Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
My prayer request is that God free all militant atheists from their hate, even the ones who hide it behind sophomoric humor.
Thank you Tzar.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
TS, if you're supposed to be "running away", how come you keep responding and asking DeeDee to stay on topic? If you were running away, wouldn't you just not respond? Or respond like DeeDee does, -with unrelated nonsense in a spam template?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
Or Conversely, that member might think, "wow this pedophille (sic) really made mistakes with his grammar. and spelling."
Just saying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
I can comment on any post I like. And as I told you, if it takes a hundred years, you will understand that your liberal penchant to think you're in charge and can tell others what to do is nonsense. You will learn.
You first attacked my mother. You have dodged that you did attack my mother, AND that you were the first to make accusations.
You made the putrid statement. You now say you were joking. How is your comment better than the "fapping" comment for which I was banned? How could Rag not see my comment as a joke, and agree that your far more vile and sexual comment was a joke?
People like you are possible on this board only because of the mod team's admitted bias against theism. And you have the nerve to report me after being the first to attack me by attacking my mother, and then making a truly disgusting comment on child rape. Thank God the board records our posted comments.
Read the above slowly - if that will help you understand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
I hereby declare to all atheists: This is a free forum. State your case as you always have.
Careful! Rag may ban you. He says if a member asks to be left alone, it is a CoC violation to post to his thread. He has already banned at least one member on that premise.
Created:
How can you ask Tradesecret for "Clear evidence" of something that you agree doesn't exist?
You have no evidence that God "failed to tell Mary". You even smarmily say, "seems to".
Stop being a loon. No one needs to defend how the Bible "seems" to you. We know your moral compass is broken. Silence is not proof of non-existence. This obstinacy is why your only friends are DeeDee and Bones.
Created:
Posted in:
You are just far too dumb to be able to juggle them all at the same time.
Is it your intelligence that is causing you to ignore the mods comment showing that your accusation against Tradesecret is a lie? Hmmm Stevie?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
Post was addressed to EtrnlV not you. You'll hush unless you'er spoken to.
I can comment on any post I like. And as I told you, if it takes a hundred years, you will understand that your liberal penchant to think you're in charge and can tell others what to do is nonsense.
You first attacked my mother. You have dodged that you did attack my mother, AND that you were the first to make accusations.
You made the putrid statement. You now say you were joking. How is your comment better than the "fapping" comment for which I was banned? How could Rag not see my comment as a joke, and agree that your far more vile and sexual comment was a joke?
People like you are possible on this board only because of the mod team's admitted bias against theism. And you have the nerve to report me after being the first to attack me by attacking my mother, and then making a truly disgusting comment on child rape. Thank God the board records our posted comments.
Why would I, an open anti-theiest who publicly criticizes the veracity of religion come into the defense of pedophile priests? Wouldn't it be more fitting to my persona for me to criticize a non-controversial immoral act?
Not if your anti-theiesm hate is greater than your homophobia. My experience has been that militant atheists are willing to make ANY statement if it allows them to take a dig against the church. You were attacking priests, you just had not thought it through.
You agreed that your comment could be interpreted two ways.
Trust me, both myself and ethang are capable of much more slander than this.
Trust me, I will never insult your mother. I'll use your words. And I will never slander you unless your own words themselves first slander you.
I'm capitalising on what I know is a violation and utlasing it to get a pedo banned from this cite.
At least you are honest about your intent. Now Rag knows you and he share a goal. PM him and you guys can collude in privacy.
Till then, your burning continues. Though I know you already regret taking this tiger by the tail.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
@949havoc
Well, they are good at talking bullshit.
Who isn't?
Well, those who point out that others are good at talking bullshit apparently.
I suppose that theism is both bullshit and not bullshit, relative to the both the narrators and a recipients conditioned ideology.
Notice the insane leftist belief. The nature of the theism depends on the conditioned ideology of the recipients. Reality is decided by what the listener thinks. Liberals are so steeped in this belief, it is difficult to get them to see the illogic in it.
Confusing reality as being the same thing as the internal state of it's observers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
...because, in a forum, just because one starts a string does not declare ownership of it. After its launch, any post is open season for reply by any member. As it should be.
