Story Comments
Posted by: rightfromwrong 11 months, 4 weeks ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
68%
rightfromwrong11 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
pc25...his attitude is that if he throws enough crap on the wall there is always idiots with an I.Q. of 91 or leas like George W. who can't disseminate the information, so therefore some of it will stick.
Reply
Other imbeciles who work on behalf are Klarissa,Redriver and Endomorph...all of these must be paid by the right wing because they likely couldn't get jobs as Walmart greeters-
29%
Bucotch11 months, 4 weeks ago
-
-
89%
CaptainLucid11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/1469/
Reply
Hey Bucotch, looking good in your walmart uniform. -
88%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BUCOTCH :
Reply
"Walmart greeters have Obama voters beat in the I.Q. department."
Actually, the opposite is true. Liberals tend to outperform conservatives academically by a significant margin.
Spin this.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/106381/Obama-Education-...
"Barack Obama leads John McCain by a significant margin among voters with the most education. McCain leads Obama among those with the least education. Thus, it appears that Obama's strong showing among educated voters in the Democratic nomination contest would extend to the general election as well."
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/sta...
"College graduates are more likely to vote Democrat than Republican by a 53% to 46% margin. Those with postgraduate degrees are more likely to vote Democrat than Republican by a 58% to 41% margin."
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcg...
"U.S. medical students are considerably more likely to be liberal than conservative and are more likely to be liberal than are other young U.S. adults. Among these medical students, 5% self-characterized as politically very conservative, 21% conservative, 31% liberal, and 9% as very liberal.”
http://www.local6.com/education/2540402/detail.htm...
http://www.alec.org/am/pdf/2007_ALEC_Education_Rep...
Of the top 5 states with the HIGHEST academic achievement, 4 vote DEMOCRATIC (Minnesota, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire). Of the bottom 10 states with the WORST academic achievement, 7 vote REPUBLICAN (Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, West Virginia, Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina).
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/departments/elearnin...
Of the top 5 "SMARTEST STATES," 4 vote DEMOCRATIC (Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey). Of the 10 "DUMBEST STATES," 8 vote REPUBLICAN (West Virginia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee, Oklahoma).
As far as the topic of this thread is concerned, I believe everyone, including PC25, should be able to post their own articles.
However, I also believe that like-minded users, like Spadecaller, also have the right to organize and boycott threads that peddle falsehoods.
It goes both ways.-
78%
CaptainLucid11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My personal favorite stat is when you look at how much more money dem states put into the federal piggie bank compared to how much republican states like the south suck out. In the south they should pledge alligence to the United States of California because we pretty much balance their budgets by ourselves. The difference between the south and mexico is the south has access to Californian money and loves to tell us how much they hate our morals and how evil we are while they take our money. It really burns me knowing the south won the civil war because we didn't let them seccede. I also like putting a protractor point on W's ranchette and drawing a circle that just misses the west coast, the great lakes and the northeast in other words a circle that is centered in texas but doesn't include any states that matter.
Reply -
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned11 Replies
-
-
-
71%
slate11 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ah is this what you had hoped for Spade? The name calling like school kids, the IQ jokes and the making of 'lists' of those that shouldn't be 'allowed' their point of view?
Reply
Marcus, once again, I implore you to reinstate the member blocking function, it will ease people feeling the need for these types of 'campaigns against free speech'.-
73%
mesodude11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Ah is this what you had hoped for Spade? The name calling like school kids, the IQ jokes and the making of 'lists' of those that shouldn't be 'allowed' their point of view?"
Reply
--Who said anything about silencing anyone's point of view? I don't see where Spade says this anywhere. Post to you heart's content but why pollute the site with your personal crusade against Obama (or anyone) and in a way that is clearly not meant to foster legitimate debate? Just as Propeller encourages users to keep their comments relevant to the story I see no reason why users shouldn't be *discouraged* from flooding the front page with the equivalent of tidbits from the National Enquirer.
A boycott isn't censorship, slate. You have a right to mindlessly promote crap stories and we have a right to boycott them.-
75%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I dunno Messo, I've witnessed much pollution from the left of Bush and every other person on the right. Fair is fair is it not?
Reply
Besides, Spade could have accomplished this very easily using PMs to those in his group and have others of like mind contact those in their groups of friends.
