28 Apr 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Red NightThen shut up already. Go back to your Private Forum where you can censor any comments you don't like.
I am so glad I decided to stop posting here. It amazes me that you people are able to sit here and endlessly argue such things, to wit: you're a nit-wit.
So glad I belong to the best private forum on the site and no longer have to deal with the witless.
28 Apr 08
Originally posted by Red NightFOAD
I am so glad I decided to stop posting here. It amazes me that you people are able to sit here and endlessly argue such things, to wit: you're a nit-wit.
So glad I belong to the best private forum on the site and no longer have to deal with the witless.
28 Apr 08
Originally posted by no1marauderWell thanks for your interpretation.
That's a ridiculous interpretation which makes the listing of specific categories excess verbiage. "Otherwise objectionable" in this context is boilerplate language which clearly means content which is equally offensive as the mentioned categories, though not fitting precisely in them. The same phrase is used earlier in the same way, to wit:
Post, ema ...[text shortened]... ned categories is an utter waste of time. That interpretation is unreasonable and illogical.
I still like my interpretation fine and will stick with it. I haven't been banned yet so I must be fairly close. Of course I'm not trying to find the line between acceptable and unacceptable forum content, so not being banned may not be a good way of determining if I understand the TOS.
28 Apr 08
Originally posted by mwmillerGreat "argument".
Well thanks for your interpretation.
I still like my interpretation fine and will stick with it. I haven't been banned yet so I must be fairly close. Of course I'm not trying to find the line between acceptable and unacceptable forum content, so not being banned may not be a good way of determining if I understand the TOS.
