Zone1 If leadership is forced to close a thread on a rule change...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well it's illegal. So you'd basically be accusing someone of a crime.

Of course, so is domestic terrorism but there's no concerted effort to establish a rule and a specific definition with regard to inferring someone is a domestic terrorist either. Or about insinuating that someone is making a legitimate threat just because they have an opposing view about something with regard to any given topical content. And that happens routinely enough to raise a brow. Even by ''staff.'' Guess it just depends on the check boxes. That's all I can legitimately gather anyway.

Though I still think it's peculiar that staff chose to define the term by using a model sourced by a child advocate for-profit group with an agenda attached to it from over in the UK, rather than premise the terms of controversy on a definition provided by a more relevant source, and one more germane to our own jurisdiction, like the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART)

Particularly given the glaring difference in depth and relevance between its definition and that of the children's charity with the agenda attached to it over in the UK.

I politely asked about why that was, as it was clearly a choice to use that model source. Never got an answer...
 
Last edited:
It is ABSOLUTELY being used that way.

If I call someone a groomer for advocating the sexual indoctrination of children...that is exactly the connotation that I am using.

I guess you are correct

”Groomer“ means someone who styles your hair. It has nothing to do with grooming children for homosexual sex
 
Is "pedophile" also banned? What other words would you ban?
Yes it is banned against other members. Please review the rules and guidelines located here.
 
Yes it is banned against other members. Please review the rules and guidelines located here.
SO why is not the Term NAZI and other terms that infer criminal behavior? Using this rule, anyone who calls me a denialist (referring the NAZI holocaust) in threads on climate change should also be banned. They are inferring that I am committing or would be committing the crimes that the NAZI's did.

I guess were going now into a game of semantics and favoritism on what is bannable.
 
Last edited:
Groomer is NOT another name for pedophile.

Grooming can be a form of manipulation of thought.
It is rare to see it used here as an innocent definition of "a form of manipulation of thought." Most here try to use it as a workaround for a Pedo accusation.
 
I think it is rather odd that a left-wing definition of the word "groomer" is being used rather than the legal description under US law where this company is based. Why is that?

  • No Accusations of other members relating to bestiality, grooming, or pedophilia. If you suspect a forum member is involved with grooming and/or pedophilia, DM the mods with your suspicions and evidence. Again, do NOT accuse other members of being a groomer or pedophile.

Why is this rule not applied to other forms of illegal activity or inferences of criminal conduct?

Attacking the individual is one of the main reasons that discussion here get sidetracked IMHO.
 
And to smear every teacher in the world because of the actions of a very tiny few.
You left out Scout Leaders, Priests, Preachers, Coaches, and day care workers, most of those being very good morally ethical people also.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top