Originally posted by rapalla7Since I think that the topic of masturbation is likely moderable,
Nemisio,
I think that we should talk about your cronic masturbation thing. You think everyone should, right? Could you shed some light on this issue?
given the climate here, I have no intention of shutting down
the thread by diverting the discussion.
I see you've developed a pcaspian trait: imposing a belief
upon someone. It's somehow less amusing when you do
it, but I'm not sure why.
Given your interest, perhaps you would like to start a thread
about the topic? I would suggest the debates forum. If you
say something remotely interesting, I might respond.
Nemesio
Originally posted by nemesioLOL
Since I think that the topic of masturbation is likely moderable,
given the climate here, I have no intention of shutting down
the thread by diverting the discussion.
I see you've developed a pcaspian trait: imposing a belief
upon someone. It's somehow less amusing when you do
it, but I'm not sure why.
Given your interest, perhaps you would l ...[text shortened]... est the debates forum. If you
say something remotely interesting, I might respond.
Nemesio
Originally posted by nemesio
However, your claim that my sentence was the product of bad
grammar or misplaced "comma's" is totally wrong. My sentence
(like the one with the boy crossing the street) is perfectly sound
and intelligble to those with any reasonly knowledge of the
english language (which you have demonstrated you don't have).
Or are you just being a troll?
I'll refer you again to A1. As I see you've failed to graps my explanation, I suggest you read it more slowly. I also suggest ,should you care to refute this explanation, you comment on 'calling' being used as a noun, not an adjective (which you purposefully omitted from your rebuttal).
Now that you have had your grammar lesson, I hope that you
will answer my question: [b]Who are 'they' and what proof can
you offer to suggest they have left? [/b]
LOL.
1. You're arrogant and seem incapable of recognisign your own mistakes.
I'll refer to my previous reply as A2.
The question in mind was whether the 'calling' has left RHP. To that I answered 'yes', meaning the people that were pro-moderation at RHP have since stopped addressing the issue due the imlpementation of Robomod.
You wrote:
I am neither a homosexual or an alcoholic. Just as a white
person can claim that a statement about blacks is offensive,
so, too, can I claim that your comments are offensive to both
alcoholics and homosexuals.
(no1Marauder, please read, this will answer your question)
1. Should I made derogatory statements regarding another group, ofcourse you may find these offensive and SHOULD REPORT IT. I may use the word 'fa*got' to describe homosexuals, but I have not done so. I may also refer to african americans as "negro's", but I have also not done that. As such, should I do any of the above and should you find my statements offensive, why are you not alerting moderators ? This is entirely what Robomod is all about.
The answer is quite simple. You know no-one else will share your acute sense of bigotry exhibited by pcaspian, as such your attempts would be in vain.
2. Any comment made in a negative light to anyone can be claimed to offend someone. I may claim every single comment you make about charity is offensive to those that do not actively support a charity. You are condemning them to Hell. This claim is immature however and clearly not in need of moderation.
As such, please find posts of mine that offend people and let us all here debate whether they deserve moderation. Also please address the fact that (as stated previously) not a single self-confessed alcoholic or homosexual has claimed to find any of those posts offensive. As my views are not derogaratory, I suggest you explain what right you have to speak on behalf of homosexuals and alcoholics.
Mind you, I've never alerted your posts. Can you say the same
for me?
No, why would i ? I believe Robomod is a waste of time. Lol, no1 constantly signs off his posts with 'idiot' or a whole host of insults I am sure he hears every day. I care little.
PS, when you state the following :
"You are really grammatically challenged."
yet continue to post the following in the same reply :
I am neither a homosexual or an alcoholic
Simply put, I suggest not handing out grammar lessons.
sincerely
pc
Originally posted by pcaspianYou've, of course, changed your claim: you originally said this to Nemesio:
[b/]Originally posted by nemesio
However, your claim that my sentence was the product of bad
grammar or misplaced "comma's" is totally wrong. My sentence
(like the one with the boy crossing the street) is perfectly sound
a ...[text shortened]... suggest not handing out grammar lessons.
sincerely
pc
PCaspian: If not, what gives your the right to make such claims on their behalf when not a single self proclaimed homosexual or alcoholic on RHP have done so ?