Hold your horses there havoc. Chief Rag still has yet to address this issue. After its launch, any thread is open season for reply by any member may not be as it should be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I will just have to accept that you are convinced that your subjective perception is reality. No problem, reality doesn't need your agreement.
God will go right on existing regardless of your delusion.
Created:
-->
@Barney
What specific old behaviors of mine on this site are you claiming I regret?
The ones you dodge when asked about them.
Again, list them if they exist.
They exist. Remember, I'm not the only member who has accused you of lying.
You were careful to lie mostly in PM
"Mostly" means you've got public times I lied a bunch. If you're not either having a mental break down or being intentionally fictitious, share the links to me lying.
Thank you for tacitly conceding that you lie in PM.
If you're wrong and I have not lied publicly as you've repeatedly claimed, then I authorize you to share the alleged PMs of me lying a whole big bunch.
Thank you. I'm checking now to see if you or your crack team have deleted our PMs. I will get back to you.
You went silent
My sincerest apologies that your precious feelings are hurt by me having other things to do than read every single post made on this site.../satire
You were in open conversations with ME! Did you go into a fugue for some of the convo? Some of the time that question was asked you in PM. You still managed not to "read" that question though you replied the PM.
members will call you out on your dishonesty
By all means, call me out on my dishonesty when I'm actually dishonest.
Yes. You'll be the on who decides if you've been dishonest. Thanks for the permission.
Name the terrible lies I committed if they exist.
Why? Because you will decide if they exist? Because they won't exist unlist I list them? Are all the charges of you lying by unrelated members all Fabrications?
Is it a violation of board CoC if a member does not leave a thread whose author has him to leave?
I'm sorry you're having trouble accessing the link at the bottom of the screen.From the Code of Conduct: "If a member politely requests that you leave them alone, do so. Repeated failure to comply, is a clear aggravating factor regarding the content of said posts."
That is not the question slick. Instead of dodging, just ignore the question if you don't wish to answer. The CoC does not address my question.
The question is not "if a member asks you to leave them alone, but whether one must leave if a member asks you to stop posting in the thread. Because you can participate in a thread without addressing, referring to, or mentioning the offended member.
Meaning the ask does not automatically make any post a CoC violation, but negative content of said posts is treated as worse than it would otherwise (better evidence to support the need for a restraining order as an obvious example).
You are still dodging, and you have to dodge because you cannot answer without confirming your dishonesty.
If you say, "Yes, a member has the authority to forbid other members from a thread," then that would be a surprise to most members because it is not in the CoC, and is not only not true, but ludicrous.
And if you say "a member does not have the authority to forbid other members from a thread," then you will have to explain why you banned me for exactly that reason. So you waffle and dodge the question.
Does a thread author have the authority to forbid another member from posting in his thread?
Not without a restraining order being in place. But again from the Code of Conduct: "If a member politely requests that you leave them alone, do so. Repeated failure to comply, is a clear aggravating factor regarding the content of said posts."
Non-moderation members cannot issue or enforce RO's. The question has nothing to do with ROs or leaving someone alone. If a member asks me to leave his thread and I then respond to a 3rd party inside that thread, not addressing, responding to, or referring to the offended member, is that a violation?
You, a mod, can't answer a simple question about board policy asked 5 times, but you're asking me to list your lies? Please.
Created:
-->
@Barney
No one is a mind reader here.
You seemed to read minds fine when you were listing intentions for the bans you were flinging.
You are making really weird leading claims about me, so please actually finish your statements instead of leaving them in the realm of your imagination.
It seems like it's your imagination that is the problem here Rag.
What specific old behaviors of mine on this site are you claiming I regret?
The ones you dodge when asked about them.
Whatever else one can say about him, RM is vastly more honest than you are.
If I'm regularly caught blatantly lying, please list five.
I said RM is more honest than you. This is true and I need answer no test from you.
You were careful to lie mostly in PM, but I still have the PMs. One time Stephen unwittingly busted you lying in PM by posting your PMed lies. You went silent. When I asked you permission to post your PMed lies, you went silent.
You have been given god-mode powers on Dart. You do not need to lie. You can do what you want without consequence save one; members will call you out on your dishonesty.
