sufficient clues about the ACTUAL expected discussion. Titles like "How stupid are These People" can't be SEARCHED or indexed for search for the use of members or mods to find and manage existing active threads.

2) Titles must be free of INFLAMMATORY words, name calling or "pet names".. Those things are what make a title "baiting".

3) The "user content" in OPs that the existing rules require needs to be "stepped up".. "Get a load of this" -- is no longer sufficient topical content"... Must be 2 lines or more.. The more the better.. Must SUMMARIZE the topic to be discussed and why you think it NEEDS discussion..

To sum that up.. We're REQUIRING the Original Posters to START a clean topical discussion.,. No more juiced incendiary titles and ranting OPs.. If it's important enough for you to dash to a keyboard to poke it in -- need to put in the effort to start the discussion with YOUR views of the topic..

Post Content
Currently the Rules require "specific topical content" in EVERY post.. And the moderation method for that is stone simple..

Post has "specific topical content" --- stop reading, ignore the rest, it's legal.
Post LACKS "specific topical content" -- It's illegal.. Delete and/or warn...

1) That rule will edited to read "must contain substantial and relevant topical content".. This means that unsubstantiated generalizations about groups or political opponents is NOT ALONE sufficient as "specific topical content" anymore.. Yeah, you have to stop and think and spend a few calories composing a post..

2) Repetition, badgering, harassment, and repeatedly ignoring requests to clarify or answer questions MAY get you booted or warned... This may be specified in the official rules in the coming days.

3) Meme pics are OK - if they are about topic and NOT just personal and fit the definition of substantial and relevant.

4) Posts on the 1st two opening pages of a thread will be CHECKED by moderation when they visit.. These will be HIGHLY moderated, because the course of thread is determined largely in the 1st pages... If you're caught dropping into a brand new topic just to attack or flame -- you'll be warned and banned for one day.. Assuming there isn't more damage to the thread later on.. If you don't care to DISCUSS the topic first -- DONT DROP IN.. This is probably the most common issue we have with "tone", anger, and stinkyness of this place lately. It's a personality pile-on on Pg1.. Not happening anymore.. Keep a distance from members you consider "retards or morons".. Just ignore what you consider to be crap.. Don't prance thru it barefoot.. "

What is the problem? You want to reserve the right to attack people without commenting on the actual topic? You want to be able to call people names in the OP of a thread? Such lofty goals.

Promoting censorship,, must be election season,, democrats protections their feelings.. 99% of the posters here prefer freedom.

Vague attempts to cloak your whining as patriotism does not work.

What, specifically, do you have a problem with concerning these "new" rules? They have already been in place since I got here. They are just warning people that the rules will be enforced more.

But do point out which of the rules listed flacaltenn's post you have a problem with?

Many of us including in the mass email are saying democrats and John Roberts are deleting to many posts because there feelings are hurt

 

[WinterBorn]

Here are the "new rules" you are throwing a fit about:

from flacaltenn's thread Yes.. USMB Moderation is Asking for Discussions..


"Titles and Opening Posts
1) Title must contain sufficient clues about the ACTUAL expected discussion. Titles like "How stupid are These People" can't be SEARCHED or indexed for search for the use of members or mods to find and manage existing active threads.

2) Titles must be free of INFLAMMATORY words, name calling or "pet names".. Those things are what make a title "baiting".

3) The "user content" in OPs that the existing rules require needs to be "stepped up".. "Get a load of this" -- is no longer sufficient topical content"... Must be 2 lines or more.. The more the better.. Must SUMMARIZE the topic to be discussed and why you think it NEEDS discussion..

To sum that up.. We're REQUIRING the Original Posters to START a clean topical discussion.,. No more juiced incendiary titles and ranting OPs.. If it's important enough for you to dash to a keyboard to poke it in -- need to put in the effort to start the discussion with YOUR views of the topic..

Post Content
Currently the Rules require "specific topical content" in EVERY post.. And the moderation method for that is stone simple..

Post has "specific topical content" --- stop reading, ignore the rest, it's legal.
Post LACKS "specific topical content" -- It's illegal.. Delete and/or warn...

1) That rule will edited to read "must contain substantial and relevant topical content".. This means that unsubstantiated generalizations about groups or political opponents is NOT ALONE sufficient as "specific topical content" anymore.. Yeah, you have to stop and think and spend a few calories composing a post..

2) Repetition, badgering, harassment, and repeatedly ignoring requests to clarify or answer questions MAY get you booted or warned... This may be specified in the official rules in the coming days.