Boycott all you want, making a thread to attack a member personally is snaky at best. -
33%
CajunChamp11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My take on what Slate meant is that, count 'em, how many replies are actually on-topic in direct response to the main topic as posted as opposed to the name calling, personal attacks and singling out others as (insert hate-stuff here). What has transpired here in this thread is exactly the same that Spade alludes that is being posted by pc25 and others. C'mon ... over 400 replies and ALL on-topic?
Reply
-
-
-
54%
CactusAnnie11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spadecaller is in blatant violation of the terms of use with this personal attack on one of my favorite posters, and it is not the first time.
Reply
8. Your Responsibilities.
You may use Propeller.com for lawful purposes only. You may not submit, offer links from, or transmit through Propeller.com any material, or otherwise engage in any conduct that:
VIOLATES OR INFRINGES THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS including, without limitation, patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright, publicity or other proprietary rights; is unlawful, THREATENING, ABUSIVE, HARASSING DEFAMATORY LIBELOUS, deceptive, fraudulent, obscene, pornographic, invasive of another's privacy, TORTIOUS, or contains explicit or graphic descriptions, or accounts of, sexual acts;
victimizes, harasses, degrades, or intimidates an individual or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability;
impersonates any person, business or entity, including our employees and agents;
contains viruses or any other computer code, files or programs that interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment, or otherwise permit the unauthorized use of a computer or computer network;
encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, or that gives rise to civil liability;
offers, promotes or encourages betting or wagering prohibited by law;
violates these Terms of Use, guidelines or any policy posted on Propeller.com, or
interferes with the use of Propeller.com by others.
You may not use Propeller.com in a way that could damage or impair our servers or networks. You may not interfere with any other party's use and enjoyment of Propeller.com. You may not attempt to gain unauthorized access to our services, user accounts, computer systems or networks. We may take any legal and technical remedies to prevent the violation of these Terms of Use.-
70%
HannibalBarca11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
75%
HannibalBarca11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And of course, rrcon personal threats to me are acceptable in your eyes as he is a con, so I deserve it right?
Reply
Any poster that negs me because I stated that I lost a twin with our first pregnancy or another implies the surviving one will do him for $5 will not get a pleasant word from me.
Big difference between us is I insult them, not their family or country, and these are your friends.
So your quest about spade and rules falls short in my eyes-
100%
CactusAnnie11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bullcorn! You insult the USA constantly, and you don't even know what you are talking about half the time.
Reply
I didn't see the neg about your loss, there was probably something else in there that he was negging, but like I said, I didn't see it.
I have seen you go around stalking and baiting certain posters around here for a long time. You are relentless. You would do well to invite RRcon out for a beer when the spring thaw comes instead of constantly harassing him...
For your information, there is no quest, that is the sort of thing SC does. I was just pointing out the fact of the situation.
However I might fall in your eyes, is of no particular interest to me.
I do wish you warmth though, I am sure you need it where you are...-
25%
HannibalBarca11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wrong again, I give what i get, and as I said those who insult my family get what they deserve.
Reply
And never have I insulted USA, just your WH policies
Find any comment on me insulting USA,,,,you can't
And as for me stalking,,,,that troll can report me
-
-
-
-
100%
LegalBob11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Calling for a general boycott is fine. Naming someone as " .... and his kind ..." is getting a bit personal and on the edge. Nothing illegal but at the same time, not warranted. He could have justly mentioned " ... and articles such as PC25 posts" with linked references. It was a personal attack, veiled yes, and craftily written.
Reply
-
-
69%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CACTUSANNIE :
Reply
"Spadecaller is in blatant violation of the terms of use with this personal attack on one of my favorite posters, and it is not the first time..."
Once again, CACTUSANNIE unsurprisingly misses the mark.
Did you bother to listen to the entire link in full?
The speech was NOT directed at PC25 at all. The speech was addressed to "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller." SPADECALLER is not calling for censorship, neither is he "threatening" or "violating" PC25's rights. In fact, I'm sure he is fully aware that as a regular member, he doesn't have the permissions necessary to delete PC25's posts and threads.