Fear of sanctions will silence some, but not all.
You're still a mod, so let me ask you a forth time.
Is it a violation of board CoC if a member does not leave a thread whose author has him to leave?
Does a thread author have the authority to forbid another member from posting in his thread?
First time I asked you, you dodged the question. 2nd time I asked you, you answered a different question. Third time I asked, you rambled about how I deserved a ban.
I've made no comment or complaint about any ban here. I've asked nothing about my conduct. The question is about your interpretation of board rules.
Can you answer now?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
To clarify, there is a very big difference between a joke, even a risky joke and a defamatory accusation.
Like a true liberal, you want to be able to decide for the both of us what is and is not "acceptable". That will not happen with me.
Even my joke about priests is a joke, a risky one sure but still a joke which many comedians
I made no jokes. I posted what you said and asked you if you wanted to clarify. If you're butthurt, it's due to your filthy comment and not any "accusation".
I didn't start the accusations, that's on the boomer who couldn't handle my heat.
I guess you saying that you had my mother "begging" was just another joke and not an accusation? You first started that.
First you said that stalking wasn't stalking if the "victim" wanted to be stalked. That tells me you think crimes at not true crimes if the victims love being victimized. You said so to me, accusing me of loving your stalking, and that it could not be stalking if I loved it.
Then immediately after, you say, "begging is what choir boys do to Priests". Then by your own established principle, a priest buggering a child is NOT a crime if the child "loved" it. You think the child "wanted" it because you think they "begged" the priest for it.
Called out, you're now claiming it was a joke. But I've noticed that while you've tried to explain both the choir boy comment and the prom comment with a weak, "I was only joking" excuse, you have been silent about your comment about my mother.
You had her "begging" you said. Was she begging you TO, or NOT TO rape her? Or did you mean she was "begging" for something else?
See, I told you loser, nothing you can say bothers me. But you, overly conscious about your image on the board, (you want to be seen as a gallant knight...) Lol!
You can be hurt. And I didn't use lies or "jokes" to do it. I used your words.
You are a liberal, so you think I MUST debate you. You think when you require me to debate, you have some sort of right to be obeyed. You think you can force or shame me into obeying you by whining incessantly that I'm a "coward".
I don't care about you, or your infantile opinions. You can beg and whine for a hundred years, my answer will be the same. Do you actually think anyone here with a life cares whether I debate you? Or is concerned that I'm a "coward" if I don't? Even I don't care.
You make the same mistake all trolls make. You think people will enjoy reading your repetitive spam over and over. No one does. I just have to keep replying you and you will torpedo yourself with over the top repeated stupidity.
Dart has seen this exact scenario before with me and Bullproof, Disgusted, Hari, Salixes, Willows, Goldtop, etc. They are all have been permanently banned.
But keep begging. You might be that one troll in ten thousand that will give Rag the bullet he craves. I will be here for you.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Everyone runs away from your stink DeeDee. I know you've noticed that no one wants to talk to you. You're having to @ people to get them to notice your turd posts.
Sorry DeeDee, your posts are still old, boring, examples of a school dropout who became a militant atheist. Templates are for people with no imagination.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
@drlebronski
wylted says you can be queen.
But Tzar Wylted says he doesn't like trans, cross dressing lady boys. Is this a test?
What does Allah call you to do here?
Allah was fired just before my employ. It's Krishna now, but he's a lazy bastard who hasn't told us what he wants.
What do you suggest ethang?
Something like Bejeweled Officer: Sanitation Services BO:SS
Same level as queen I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drlebronski
I'm just a lowly trashman, why would the great Tzar speak to me?
Created:
Here Stevie, pretend to be obtuse with this again.
But Stephen is wrong. Mary did know because the Bible tells us in multiple ways.
1. There is no reason to pretend God didn't tell Mary.
2. There is no reason to assume God should have told Mary.
3. Jesus had many interactions with Mary indicating she knew His mission.
4. Jesus read from passages in the OT that fortold His sacrificial death and His resurrection. Mary knew these passages.
Stephen knows all these things, but prefers to lie for the pleasure of atheists here who don't know the Bible well enough to know he's lying, and don't care anyway due to their anti-god bias.