Suggesting that only those within the group being insulted had a "right" (a misuse of that word) to find the insult offensive. I take your last post to be abandonment of that position. Fine witn me. Now basically your argument is with Nemesio as you know I don't alert posts, PERIOD, and if I found a post of your's offensive or wrong, I would simply respond to it and state my objections to the CONTENT of the post, not the fact of you being allowed to post it. Whereas you want to ban me because you don't like my politics and style, I have no problem with you posting whatever rubbish you want - but I reserve the right to comment on it and even ridicule it if I feel it is sufficiently ridiculous (as the "electric shock" example you gave was). There's the difference between us in a nutshell.
Originally posted by nemesioThe General and Debates forums have always been the most lax. They are not site or chess specific. Off topic posts are allowed (what can be off topic if it's General or a Debate of some kind it's presumably on topic).
Would you like me to point to offensive language and
posts in the General forum as a demonstration? I assure
you, I can.
Your classification of the Debates Forum as the 'garbage
dump' is unfair. There are a lot of very interesting posts
there. Compare with 'Word Association.' The reason that
there is less of what you call garbage in the Gener ...[text shortened]... rst place.
Do you care to provide a theory, or just make more biased observations?
Nemesio
Therefor these two Forums are the ones where the people least interested in Chess loiter, or rather those people that use RHP for something other than just playing Chess are prone to loiter. Therefor it's less likely for people to get up in arms at the odd offensive post there than say in the "ONLY CHESS" or "CLAN" forum.
Is that any clearer for you?
Originally posted by no1marauder
You've, of course, changed your claim: you originally said this to Nemesio:
PCaspian: If not, what gives your the right to make such claims on their behalf when not a single self proclaimed homosexual or alcoholic on RHP have done so ?
No, I havn't. In fact, I have reitterated this in my last post. As a rule, you should read every post twice as your speed reading is resulting in you clearly missing vital information.
Also please address the fact that (as stated previously) not a single self-confessed alcoholic or homosexual has claimed to find any of those posts offensive. As my views are not derogaratory, I suggest you explain what right you have to speak on behalf of homosexuals and alcoholics.
Suggesting that only those within the group being insulted had a "right" (a misuse of that word) to find the insult offensive. I take your last post to be abandonment of that position. Fine witn me.
2 Situations.
-----------------
1. Someone makes a derogatory claim about another group of people. (I type in caps, so read carefully.)
(ANYONE CAN ALERT AND SHOULD DO SO.THIS SHOULD BE AUTO MODERATED IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER ANYONE CLAIMS TO BE OFFENDED).
eg: the use of the words 'fag*ot' , or 'nig*ers'. Reference to Jesus as a fetus.
- This is wrong and should be removed IRRESPECTIVE of whether anyone at RHP finds offense. Ofcourse we may claim Robomod omits these words, however it is far from infallable. Keep in mind, RHP posts are freely available on Google. Do a search for no1marauder.
2. Someone debating the morality of an action or person. eg: "I find homosexual intercourse disgusting" or interpretation of validity of scriptures : "according to the scriptures, alcoholics will not reach salvation". This is in context with debate and does not intend to offend. I know gay men that are appalled by the idea of having intercourse with a woman. Should I be offended ? I know muslems that believe I will not enter Heaven ? Again, am I offended ? No. This is not derogatory text , as such should not be offensive.
Nemesio and you don't seem to graps the difference between that which may cause offense (for which he claims to speak for all alcoholics and homosexuals), and that which is actually derogatory. As every 3rd or 4th post of mine certainly is not derogatory, they fall in the 2nd category, that which Nemesio deems offensive.
As such I challenge his authority to speak on behalf of these deeply hurt individuals by attacking my character in making these accusations. See, those actually require substantiating. As I've yet to receive a single response from a self confessed alcoholic/homosexual at RHP (afterall 10% of men across the board are homosexual) regarding my 'offensive' posts, I want him to substantiate his claims.
Nemesio is the policeman who publically berates you when you take a pee in the bush, eventhough no-one else could care less about it, he speaks on behalf of the community appalled by my actions. Its a load of crud, and simply claiming that he's doing me some kind of favour by not throwing me into jail is even further removed from the truth.
Difference is I'd gladly accept moderation of my own posts, indeed I've made posts that did deserve moderation, yet because of the outcry against our previous human mods, the standard keeps slipping. If you insist on an unmoderated forum, why didn't you just stay at Cribs forum ? You had everything you needed, except perhaps people to irritate ?
pc
EDIT: Numerous typo's. We really need to get a preview options in the forums.