No, SPADECALLER's speech was addressed to "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" because it is calling for such like-minded members to exercise restraint when encountering an article filled with apparent falsehoods. In other words, don't just Prop every story that is sent to your mailbox. Read the article, evaluate its veracity and value, and then make the decision to Prop and/or comment.
SPADECALLER is not censoring, removing offending threads, deleting posts, or banning members.
SPADECALLER is not threatening PC25. In fact, his speech is not even addressed to PC25.
SPADECALLER is not threatening members to Prop only his approved stories.
Spadecaller is simply asking members to exercise some discretion.
Furthermore, this is a private forum, not a public space. It is neither your place to interpret the TOU, nor is it your place to determine whether the TOU has been violated. So your futile appeal to Propeller's TOU is just that -- futile.
LOL.-
78%
Spadecaller11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for clarifying that point, ybdogsct. This short address was an appeal to the mainstream,centrist, and liberal members to exercise discretion in propping stories and to consider boycotting those that are based on lies and rumors. I believe that will benefit our community and improve the quality of debate.
Reply -
100%
LegalBob11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
First line:
Reply
"In their quest to blame Obama for everything, PC25 and a few others "
First line of Spade's discussion:
"PC25 and his kind would soon slither into obscurity, where they belong,"
I would really like you, et al, on the witness stand. You wouldn't stand a chance.
Yes, I agree with the premis of the article but not singling out a particular individual. The article could have just as much impact without mentioning PC25, IMHO of course.
Good idea, Spade, but it won't fly.-
40%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB:
Reply
"Yes, I agree with the premis of the article but not singling out a particular individual."
There is nothing in the TOU that prevents members from referring to other individual member. The issue is whether or not Spadecaller was "threatening" PC25 with a personal attack. It was NOT a "threat" since the speech was not even directed at PC25, but rather to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller."
Was the speech preachy? Yes.
Proselytizing? Yes.
A little "holier than though"? Sure, why not.
But there's nothing in the TOU that prohibits that. If there were, a number of the "Moral Majority" here on Propeller would have been banned quite a long time ago.
But the speech can't be construed as a "threat" if its not directed at PC25, even though it singles PC25 by name as a prime example of a member whose threads lack credibility and value.
If you claim Spadecaller is "threatening" PC25, then what exactly is Spadecaller threatening him with? Deletion of threads, deletion of posts, revocation of forum membership? No, I don't hear that anywhere in Spadecaller's speech. Besides, I'm fairly certain Spadecaller realizes he doesn't possess the necessary permissions to delete threads, remove posts, and ban members; if he did have these website permissions, Spadecaller wouldn't have had to create this thread.
If you have a sound argument, then by all means put me on the witness stand and present it. You certainly haven't impressed me thus far. Although as I stated earlier, this is a private forum, not a public space so your interpretation of the TOU means squat, but I'll certainly give you the opportunity to bloviate, if you wish.-
100%
LegalBob11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gee, you sure add things to replies that don't exist. I did not SAY or mean that it was against the TOU. I did not SAY he was "threatening" anyone or even hint as such. When he said "PC25 and his kind" is where he stepped close to the line of personal attack no matter what the TOU says and the TOU doesn't even enter in to it from my standpoint, mine is a personal assessment.
Reply
Also, sorry but this IS a public forum and not even on a private server. It's only considered private if you need a login and password to POST, not just READ. Some sites that ARE on an individual or company private server may not need to register, etc.
Whether or not you're "impressed" means diddly squat. Reading comprehension lessons should be considered in your immediate future.-
50%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB :
Reply
'If anonymous individuals can come here and READ the submissions then it's a PUBLIC venue, simple as that."
We are NOT talking about "anonymous individuals. We are discussing Spadecaller and PC25, two REGISTERED members.
Why is this so difficult for you to understand?
LEGALBOB :
"My point is "everybody" can post here, therefore it is a pubic access server."
Wrong.
Firstly, only REGISTERED members can post here. Users have been banned before without warning and they can be banned again. Likewise, spammer accounts and sock-puppet accounts are prevented from posting once they've been discovered. Not "everyone" can post here. Only registered members who have agreed to accept the TOU can post in the forums.
Secondly, you are changing terms to fit your altered reality. NOBODY is arguing whether Propeller exists on a public access server. The argument is whether or not the Propeller website is considered private property. If it is, AOL has full leverage to deny membership to anyone they deem unacceptable.
