Those aren’t Wingnut Dollars. They’re Dunning-Kruegerrands.
That appears to be more than a flagging, but who cares?
Thread won.
If I were a Sovereign, I’d use that comment for currency. That’s how gold it is.
Am I wrong in thinking deleting his post was excessive? It strikes me as excessive for reasons I can’t really articulate right now, but I’m not going to lose any sleep over it any time soon.
This cop deserves a raise.
From the site TOS, no reason is necessary. The user created an account, posted a couple walls of text, and disappeared within minutes. I personally don’t have a lot of sympathy for drive-bys. My 2 cents anyway.
Laws have power because they can be enforced, not because they are good.
If such a law exists it is because at some point society has deemed it good/useful /expedient.
Merely opting out of a law only serves to avoid responsibility for participating in society and deciding what is good and/or useful.
Society does not care if you want to participate in it, merely existing is enough for you or any person to be part of that society.
He intentionally violated the BBS guidelines by copying and pasting long passages of text instead of participating in the discussion. Should we suspend the rules just to prove him wrong?
Two long copy/paste rants with interspersed all caps apparently tying to drag the thread off topic - can’t say it’s a bad call to just yank it.
I’m just confused about how they find us…are we on a list somewhere on a rightist website as a community that must be attacked? Or is it just the random connectedness of Google?
And throwing in pre-emptive outright insults towards anyone who might disagree with him, to boot.
Saying “I’m going to get banned” before violating all the rules shouldn’t protect one from enforcement of the rules, any more than saying “I’m an ‘article four free inhabitant’” protects one from being arrested for driving without a license…
“I’m know I’m gonna get kicked out of the bar for this…”
Whips out dick to piss on billiard table, gets grabbed by the collar and tossed out front door by bouncer
“Aha! You proved me right!”
No joke–I got the impression the woman had put a bag over her head to hide her identity and the cop was trying to pull it off. Okay, so I have a strange imagination.
Sovereigns are rarer than doubloons around here. I have sympathy for the poor deluded souls… until they start converting others. Then, I only have sympathy for their victims.
Punching yourself in your face - as is your right - is OK with me. Had I the right to not get punched in the face - which isn’t terribly likely at this stage of our infantile anthropoid apeness - I’d not expect to have to take on any responsibilities to ‘pay’ for it. It would just be there.
Maybe I should have made it clearer that said politicians were expecting you to pay for your own rights with some corresponding burden of responsibility. It just seems to me that such a trade immediately makes the ‘right’ something else entirely, needing another word - more like ‘perk’.
“Yes. Yes, you are.”
insert violence
Or she is stalling for time.
That’s exactly the point I was making. If you live in a society that respects your RIGHT not to be punched in the face, you “pay for” that right by assuming the RESPONSIBILITY of not punching anyone else in the face.