Cowardly v Courageous Stances

@divegeester said
Do you think your posting of the hundreds of trolling posts describing a male child having sex with an ageing barmaid were… how was it you put it… “appropriate”?

That was never done by anyone.

And it’s remarkable that of these “hundreds and hundreds” of alleged posts about adults having sex with a child, no one can produce a single one.

And this website allegedly tolerated those “hundreds and hundreds” of posts about adults having sex with a child “ad nauseam” for months and months?

You guys are such pathetic liars.

But I guess your strategy is: Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

Won’t be long before you’re searching for your integrity in the sewer with Ghost.

FMF’s on his way there too.

Edit: And why does your profile characterize those posts this way: “due to months and months of abusive trolling with paedophilic inferences.”

That’s still a lie but obviously much different than “posts describing a male child having sex with an ageing (sic) barmaid.”

You guys just can’t keep your lies straight!

@pb1022 said
That was never done by anyone.

And it’s remarkable that of these “hundreds and hundreds” of alleged posts about adults having sex with a child, no one can produce a single one.

And this website allegedly tolerated those “hundreds and hundreds” of posts about adults having sex with a child “ad nauseam” for months and months?

You guys are such pathetic liars.

But I g ...[text shortened]... male child having sex with an ageing (sic) barmaid.”

You guys just can’t keep your lies straight!

You should just hold up your hands for all the depraved things you posted as Romans1009 and leave this site in disgrace.

@fmf said
The hundreds of trolling posts, many of them just the same text copy-pasted over and over again, described a prepubescent child being deliberately plied with drink by "the barmaid" and other "trollops" in a pub and the child being put in sexual situations when he was intoxicated. The ones which went as far as depicting the sexual acts were deleted by the mods.

And no one can produce a single one of these posts? Not one?

Why don’t you guys just admit what really happened - That Roman guy trolled the stuffing out of you and nearly drove dive into a nuthouse by portraying him as a drunken child who continually got plastered at a pub and hit on pub trollops who rejected him and then giggled and pointed fingers at him behind his back.

There was no sexual content in any of those posts.

You guys simply got trolled so effectively and mercilessly that you’re suffering from PTSD and that Roman guy is still living rent free in your heads four years later.

@divegeester said
Do you still hold to your famous claim that Ghost of a Duke (along with FMF and myself) “bullied Romans1009 off of the website”?

Another “substantive” post?

Do you realize that not only do you not play chess on a chess website, you also don’t discuss substance in a forum created for substantive discussions and debates?

What exactly do you do here besides pit people against each other and harass and troll people?

This is why that Roman guy trolled you so hard you nearly wound up wearing a straitjacket in a rubber room.

@suzianne said
Exactly.

Exactly wrong.

I don’t discriminate against anyone.

If you think my objecting to men exposing themselves at a parade and simulating sex acts during that parade means I’m “homophobic,” that says more about your view of homosexuals than it does about mine.

@suzianne said
There was a certain amount of "bullying", certainly, but what is becoming more and more clear over time is that at least some, and more likely most, of this "bullying" was warranted, given the inappropriateness of the things he said. Every community has standards, that when violated, will result in the expulsion of those guilty of violating those standards. This appears to be what happened in this case.

Sounds like you’re buying the lie and revisionist history.

And it’s amazing you’re doing it without a shred of evidence.

I guess that Goebbels guy was right: Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

Especially for Christians who crave the approval of atheists.

@fmf said
You are mistaken. Romans1009 was not bullied by Ghost of a Duke or divegeester or me ~ or by anyone for that matter. Indeed, the three of us did not interact with him at all for 3-4 months, and his trolling just continued and even increased. Ghost of a Duke, in many ways, copped the worst/most of it and yet Ghost of a Duke didn't bully him. The same goes for divegeester and me.

😂

Yeah, the Trolling Trio are saints. They don’t bully, harass, troll, lie about or smear anyone!

Every one of their posts is substantive or a sweet, heartfelt compliment.

😂

@suzianne said
Exactly.

Thankfully most Christians are more tolerant than Romans1009.

@divegeester said
There was no bullying by Ghost of a Duke; you misrepresented him (and others) very badly.

What a pity that you lacked the ability to show some integrity at that time back in September 2018.

Wait a minute.

Are you implying by omission that there *was* bullying by you and FMF?

Sounds like another example of the Trolling Trio not being able to keep its lies straight.

@fmf said
If your opinion is that Romans1009 was bullied by Ghost of a Duke and the rest of us, then you are totally wrong. Your opinion is based on a faulty memory of the events of that year.

Didn’t dive just say Ghosty didn’t engage in bullying but leave you and him out of that claim?

Time for the Trolling Trio to have a pow wow and get its lies straight.

@pb1022 said
But I wouldn’t and don’t discriminate against anyone based on their religion (though I suppose I would if they were a satanist.)

Of course you do. You specifically stated that you come here to 'tweak atheists'. How is that not discriminatory?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You should just hold up your hands for all the depraved things you posted as Romans1009 and leave this site in disgrace.

Still searching for your integrity in the sewer?

You’d find it a lot faster if you stopped playing with the turds.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Thankfully most Christians are more tolerant than Romans1009.

Another troll post from the trolling master.

@avalanchethecat said
Of course you do. You specifically stated that you come here to 'tweak atheists'. How is that not discriminatory?

I don’t believe I ever said that, but if I said I enjoy tweaking atheists, it’s in response to their tweaking of me.

I certainly don’t come to the SF to tweak atheists.

@fmf said
Oh THIS question? OK, didn't see it.

My answer is no.

If you believe homosexuality is a transgression of your God's will, I think it would be non-controversial - and neither courageous nor cowardly - for you to say so on a forum like this.

Then when, and in what setting, would you deem it "courageous" or "cowardly" to state that homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible?