Should able2know ban people for having untoward opinions?

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Perhaps both of them have good points that are worth considering, rather than adopting such a black-and-white view of things.

Both of them have good points, which I did consider. Having considered them, my judgment is that Craven is right and Bill is wrong. What's the problem with drawing conclusions about points, if you do it after considering them?

Nothing, but that doesn't make O'Bill entirely wrong either. He has raised several valid points, and it's clear that the poster in question has a history of making comments which SKIRT the boundaries of what is allowable, even if they don't go over them.

Saying that someone is 'just plain wrong' sort of implies that they weren't making good points or that their logic didn't hold up. Not a big deal, just wanted to point out that I think O'Bill had several good points, even if his argumentation didn't carry the day.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

So Bill O have some good points?

I had him on ignore for a long time as I did not find his pointings to have any points at all when I was reading them just one insult after another.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

So Bill O have some good points?

I had him on ignore for a long time as I did not find his pointings to have any points at all when I was reading them just one insult after another.

Yeah, but then again, he's not a useless Dick like you are. His insults are usually things of beauty to read, and I should know, as I've received enough of them myself.

The nice part about not banning people on a website is that you can tell people just what you think, and I think that you, Bill, are a Troll. You are here to stir **** up and cause trouble more than anything else. You like causing arguments and you are intentionally abrasive. You make bold predictions and then run away when they don't come true (Remember the DWFTTW thread, where you thoroughly embarassed yourself? Ever apologize to ANYONE for being such a dick there? No, you never did.). In short, I find little reason to EVER read what you say.

I don't have you ON ignore, because that would take away my freedom to choose, but I typically DO ignore anything you write, as a matter of course, because it adds nothing to my life or to A2K as a whole.

Stay or go, I don't give a **** and I doubt anyone other than Hawk does either.

Cycloptichorn

3 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Admittedly, I phrased my answer badly. Let me rephrase it: Your **** would stink just as bad to me in both cases.

No worries. The way you've framed your every response makes your mindset abundantly clear.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

Glad we understand each other, then.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

BillRM wrote:

So Bill O have some good points?

I had him on ignore for a long time as I did not find his pointings to have any points at all when I was reading them just one insult after another.

Yeah, but then again, he's not a useless Dick like you are. His insults are usually things of beauty to read, and I should know, as I've received enough of them myself.

The nice part about not banning people on a website is that you can tell people just what you think, and I think that you, Bill, are a Troll. You are here to stir **** up and cause trouble more than anything else. You like causing arguments and you are intentionally abrasive. You make bold predictions and then run away when they don't come true (Remember the DWFTTW thread, where you thoroughly embarassed yourself? Ever apologize to ANYONE for being such a dick there? No, you never did.). In short, I find little reason to EVER read what you say.

I don't have you ON ignore, because that would take away my freedom to choose, but I typically DO ignore anything you write, as a matter of course, because it adds nothing to my life or to A2K as a whole.

Stay or go, I don't give a **** and I doubt anyone other than Hawk does either.

Cycloptichorn

Hear, hear! Exactly my feeling and similar to what I have posted in some thread or other.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Not a big deal, just wanted to point out that I think O'Bill had several good points, even if his argumentation didn't carry the day.

Damn decent of you. Opposing the king in the king's court makes for a long row to hoe.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

His insults are usually things of beauty to read, and I should know, as I've received enough of them myself.

And this is just outright kind... especially when one considers my only banning I believe was the consequence of same.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Why would you call a group of people "the coloreds," High Seas?

not a phrase i'd choose myself, but it doesn't seem to upset the NAACP

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

The nice part about not banning people on a website is that you can tell people just what you think, and I think that you, Bill, are a Troll. You are here to stir **** up and cause trouble more than anything else

So you do not believe that I am expressing my honest opinions on this website?

Hell you had found me out I am in fact a male feminist just pretending to be otherwise for the pleasure of trolling you and others here.

In fact, I am secretly in total agreement with Firefly for example and just posting otherwise to annoy all the right thinking membership of this system.

What gave you your first clue?

Was it that I was a member of NOW in the 70s or I had help a battery woman relocated across the country also in the 70s?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Another articulate and well thought out post by Billy.

Hey, Billy. We are no longer in the '70s. This is the 21st century.

Better ignored than banned. At least we know you are on here and not out scaring the general populace.

0 Replies

@djjd62,

...laughing. I've made that same argument. But, never used that word to describe someone. I think that was the circa 50s terminology.

It's 2010.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Thanks - so what's the PC, updated, term - preferably in a single, comprehensive, easily understandable word - for saying "colored"?

0 Replies

@djjd62,

You can't expect the PC-afflicted to know what the "C" in NAACP stands for - or to be able to come up with any non-Orwellian alternatives.

Unless you have any suggestions?!

1 Reply

@High Seas,

Well, by all means, High Seas since you're so unafflicted, continue to call people "coloreds," loudly please and in public. I suspect you'll have many occasions to discuss varied opinions about your behavior.

3 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

Well, by all means, High Seas since you're so unafflicted, continue to call people "coloreds," loudly please and in public. I suspect you'll have many occasions to discuss varied opinions about your behavior.

is there an term that is currently accepting by those of whom we are speaking? So far as I can tell all of the different names that they have had for themselves over the years are now objected to when said by whites..presumably we are not supposed be be talking about them at all.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Don't be a silly hardass, compadre. You can roll off your little forked tongue right now the two or three terms that have been used for the past decade. I understand that the terms have changed a bunch over our lifetimes, and I've taken issue with that too - but just say that. Don't pretend not to know what they are.

1 Reply

@Lash,

This is a simple question that obviously went over your pretty head so I will repeat it: what alternative term do you suggest?

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Aren't you trained in the sciences? If yes, you know that the simplest explanation that fits all the facts is to be preferred to the complex one. If the term "colored" isn't acceptable to you, please provide a single-word, descriptive, understandable, PC-compliant alternative. I will wait Smile

2 Replies

@Lash,

Here it is again for you, dear, in case it blurred by too fast for you the first time.

Re: High Seas (Post 4393686)
Well, by all means, High Seas since you're so unafflicted, continue to call people "coloreds," loudly please and in public. I suspect you'll have many occasions to discuss varied opinions about your behavior.

I REALLY STRONGLY prefer for you to continue calling people "coloreds."

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

Don't pretend not to know what they are.

So what is the current acceptable term?

colored
nigger
negro
african American
American of African decent
homeboy/girl
black
people of color

All these terms have been ok at one time or another, depending upon whom is saying it, but I have heard them all objected too by a person of whom we are speaking. As far as I am concerned if they cant make up their mind I am free to pick any from the list.

1 Reply

Should able2know ban people for having untoward opinions?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know