Originally posted by pcaspianAgain, I don't let self-righteous petty dictators like you tell when and where I can post. Last I checked, I had the same right to post here as you. You keep suggesting or outright saying that I should be banned from these forums even though you concede that my posts are well within the allowable limits here. If you can't deal with the moderation rules here maybe YOU should stop posting here rather than desperately seeking to muzzle other people in a public forum meant for the exchange of ideas and information.
[b/]Originally posted by no1marauder
You've, of course, changed your claim: you originally said this to Nemesio:
PCaspian: If not, what gives your the right to make such claims on their behalf when not a singl ...[text shortened]... erything you needed, except perhaps people to irritate ?
pc
The idea that there are things INTRINSINCALLY OFFENSIVE even though most people aren't offended by them is absurd. You and a small group found the Norma McGreavey haikus offensive; most people here didn't. Why should your rules trump the views of the great majority? Your extreme beliefs are a tiny minority on this site; therefore, you and your ilk have no right to dictate to everyone else what can and can't be said. You are free to spout whatever garbage you want, go right ahead. But your insistence that others shouldn't be allowed to respond to your rubbish in kind makes you a complete and utter hypocrite.
Originally posted by no1marauder
Again, I don't let self-righteous petty dictators like you tell when and where I can post.
LOL... as if I even bother reading the rest of your rebuttal when you start off your format! 😉
For crying out loud dude argue the points ! Perhaps then I'll read through that waste of bytes.
in yourneedstoreadsabitsmoreship
pc
Originally posted by pcaspianFrom the content of your posts I'm sure you wouldn't be able to understand my post without somebody of a higher IQ (find an average 2nd Grader they'll do) reading it very slowly to you. My first line is in direct response to your last line, to wit:
Originally posted by no1marauder
[b] Again, I don't let self-righteous petty dictators like you tell when and where I can post.
LOL... as if I even bother reading the rest of your rebuttal when you start off your format! 😉
For crying out loud dude argue the points ! Perhaps then I'll read through that waste of bytes.
in yourneedstoreadsabitsmoreship
pc
[/b]
If you insist on an unmoderated forum, why didn't you just stay at Cribs forum ? You had everything you needed, except perhaps people to irritate ?
Perhaps you should read your OWN posts so you can try to figure out what other people are posting in response.
In Whatadipstickship,
2BitLawyer
Originally posted by no1marauder
From the content of your posts I'm sure you wouldn't be able to understand my post without somebody of a higher IQ (find an average 2nd Grader they'll do) reading it very slowly to you. My first line is in direct response to your last line, to wit:
Do you even understand the concept of IQ ? The 'Q' means "quotient".
The "quotient" refers to Binet's definition of IQ as (Mental Age) divided by (Chronological Age).
You don't actually get a 'higher IQ' as you grow older.
inareyoureallyanadultship
pc
Originally posted by pcaspianI didn't say anyone did; I merely said that the average 2nd grader had a higher IQ and better reading comprehension than you. Your post in response is proof of those facts.
Originally posted by no1marauder
[b] From the content of your posts I'm sure you wouldn't be able to understand my post without somebody of a higher IQ (find an average 2nd Grader they'll do) reading it very slowly to you. My first line is in direct response to your last line, to wit:
Do you even understand the concept of IQ ? The ...[text shortened]...
You don't actually get a 'higher IQ' as you grow older.
inareyoureallyanadultship
pc[/b]
In Howaboutthatdimwitship,
2BitLawyer
Originally posted by no1marauder
I merely said that the average 2nd grader had a higher IQ and better reading comprehension than you. Your post in response is proof of those facts.
LOL!
without somebody of a higher IQ (find an average 2nd Grader they'll do)
-- hehe, liar and a fool. What a potent combination.
inareyoulike12? ship
🙂
Edit: I'll let you have the last say, you clearly need it. 😉
Originally posted by pcaspian"A liar and a fool" will make a fine epitaph for ya, pcaspian and I'm sure the Reverend Kirksey will happily give you a well-deserved eulogy.
Originally posted by no1marauder
[b]
I merely said that the average 2nd grader had a higher IQ and better reading comprehension than you. Your post in response is proof of those facts.
LOL!
without somebody of a higher IQ (find an average 2nd Grader they'll do)
-- hehe, liar and a fool. What a potent combination.
inareyoulike12? ship
🙂
Edit: I'll let you have the last say, you clearly need it. 😉[/b]
In Dearfriendship,
2BitLawyer