Get this through your thick head: Propeller is a private, for-profit venture. AOL reaps the generated revenue. AOL alone determines how to interpret/enforce its TOU. AOL determines whether to expunge threads, delete posts, and ban members. All the content on this website is the property of AOL. Period.
If you don't like it, tough. Like any membership club, the website belongs to AOL, and AOL makes the rules.
The fact you keep changing your story reveals just how tenuous your pathetic argument is.
LEGALBOB:
"Another example: You have an office. The boss chews you out in the middle of the office where all the employees can hear but they can't comment. OR the boss takes you into his office and closes the door and chews you out and invites your immediate supervisor in. Can you relate that to Private and Public?"
Actually, you had to click a link to enter this thread and even then you only were exposed to a snippet. In order to hear the full recording, you had to click another link to enter Spadecaller's personal website. Spadecaller's opinions certainly weren't imposed on your virgin ears. If you didn't want to hear what Spadecaller had to say, then perhaps you shouldn't have followed the TWO LINKS you voluntarily clicked.
A better characterization of what happened is this: Spadecaller invited all the Friends on his Friends List into a room to warn them about dubious stories PC25 was posting. You decided to enter not just the house (i.e., clicked the 1st link to enter the thread), but also decided to enter the very room where Spadecaller's friends were gathering (i.e., clicked the 2nd link to the recording on Spadecaller's personal website).
Spadecaller's tirade was not imposed upon you. Nobody forced you to follow those two links to Spadecaller's personal website.
As I said before, if you think you have a case, then why don't you put your money where your mouth is. File a suit for slander.
Go ahead.
Let's see just how strong your courage in your convictions is.
LOL. -
50%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB:
Reply
"When he said "PC25 and his kind" is where he stepped close to the line of personal attack no matter what the TOU says and the TOU doesn't even enter in to it from my standpoint, mine is a personal assessment."
Let me explain it simple terms so that even a simpleminded fool like you can understand.
You claim Spadecaller "personally attacked" PC25.
How? From a post that wasn't even addressed to PC25, but instead was addressed to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller"? Can you demonstrate losses or damages PC25 suffered in this alleged attack?
Go ahead and sue for slander, if you think you have a case. Put your money where your mouth is.
LOL.
There's a profound difference between a personal attack and a call-to-action. This speech addressed to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" was a call-to-action.
LEGALBOB:
"Also, sorry but this IS a public forum and not even on a private server. It's only considered private if you need a login and password to POST, not just READ. Some sites that ARE on an individual or company private server may not need to register, etc."
Wrong.
This forum is private property owned by AOL. As such, the moderators are free to interpret the TOU, remove threads, delete posts, and even ban members as they see fit. This website is private property and any revenue generated by it goes to AOL's coffers. Period. If you don't like how AOL's moderators interpret the TOU, you don't have to participate.
I suggest you learn the difference, or return to your law books. Either you failed to learn it the first time, or your school was subpar. I would have expected more from someone who "claims" to possess a JD.
Pathetic.-
100%
LegalBob11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"mine is a personal assessment". Any idea what that means? Opinion maybe??!!
Reply
Public/Private .. you have no clue as to what that means. To you, every server that is owned by an individual or company is a "private" server. Maybe I should make things a little simpler for you to understand. The fact that it is a "private" server owned by AOL has no bearing. If anonymous individuals can come here and READ the submissions then it's a PUBLIC venue, simple as that. If you post, nobody knows who you are other than the AOL folks when you register after which you can post with your handle which the PUBLIC reading your post has no idea who you really are. If the PUBLIC has no access to READ or to POST then that is a "Private" venue. I am not disputing the difference between privately owned and "public" access. My point is "everybody" can post here, therefore it is a pubic access server. I suggest you learn a bit more about the difference. When I was in law school there were no PC's or Internet.
Another example: You have an office. The boss chews you out in the middle of the office where all the employees can hear but they can't comment. OR the boss takes you into his office and closes the door and chews you out and invites your immediate supervisor in. Can you relate that to Private and Public?
Some ancient philosopher had it right:
He who knows and knows that he knows is a teacher, follow him
He who knows not and knows that he knows not, is simple, teach him.
He who knows not and knows not the knows not is a fool, shun him.
