After careful consideration over a few drinks, I've decided that I will
be responding to blatant and readily disprovable lies posted here with the word "Bulls***."
Now, technically, the echo rules say that swearing should be kept to a minimum, so I'm placing that responsibility on you: Please verify all claims before you post them in order to keep swearing to a minimum.
After careful consideration over a few drinks, I've decided that I will be responding to blatant and readily disprovable lies posted here with t word "Bulls***."You are not the moderator here.
Now, technically, the echo rules say that swearing should be kept to a minimum, so I'm placing that responsibility on you: Please verify all cl before you post them in order to keep swearing to a minimum.
BS is acceptable. Spelling it out is not. It is up to you and you only as to how you react to things.
If you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo will disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.
If you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo will disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.
You [Jeff Thiele] are not the moderator here.
BS is acceptable. Spelling it out is not. It is up to you and you only as
to how you react to things.
If you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo will disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.
First warning.
If you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo will disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.
willAfter careful consideration over a few drinks, I've decided that I
with tbe responding to blatant and readily disprovable lies posted here
to aword "Bulls***."
Now, technically, the echo rules say that swearing should be kept
all clminimum, so I'm placing that responsibility on you: Please verify
before you post them in order to keep swearing to a minimum.
You are not the moderator here.
I am not. But I am free to interpret the rules as I see fit, with regards to
my own behavior.
Incidentally, "to a minimum" is failry vague and ill-defined.
BS is acceptable. Spelling it out is not. It is up to you and youonly
as to how you react to things.
I will only spell it out in response to blatant and readily disprovable lies.
I will spell it out for no other reason. That should comply with keeping it
to a minimum.
If you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo will
disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.
I will be keeping my swearing to a minimum, in compliance with the rules.
Aren't logical fallacies likewise to be kept to a minimum? I don't see you enforcing those.
Aren't logical fallacies likewise to be kept to a minimum? I don't se enforcing those.There is no logical fallacy -
This, then, means that Mike knows that lies and misinformation are being posted here, but chooses to do nothing about it, either as a regular
If you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo will disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.
It's almost as if you think there are a lot of blatant and easily disprovable lies being posted here. That's not a very good vote of confidence in your ideological brethren, now is it?
Aren't logical fallacies likewise to be kept to a minimum? I don't see you enforcing those.
No, but I do know that "easily disprovable" for you often means "what I say is so." You argue with Aaron all the time but rarely back up your posts with any links to anything that proves what you say is true.If you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo will disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.It's almost as if you think there are a lot of blatant and easily dispro lies being posted here. That's not a very good vote of confidence in you ideological brethren, now is it?
Aren't logical fallacies likewise to be kept to a minimum? I don't see y enforcing those.Swearing is easy to catch, especially when someone threatens to do so, knowing it is against the rules but assuming that the rules don't apply
to them.
willIf you continue down your stated path, your posts in this echo
disappear from anyone's BBS that gets their feed from me.
The problem with this threat, of course, is that if I follow down my stated
path but no blatant and easily disprovable lies are posted here, no one will
know whether I have followed down my stated path or not.
This means that Mike is fully expecting blatant and easily disprovable lies
to be posted here, and *lots* of them; otherwise he would not consider my following of my stated path to be an issue. On the contrary, it caught his attention *real* quick.
This, then, means that Mike knows that lies and misinformation are being posted here, but chooses to do nothing about it, either as a regular user or
a moderator. That he refuses to correct lies from his fellow conservatives makes Mike (the user) quite the dishonest hypocrite, as Mike (the moderator)
has so amply demonstrated.
see yAren't logical fallacies likewise to be kept to a minimum? I don't
enforcing those.
Swearing is easy to catch, especially when someone threatens to doso,
knowing it is against the rules but assuming that the rules don'tapply
to them.
The rules allow a minimum amount of swearing, for some definition of "minimum." I don't think that the rules don't apply to me.
don't seAren't logical fallacies likewise to be kept to a minimum? I
enforcing those.
There is no logical fallacy -
From the rules, as posted by Mike:
# Resist logical fallacies. Don't know what a logical fallacy is? The
website logicalfallicies.info is a great place to check. We all fall
victim to logical fallacies but don't fall for them all the time.
That's about as strongly worded as, "Please keep the swearing to a minimum,"
don't you think?