3) Meme pics are OK - if they are about topic and NOT just personal and fit the definition of substantial and relevant.

4) Posts on the 1st two opening pages of a thread will be CHECKED by moderation when they visit.. These will be HIGHLY moderated, because the course of thread is determined largely in the 1st pages... If you're caught dropping into a brand new topic just to attack or flame -- you'll be warned and banned for one day.. Assuming there isn't more damage to the thread later on.. If you don't care to DISCUSS the topic first -- DONT DROP IN.. This is probably the most common issue we have with "tone", anger, and stinkyness of this place lately. It's a personality pile-on on Pg1.. Not happening anymore.. Keep a distance from members you consider "retards or morons".. Just ignore what you consider to be crap.. Don't prance thru it barefoot.. "

What is the problem? You want to reserve the right to attack people without commenting on the actual topic? You want to be able to call people names in the OP of a thread? Such lofty goals.

Promoting censorship,, must be election season,, democrats protections their feelings.. 99% of the posters here prefer freedom.

Vague attempts to cloak your whining as patriotism does not work.

What, specifically, do you have a problem with concerning these "new" rules? They have already been in place since I got here. They are just warning people that the rules will be enforced more.

But do point out which of the rules listed flacaltenn's post you have a problem with?

Many of us including in the mass email are saying democrats and John Roberts are deleting to many posts because there feelings are hurt

Did the posts violate the rules listed above? If so, blame the person who broke the simple rules. Unless it is you. I know you will never blame yourself for any violations.

That said, there is no need for the incredible amount of hostility and vitriol on some poster's posts. Stick with the topic and leave out the attempts at the insults, personal attacks and bullshit. Then you can debate or discuss to your heart's content.

What you are throwing a fit about is your desire to be free to be assholes. What you are defending is to be able to stray off topic specifically to attack people. It is ridiculous.

 

[Jitss617]

Here are the "new rules" you are throwing a fit about:

from flacaltenn's thread Yes.. USMB Moderation is Asking for Discussions..


"Titles and Opening Posts
1) Title must contain sufficient clues about the ACTUAL expected discussion. Titles like "How stupid are These People" can't be SEARCHED or indexed for search for the use of members or mods to find and manage existing active threads.

2) Titles must be free of INFLAMMATORY words, name calling or "pet names".. Those things are what make a title "baiting".

3) The "user content" in OPs that the existing rules require needs to be "stepped up".. "Get a load of this" -- is no longer sufficient topical content"... Must be 2 lines or more.. The more the better.. Must SUMMARIZE the topic to be discussed and why you think it NEEDS discussion..

To sum that up.. We're REQUIRING the Original Posters to START a clean topical discussion.,. No more juiced incendiary titles and ranting OPs.. If it's important enough for you to dash to a keyboard to poke it in -- need to put in the effort to start the discussion with YOUR views of the topic..

Post Content
Currently the Rules require "specific topical content" in EVERY post.. And the moderation method for that is stone simple..

Post has "specific topical content" --- stop reading, ignore the rest, it's legal.
Post LACKS "specific topical content" -- It's illegal.. Delete and/or warn...

1) That rule will edited to read "must contain substantial and relevant topical content".. This means that unsubstantiated generalizations about groups or political opponents is NOT ALONE sufficient as "specific topical content" anymore.. Yeah, you have to stop and think and spend a few calories composing a post..

2) Repetition, badgering, harassment, and repeatedly ignoring requests to clarify or answer questions MAY get you booted or warned... This may be specified in the official rules in the coming days.

3) Meme pics are OK - if they are about topic and NOT just personal and fit the definition of substantial and relevant.

4) Posts on the 1st two opening pages of a thread will be CHECKED by moderation when they visit.. These will be HIGHLY moderated, because the course of thread is determined largely in the 1st pages... If you're caught dropping into a brand new topic just to attack or flame -- you'll be warned and banned for one day.. Assuming there isn't more damage to the thread later on.. If you don't care to DISCUSS the topic first -- DONT DROP IN.. This is probably the most common issue we have with "tone", anger, and stinkyness of this place lately. It's a personality pile-on on Pg1.. Not happening anymore.. Keep a distance from members you consider "retards or morons".. Just ignore what you consider to be crap.. Don't prance thru it barefoot.. "

What is the problem? You want to reserve the right to attack people without commenting on the actual topic? You want to be able to call people names in the OP of a thread? Such lofty goals.

Promoting censorship,, must be election season,, democrats protections their feelings.. 99% of the posters here prefer freedom.