With that in mind, see ya.-
100%
LegalBob11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ok then, let's get on the same page.
Reply
Propeller is hosted on a privately owned server (AOL) but is publicly accessible. Anybody can READ and anybody can POST (yes, registration necessary).
You said:
" Although as I stated earlier, this is a private forum, not a public space so your interpretation of the TOU means squat"
The "this is a private forum" is what I took/take issue with. It is NOT a "private forum", anyone can partake. Having to register to post does not make it a private forum as ANYone can register, even Valerie Putin.
And I was/am not interpreting the TOU but rather voicing my own opinion as I previously stated.
Summary: Private server, by definition, yes owned by AOL. Private forum, no, anyone can use it.-
50%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB:
Reply
"Private server, by definition, yes owned by AOL. Private forum, no, anyone can use it."
We differ in our definition of "use." Anyone can read the forum, yes. But not everyone (only registered members) can post messages. Likewise not everyone (only those who voluntarily agree to abide by AOL's TOU) can become a member. I define "use" to mean one can enjoy the full privileges of everything the website has to offer.
Furthermore, your office analogy earlier is invalid. Just because everyone can read the forum does not mean that its contents are in any way imposed upon you the public. Nobody forced you to listen to Spadecaller's rant -- you had to click the first link to enter this thread just to see the excerpt and then had to click a second link to be transferred to Spadecaller's personal website to listen to the entire recording in full. Even once you arrived at Spadecaller's website, his speech wasn't imposed upon you since you were free to close your web browser at ANY time.
I posted this earlier, but I'll post it again here for emphasis: You wrote earlier
LEGALBOB :
"Another example: You have an office. The boss chews you out in the middle of the office where all the employees can hear but they can't comment. OR the boss takes you into his office and closes the door and chews you out and invites your immediate supervisor in. Can you relate that to Private and Public?"
But that's not what happened here. What happened here was more like this.
A better example: Spadecaller invites Friends on his Friends List to his room to warn them of PC25's dubious articles. You not only enter the house (click the 1st link to enter the thread), but also enter the very room in which Spadecaller's friends have gathered (click the 2nd link to enter Spadecaller's personal website). And then you have the nerve to complain that Spadecaller's speech, which exists on his private, personal website, was imposed upon you the public.
Your description is simply not an accurate account of what transpired. Only interested parties would have followed both links, which were CLEARLY LABELED AND NOT MISLEADING IN THEIR CONTENT .-
100%
MotiGui11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was an anonymous public user when I typed in the propeller.com address and the very first submission was this one. I was not invited in to anyone's private domain, their house or their private web site. I understand if Spadecaller has a web site and he posts content. I can either read it or not. But that's not a private space either unless it is not publicy available and the only way you can get there is if someone gives you the URL and access information. After that, caveat emptor. Propeller, by contrast is not anyone's private domain, anyone in the public arena can come here, read posts and reply (if they register) but they are still in the public domain, the exception being is that now they can post. In reality we are ALL in the public domain, you don't know who I am and vice-versa.
Reply
My take is that you guys are talking about two very different things. There is a difference between a privately owned server, a private or public forum, a private or public website, etc. Private means just that, not accessible to the public to read OR to post. If Spadecaller's web site is able to be Googled then it's not a private web site. Lets say I type PC25 in the Google box and Spadecaller's site comes up, the first page being a login page in order to proceed to the message page(s). That would then be a "private" web site. If the message page in question pops up first then it's not private. Anyway, your take on "Bob" is not correct. He said right off that it was his own personal assessment which means "opinion" where I hail from.-
25%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
MOTIGUI:
Reply
"If Spadecaller's web site is able to be Googled then it's not a private web site. Lets say I type PC25 in the Google box and Spadecaller's site comes up, the first page being a login page in order to proceed to the message page(s). That would then be a "private" web site."
This would never happen. If you type "PC25" in the Google search engine, it will search for websites that contain the words "PC25" and then display the websites in order from most cross-referenced to least cross-referenced.
But the word "PC25" does not exist on Spadecaller's personal webpage. It's an audio recording . So, no Spadecaller's webpage would not have shown up as a Google hit.
But don't take my word for it. Try it yourself. Type the words below (without quotation marks) into the Google search engine.