I don't need to. Most of Aaron's BS is plainly obvious. Just yesterday he claimed that the January 6 Committee is doing their investigation as revenge for Trump not accepting a bribe. WTF? Can you find a link disproving that?
The rules allow a minimum amount of swearing, for some definition of "minimum." I don't think that the rules don't apply to me.None of his silly rules apply to me. So why should they apply
to you? Or to anybody else, for that matter?
That's about as strongly worded as, "Please keep the swearing to a minimum,"Since there is no minimum or maximum, it is just as stupid.
don't you think?
So what is the point of his silly rule?
I stated the judicial philosophy of Fidonet, as shown in P4.
Make of it what you will. All sysops are expected to abide by
those principles, as silly as those principles are.
So who is Mike Powell to tell everybody else what to do or
how to behave in this echo, or anywhere else in Fidonet?
I don't need to. Most of Aaron's BS is plainly obvious. Just yesterda claimed that the January 6 Committee is doing their investigation as revenge for Trump not accepting a bribe. WTF? Can you find a link disproving that?That's not what I said, and it wasn't yesterday.
On 06-12-22 18:18, Jeff Thiele <=-
spoke to Aaron Thomas about Re: Bullsh!t <=-
Cash bail is an option for judges, but it's not being used enough.
That's your opinion. Perhaps you should go to law school and become a judge.
Cash bail is an option for judges, but it's not being used enough.Not all judges are lawyers. I am reasonably certain that not all
That's your opinion. Perhaps you should go to law school and become a judge.
Supreme Court Justices have been lawyers, although all sitting Justices
at present have law degrees.
definition ofThe rules allow a minimum amount of swearing, for some
"minimum." I don't think that the rules don't apply to me.
None of his silly rules apply to me. So why should they apply
to you? Or to anybody else, for that matter?
Well, seeing as he's threatened to partially silence me...
I'm ok with rules.
But I'm not ok with silly, petty rules that value individual words over lies
and misinformation.
That's about as strongly worded as, "Please keep the swearing to a
minimum,"
don't you think?
Since there is no minimum or maximum, it is just as stupid.
So what is the point of his silly rule?
"to a minimum" could be interpreted as "one less than I otherwise would have." But how is Mike to know how many swear words I would have posted, had
this rule not been in place?
I stated the judicial philosophy of Fidonet, as shown in P4.
Make of it what you will. All sysops are expected to abide by
those principles, as silly as those principles are.
So who is Mike Powell to tell everybody else what to do or
how to behave in this echo, or anywhere else in Fidonet?
I agree with swearing in moderation, but when lies and misinformation become
so egregious as to threaten our democracy, I draw the line.
Cash bail is an option for judges, but it's not being used enough.
That's your opinion. Perhaps you should go to law school and become a
judge.
Not all judges are lawyers. I am reasonably certain that not all
Supreme Court Justices have been lawyers, although all sitting Justices
at present have law degrees.
I am of the opinion that judges should obtain office only as a result of
a peer review, and not based on any sort of popular opinion.
On 05-25-23 14:35, Ib Joe <=-
spoke to Alan Ianson about Re: Durham Report explain <=-
Recent history... recall back in the day when the Democrats lowered
the threshold for 60 to simple majority to cram through some
Obama appointees... remember?? and what did we say then...
don't do it because someday you won't be in power and you
might regret it.... and then you changed the rules to
appoint federal Judges from a 60 vote to simple majority...
and we said don't do that because someday you won't be in
power and you may regret it...
Well then the GOP changed the rules, as per the Democrats
prior actions, we lowered the threshold for Justices and we
crammed in 3 conservative justices... remember how pissed
y'all were...
Think more about the reasons for that displeasure. The Senate (i.e.
Mitch McConnell) denied Obama to even bring a nominee to a vote for
almost a year. But then Trump rammed through a nominee only several
weeks before his term expired.
Had normal procedure would have been followed, Obama would have gotten a nominee, Trump would have gotten only one nominee and the Biden would
have gotten the third one.
Sysop: | Nelgin |
---|---|
Location: | Plano, TX |
Users: | 510 |
Nodes: | 10 (1 / 9) |
Uptime: | 129:29:05 |
Calls: | 8,198 |
Files: | 15,445 |
Messages: | 913,721 |