I like seeing you pretend your lame posts have not been answered.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drlebronski
Are there positions between Tzar and potentate?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Mr E thinks, therefore he believes in a supernatural GOD.
My God is natural.
Please don't try now to move the goalposts. The question was not whether Ethan believes in God.
You said, "Irrespective of whether or not there is an existent GOD, you are wholly reliant upon internal function."
This is not true. My God is not limited by my limitations, regardless of how much the liberal in you believes his thoughts are reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
So thinking I might be Catholic, (I'm not)
Point to me where I said you were Catholic.
Would pointing to where you thought I might be Catholic suffice?
I mean I'm not the coward dodging a debate...
No, you're the coward who is trying to use a wall-o-text to hide from is completely disgusting comment about pedophile rape.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Your boringly childish template posts are still old and dumb. I don't care for your repetative spam.
Do people ignore you so completely that you have to beg people to see your turd droppings?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Sorry. The next time you concede, I won't mention it.
Created:
-->
@Barney
Then I must be referring to those behaviors of yours you aren't comfortable with. They aren't secret Rag, so spare me the "what are you talking about act".
Whatever else one can say about him, RM is vastly more honest than you are.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Good Ideas.
But that still didn't answer my question. And self-sovereignty still isn't morality.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Thank you for conceding. I know it must have been difficult for you.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Non-sequitur. Whether one is "UNABLE TO RECOGNIZE THE INVALIDITY OF INVECTIVES AND AD HOMINEM ATTACKS has nothing to do with whether those attacks can be libel.
I was not calling into question the soundness of your logic, but for the consistent application of your principle. If an anonymous person cannot be libeled because he is anonymous, then neither can an anonymous person be harassed.
Should we throw out all mod sanctions for harassment?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Are you perhaps maybe kinda somewhat familiar with HUME'S GUILLOTINE ?
Exactly, which is why I'm asking the atheist for the moral principle on which his feeling based morality is derived.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Suit yourself. But when you are able to state a reason for atheist morality other than how they feel, let me know.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I did not need to give any reasons because I was NOT stating MY positions, I was stating the liberal's position.
Sigh. I was NOT stating MY position in post #177 Brutus, and I was denying your charges in post #189.
In the same way, Someone who identifies as a christian probably shouldn't be trusted to speak authoritatively about the beliefs and opinions of ALL atheists.
None of your post addresses morality. Self-sovereignty is not morality.
If you feel that atheists do NOT base their morality on how the feel, please offer what you think they do base their morality on.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Sovereignty does not confer morality.
What principle do you suppose confers morality ?
Something objective, other than how we feel.
I have the self-sovereignty to shoot someone, but that sovereignty does NOT make it moral.
Shooting someone would violate their SELF-SOVEREIGNTY.
You said nothing about that. You only mentioned self sovereignty. Does a dog have self-sovereignty? Why not? Did Hitler's soldiers have self-sovereignty? Was shooting them immoral?
We are discussing morality, not self-sovereignity. Two very different things.
Please explain.
Self-sovereignty is the (yet unproven) idea that we have the right to do with our bodies what we will.
Morality is the idea that some things are right (moral) or wrong (immoral) to do regardless of self-sovereignty.
That they are different is self-evident.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
It can't be "libel" if you never reveal someone's legal identity.
Then neither can anyone harass another anonymous member.
Your application of logic must be sound AND consistent.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
GENDERIDENTITY - INDIVIDUALS ARE SELF-SOVEREIGNABORTION - INDIVIDUALS ARE SELF-SOVEREIGNIMMIGRATION - INDIVIDUALS ARE SELF-SOVEREIGNRACEPRIVLEGE - INDIVIDUALS ARE SELF-SOVEREIGNHOMOSEXUALITY - INDIVIDUALS ARE SELF-SOVEREIGN
Sovereignty does not confer morality. I have the self-sovereignty to shoot someone, but that sovereignty does NOT make it moral.
We are discussing morality, not self-sovereignity. Two different things.
I did not need to give any reasons because I was NOT stating MY positions, I was stating the liberal's position.