"Spadecaller PC25 site:www.freewebs.com"
Let me know how many hits you get.-
100%
LegalBob11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cripes man, it's a loaded question, you already know the answer. You're missing the point. MotiGui posted an IF example. Yes, we all know it's an unknown web site per se and it can't be Googled, that's a given, but if someone posts the URL anyone can view it without a login which still does not make it a private web site unless you DO have to have a user/pass access. I have private web sites that nobody can view unless you have a user/pass even IF you have the URL, THAT is private. You're mis-applying "private" in this scenario.
Reply
The point that you're missing is that this forum is not private, the server is privately owned. This is a public forum that anyone can access and read posts. Like the staff guy said, posting/replying is RESTRICTED to REGISTERED users. That does NOT make this a private forum. Actually and more accurately this is a "restricted public forum". Let's just put a period on this and if you still don't get it then we'll simply agree to disagree. This submission is not even on the front page any longer, so all this is really moot now.-
0%
ybdogsct11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We've been talking past each other instead of to each other. You've been talking about the difference between the public sphere and private sphere. I've been talking about the difference between public and private property (Perhaps, I should have inserted the word "privately-owned forum" in place of "private forum" to avoid confusion. Fine. Whatever. The salient point is that AOL establishes its TOU, is solely responsible for interpreting the TOU, and can revoke membership as they see fit.
Reply
But what's your point?
You still haven't demonstrated that Spadecaller's speech was anything more than a call-to-action addressed specifically to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller." If you didn't want to hear what Spadecaller had to say, you shouldn't have accepted the invitation to visit Spadecaller's personal website. It's not like Spadecaller's link attempted to mislead you into visiting Spadecaller's personal website.-
100%
LegalBob11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
First paragraph:
Reply
Ok, once more .... My initial comment had nothing to do with the TOU or Spadecallers website and still doesn't. My statement was, as I mentioned to begin with, my personal assessement centering on Spadecaller's perceived personal attack on PC25 in the way he worded his first post and the introduction. That's it, nothing else, until you brought up private forum, of which I took issue and attempted to explain "private" and "restricted", etc. ad nauseum after which you proceeded way off into left field with accusations, name calling, doubting credentials and so on. Where in hell you got all that stuff escapes me..
Second paragraph:
I have/had no interest in his website, has nothing to do with anything regarding my personal assessment.
I have nothing against Spadecaller, it was only the way that PC25 was mentioned in the beginning, that's it. I didn't accept a personal invitation and I didn't visit the website, I have no interest in the site, only the difference between private and public in order to debate that issue that you brought up.
Have a nice day ....-
ybdogsctComment removed: Spam
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
JayGarcia11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let me clarify the last sentence a bit. The forum is open to the public to read and to post (restricted to registered users). That fact does not make the Propeller forums private forums. Private forums are those that the public cannot see or post to unless they have the necessary login criteria available.
Reply
My UFAQ - www.ufaq.org - is a good example. I own the server which makes it a privately owned machine. The FAQS are there for everyone to read. The fora are there for everyone to read. If you want to post or reply you have to register. I also have 6 forums that are there for programming staff that are private, the public - registered or not - cannot see these, only the members that have the necessary login information.
-
-
-
-
-
-
50%
Klarissa11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
right - I think that you forgot about the subject.
Reply
Your personal attacks are a reflection on you, not on your victims.
You are the only one who controls what you write - If someone had written this about you, how would you feel - for example,
"Rightfromwrong must be paid by the democratunderground, because he likely couldn't get a job as Walmart greeter. -
-
100%
GLee11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I must agree Chik. This story in particular tops the list of Spadecaller's so called "trash" but will he be 'called out' by the Propeller Scouts for 'calling out' a respected fellow Propeller member, PC25? How dare Spadecaller for attempting to silence any voice on Propeller. This site is what America is all about. Different 'voices' with different opinions. What a shame! AND yes, just who is next on 'Callers list?
Reply -
-
loading ...
Ciera-Marie
DarkWizard
BronxBomber
cushi
not2needy
Spadecaller
mesodude
PsychoHosebeast
dunkirk
antibrainwasher
JEBUS08
Newperson
FrauBlucher
CactusAnnie
Albmore
gwhiddon
corl64
RRcon
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.