Vague attempts to cloak your whining as patriotism does not work.

What, specifically, do you have a problem with concerning these "new" rules? They have already been in place since I got here. They are just warning people that the rules will be enforced more.

But do point out which of the rules listed flacaltenn's post you have a problem with?

Many of us including in the mass email are saying democrats and John Roberts are deleting to many posts because there feelings are hurt

Did the posts violate the rules listed above? If so, blame the person who broke the simple rules. Unless it is you. I know you will never blame yourself for any violations.

That said, there is no need for the incredible amount of hostility and vitriol on some poster's posts. Stick with the topic and leave out the attempts at the insults, personal attacks and bullshit. Then you can debate or discuss to your heart's content.

What you are throwing a fit about is your desire to be free to be assholes. What you are defending is to be able to stray off topic specifically to attack people. It is ridiculous.

Are you saying they don’t participate in banter? Outside of the topic?

 

[WinterBorn]

Here are the "new rules" you are throwing a fit about:

from flacaltenn's thread Yes.. USMB Moderation is Asking for Discussions..


"Titles and Opening Posts
1) Title must contain sufficient clues about the ACTUAL expected discussion. Titles like "How stupid are These People" can't be SEARCHED or indexed for search for the use of members or mods to find and manage existing active threads.

2) Titles must be free of INFLAMMATORY words, name calling or "pet names".. Those things are what make a title "baiting".

3) The "user content" in OPs that the existing rules require needs to be "stepped up".. "Get a load of this" -- is no longer sufficient topical content"... Must be 2 lines or more.. The more the better.. Must SUMMARIZE the topic to be discussed and why you think it NEEDS discussion..

To sum that up.. We're REQUIRING the Original Posters to START a clean topical discussion.,. No more juiced incendiary titles and ranting OPs.. If it's important enough for you to dash to a keyboard to poke it in -- need to put in the effort to start the discussion with YOUR views of the topic..

Post Content
Currently the Rules require "specific topical content" in EVERY post.. And the moderation method for that is stone simple..

Post has "specific topical content" --- stop reading, ignore the rest, it's legal.
Post LACKS "specific topical content" -- It's illegal.. Delete and/or warn...

1) That rule will edited to read "must contain substantial and relevant topical content".. This means that unsubstantiated generalizations about groups or political opponents is NOT ALONE sufficient as "specific topical content" anymore.. Yeah, you have to stop and think and spend a few calories composing a post..

2) Repetition, badgering, harassment, and repeatedly ignoring requests to clarify or answer questions MAY get you booted or warned... This may be specified in the official rules in the coming days.

3) Meme pics are OK - if they are about topic and NOT just personal and fit the definition of substantial and relevant.

4) Posts on the 1st two opening pages of a thread will be CHECKED by moderation when they visit.. These will be HIGHLY moderated, because the course of thread is determined largely in the 1st pages... If you're caught dropping into a brand new topic just to attack or flame -- you'll be warned and banned for one day.. Assuming there isn't more damage to the thread later on.. If you don't care to DISCUSS the topic first -- DONT DROP IN.. This is probably the most common issue we have with "tone", anger, and stinkyness of this place lately. It's a personality pile-on on Pg1.. Not happening anymore.. Keep a distance from members you consider "retards or morons".. Just ignore what you consider to be crap.. Don't prance thru it barefoot.. "

What is the problem? You want to reserve the right to attack people without commenting on the actual topic? You want to be able to call people names in the OP of a thread? Such lofty goals.

Promoting censorship,, must be election season,, democrats protections their feelings.. 99% of the posters here prefer freedom.

Vague attempts to cloak your whining as patriotism does not work.

What, specifically, do you have a problem with concerning these "new" rules? They have already been in place since I got here. They are just warning people that the rules will be enforced more.

But do point out which of the rules listed flacaltenn's post you have a problem with?

Many of us including in the mass email are saying democrats and John Roberts are deleting to many posts because there feelings are hurt

Did the posts violate the rules listed above? If so, blame the person who broke the simple rules. Unless it is you. I know you will never blame yourself for any violations.

That said, there is no need for the incredible amount of hostility and vitriol on some poster's posts. Stick with the topic and leave out the attempts at the insults, personal attacks and bullshit. Then you can debate or discuss to your heart's content.

What you are throwing a fit about is your desire to be free to be assholes. What you are defending is to be able to stray off topic specifically to attack people. It is ridiculous.

Are you saying they don’t participate in banter? Outside of the topic?

Did I say that? No.

But I don't see them claiming the basic rules of this board violate their free speech.