How is self-sovereignity different from "I feel that way"? Not much to me. Can you tell us how they are different?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
First off, I will not reply to your hilarious attempt at a "gotcha" moment.
Of course you won't.
Then why did you accuse me of saying it.
I posted what you said and asked you if you wanted to clarify.
...tell me exactly where I say that 11 year old boys wish to get raped by their priests.
Board: Religion
Thread title: Biblical contradiction
Post: #132
Comment: "Begging is what the choir boys did the priest."
If you meant something different, say so.
But after saying you had my mother begging, calling me a "pussy", and claiming I masturbated at my prom, the choir boy comment seems within your scope.
There is a very clear difference between making jokes about stereotypes and accusing someone of saying that 11 year olds wish to be raped by their priests (completely your words, not mine).
Ah, you were joking! Lol. That's rich.
"Begging is what the choir boys did the priest."
You got carried away trying to find an insult that riled me. So you first attacked my mother, then how I was raised, then my father, and finally, charged masturbation. I did not follow suit. I didn't report you or flag your posts. I used your actual words to show your depravity. I left your parents out of it.
So thinking I might be Catholic, (I'm not) you attacked the church on the pedo scandal and hit the "POST" button before thinking it through. Now you're backpedaling and acting all sanctimonious and outraged.
Don't worry so much. The mods are liberals, not Solomon, so they almost always blame aggressor and victim equally. At worst they will decide to cleave the baby in two.
Till then I will be here to burn you for as long as it takes for you to realize you're being a fool. Go cry to them some more. They hate being pestered.
Created:
Posted in:
It was you own disgusting filth that got you banned.
What got you banned Stevie?
My guess is that you don't think it was your own disgusting filth.
Am I right or am I right?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
My presentation is a reflection of your presentation.
No sir. Your presentation is a reflection of your perception of my position.
My presentation has exactly as much validity as your version.
If by validity you mean logically sound then I beg to differ. You do not know my position on any of those issues and my comments did not state any position except for the fact that feelings do not validate beliefs. Mine or anyone else's feelings. None of it means that those reasons cannot be otherwise valid.
We can take you for example.
So a man can'T act like and dress like a woman because it makes You feels uncomfortable.
How I feel is immaterial to the morality. You have assumed I feel uncomfortable, and worse, have assume that is my reason for opposing it. I do not oppose cross dressers.
A girl can'T choose whether or not to maintain her own pregnancy because it makes You feels bad.
How I feel is immaterial to the morality. You have assumed I feel bad, and worse, have assume that is my reason for opposing it. I do not oppose a woman's right to choose.
A person can'T flee persecution and poverty because You feels afraid of scary dirty foreigners.
How I feel is immaterial to the morality. You have assumed I feel afraid, and worse, have assume that is my reason for opposing it. I do not oppose legal immigration, I oppose all illegality because breaking the law in this case is immoral.
Some people are the evil and or privileged if You feels they are.
How I feel is immaterial.
Homosexuality is immoral because the very thought of dicks in assholes makes You feels icky
How I feel is immaterial to the morality. You have assumed I feel icky, and worse, have assumed that is my reason for opposing it. I do not oppose homosexuality, but I do think it is immoral.
And homosexuality is not dicks in assholes, as even straight couples can perform gay sex.
If I asked you why you think any of the subjects above are moral, as a liberal, you would be able only to cite your personal feelings about it. You are projecting.
Created:
-->
@Bones
Begging is what the choir boys did the priest.
What did the choir boys do? They begged.
Whom did they beg? The Priest.
What did they beg for? .....
Is it any wonder "ejaculate on a Dart member" was your take?
Created:
-->
@Barney
RM brought it up in a board discussion about fixing past problems involving that very list. Perhaps your insinuation is that it should never be brought up. He has let it go, but can bring it up in the context of a discussion about the list. Does "letting it go" to you mean never mentioning it again?
Stop being disingeneous. If your past behavior makes you uncomfortable, it should.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Then neither can anyone harass another anonymous member.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
This is for posterity.
...Statistically, I am infinitely better than you at debating.
And yet it's you begging me.
I had your mum begging
My mum is dead. But say hello for me if you speak to her again.
Dead people lie in soil.
Some people lie in their posts.
At least I have a mum's shoulder to cry on.
Right. Your mother will never die.
Now, go cry on her shoulder, mine are soggy from your begging tears.
Not my fault your a pussy.
Your sexual proclivities are of no interest to me.
know your a horney mf and you don't get pussy, but not everything is about sex.
And yet you're the one talking about horny, pussy, and sex.
I mean, I called you pussy,...
Lol. But I'm the horney mf making everything about sex?
With the above, we see that you are the one bringing sex in. Who mentioned sex? Not me. The horeny one did though
Maybe because you're a pussy.
Sorry I'm not the one quivering and dodging a challenge so...
No, you're the idiot following me around begging to be noticed.
...the only thing which pleasured you at prom was your right hand.
This is Mr. I'm not horny NOT talking about sex again.
1) I'm not following you. To be follow is to come after someone undesirably. Obviously, as you keep replying, you're really loving the attention.
Pure liberal illogic. "I'm not stalking you if you wanted me to stalk you." Lol.
Again, you're constant remarks that I am a beggar is only a sign of your naiveness. Begging is what the choir boys did the priest.
Yeah, you think it isn't rape if the 11 year old boy wanted it. We know your position boner.
That is actually fucked up. Of course it's fucking rape if the kid's 11. Come on now.
Let me remind you what you said loser.
Begging is what the choir boys did the priest.
Do you wish to clarify?
...accusing someone of being accepting of child rape is most certainly not acceptable
Saying 11 year old choir boy begged Priests to rape them IS sick. Hypocrite much?
You came on trying to match me on wit and found you couldn't. So you've run crying to the mods. Don't bring a knife brain to a gun brain fight.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
If we're going to start calling each other's things which we aren't, I should start calling you a Nazi then...
Sure, you're a liberal. You guys call eryone who disagrees with you a Nazi, or a homophobe, or a right wing extremist. Catch up snowflake.
It is of my judgement that Ethang5 has nothing to contribute to this cite. But of course, judgement is on you guys. I will say, on my watch, accusing someone of being accepting of child rape is most certainly not acceptable.
But necrophilia with ones mother is ok? Does blatant hypocrisy not shame you?
This is where the atheist pulls a Stephen. He can't rattle or win me so he calls the mods to come ban me for the things he's done. Hint Bones, your best bet is to cry to Rag. He could even spin your calling me a pussy into a sexual harrasment charge on me!
Let me know how that goes. In the main time, you're going to get toasted Everytime you put your ignorance and bitterness on display. Cheers.
Created:
This is what happens when the Christians cannot answer valid and genuine questions. I don't expect anything different from these bible dunces .
Your insipid question was answered by me, atS, and even Casting, who is an atheist. But as usual, you pretend not to see answers so you can re-spam your droppings in yet another brain-dead thread.
That post was directed at dunces like you stupid. It was concerning the accusation that I was also another user.
That post was directed to me, whom you've blocked and then lied that you hadn't. I know no other poster could be as bitter as you.
Heads up doofus, your pants are on fire. Lol!
Created:
"no two users in this thread share any system information."
You sending him your password via email to get you out the shite wouldn't show in the system, you clown.
It would show us signing in with the same password from different systems and different IP's.
Now stay with the thread.
You brought up the shared password doofus, and a mod, who would know, replied. You are a documented liar.
Created:
But your claim that TS and I share a password (how on Earth would you know that??) has been debunked by your protector himself.
We're you lying or just deluded?
s/he banned me three fkn times you clown because of yours and your other persona "Tradey's" whining and whinging.
Delusion it is!
Rag banned you because you were too stupid to know he was trying to help you, and I highlighted his bias in a way he could not dismiss.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
unfortunately for them, I have declared myself tzar of the religion forum
You didn't even have to do that. The CoC says each member must abide by reasonable requests made by the thread creator, and as we can see, Wylted's requests are as reasonable as Stephen's requests that got me banned.
I look forward to Rag banning anyone breaking Wylted's reasonable rules.
(Yeah, and Obama isn't really the president either)
Created:
Yeah, and your reasons why I'm wrong, and what I'm wrong about are clearly spelled out. Thanks.
Created: