Lolz at my recent infractions

[So the Heroes Fall]

So just for speaking the truth about possibly the worst meme in forum history that I'm amazed Inks is fond of considering those earlier threads were far more vulgar than simply an uncensored "f**k" and disagreeing with the beliefs of Mormons.

[Gustaf]

You weren't disagreeing with their beliefs you were saying all Mormons are bad people. I think there's a bit of a crackdown on the anti-Mormon hate speech that has been floating about.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

It wasn't infracted because you spoke the truth.  It was infracted because you tried to disrupt the thread (aka "trolling").  If you don't find them funny, that's fine, but let them have their fun.  Like I said, if this post becomes vulgar or inappropriate, I'll handle it.

But I'm not going to get into a public debate here about the validity of your infraction point.  If you wish to appeal it, follow the proper channels and PM me or Nym.  I'll be away on vacation tomorrow, so if you don't do it tonight, I suggest you go to Nym.

[Lief]

The moderators have decided to use criticism of the Mormon "religion" as an excuse to infract those posters who happen to be on their enemy lists. It's really just a means to an end.

[So the Heroes Fall]

You weren't disagreeing with their beliefs you were saying all Mormons are bad people. I think there's a bit of a crackdown on the anti-Mormon hate speech that has been floating about.

Actually no I didn't say that, I said some might be but only if they are only very loosely Mormon. I was saying that in response to someone smearing all evangelicals like Mormons, but I was making the point there are evangelicals who are good and accepting people and strongly opposed to the extreme bigotry of other evangelical churches and the LDS toward GLBT individuals, I know a lot. However any Mormon who does this is only nominally Mormon.

[Meeker]

If BRTD had replaced the word "Mormons" with "Scientologists" would he have been infracted?

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

So just for speaking the truth about possibly the worst meme in forum history that I'm amazed Inks is fond of considering those earlier threads were far more vulgar than simply an uncensored "f**k" and disagreeing with the beliefs of Mormons.

Lol, I got infracted too in this thread.

Incredible, but looks like Red and me are on the same side on this one.

[© Tweed the Younger]

If BRTD had replaced the word "Mormons" with "Scientologists" would he have been infracted?

+1.

[Grumps]

Lolz does seem to be the correct word here.......sorry I don't get it.  Whatever.

[I'm JewCon in name only.]

I go infracted for calling Ron Paul stinky poo the other day lol

[Communists For McCain]

First off, I'm a pretty anti-PC individual but even I have to say that BRTD's post on Mormons sounds hypocritically bigoted.

Second, just because it was doesn't mean that it should be infracted.  Especially considering how many morons on here get away with pretty blatant anti-semitic stuff (like you BigSkyBob, don't deny it).

[opebo]

Is it acceptable to say that all religous are bad people?  Because I think the act of faith is bad - as in I dislike it.

For that matter, can I say I dislike all Mormons?

[© Tweed the Younger]

Is it acceptable to say that all religous are bad people?  Because I think the act of faith is bad - as in I dislike it.

For that matter, can I say I dislike all Mormons?

you dislike me? 

[opebo]

Is it acceptable to say that all religous are bad people?  Because I think the act of faith is bad - as in I dislike it.

For that matter, can I say I dislike all Mormons?

you dislike me? 

You're a religious?  Or a Mormon?  If you can stomach that stuff, I have to say it certainly calls your character into question.  What I'm getting at here though is - am I allowed to have such an opinion?

[Senator Napoleon]

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

What the hell? I just got 4 death points for making a thread, suggesting that it may be good idea to make Jmfcst a part of the moderation team, giving his interest in it, as well as already mentioned lack of Republican moderators.

I also suggested to make AndrewCT moderator, but obviously, this thread was fine. Am I just a collateral damage of moderators personal antipathy toward suggested person or there are some double standards, whom we can discuss as possible moderator?

You know I do not complain publicly about infractions, as I prefer to avoid the drama by simply contacting a moderator, but my recent infraction is just so sensless.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

What the hell? I just got 4 death points for making a thread, suggesting that it may be good idea to make Jmfcst a part of the moderation team, giving his interest in it, as well as already mentioned lack of Republican moderators.

I also suggested to make AndrewCT moderator, but obviously, this thread was fine. Am I just a collateral damage of moderators personal antipathy toward suggested person or there are some double standards, whom we can discuss as possible moderator?

You know I do not complain publicly about infractions, as I prefer to avoid the drama by simply contacting a moderator, but my recent infraction is just so sensless.

those are what are known as fear-factor-death-points, the kind that are never rescinded…the jmfcst thumbing through the Mod Board would be an existential threat to the current regime.

[Joe Republic]

What the hell? I just got 4 death points for making a thread, suggesting that it may be good idea to make Jmfcst a part of the moderation team, giving his interest in it, as well as already mentioned lack of Republican moderators.

I also suggested to make AndrewCT moderator, but obviously, this thread was fine. Am I just a collateral damage of moderators personal antipathy toward suggested person or there are some double standards, whom we can discuss as possible moderator?

You know I do not complain publicly about infractions, as I prefer to avoid the drama by simply contacting a moderator, but my recent infraction is just so sensless.

AndrewCT is a legitimate recommendation for moderator.  The suggestion of jmfcst becoming one is pure trollery.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

What the hell? I just got 4 death points for making a thread, suggesting that it may be good idea to make Jmfcst a part of the moderation team, giving his interest in it, as well as already mentioned lack of Republican moderators.

I also suggested to make AndrewCT moderator, but obviously, this thread was fine. Am I just a collateral damage of moderators personal antipathy toward suggested person or there are some double standards, whom we can discuss as possible moderator?

You know I do not complain publicly about infractions, as I prefer to avoid the drama by simply contacting a moderator, but my recent infraction is just so sensless.

AndrewCT is a legitimate recommendation for moderator.  The suggestion of jmfcst becoming one is pure trollery.

Well, if a dude who put a picture of black penis in the (certainly) underage member's signature can be a moderator, why can't be jmfcst?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

AndrewCT is a legitimate recommendation for moderator.  The suggestion of jmfcst becoming one is pure trollery.

I think most would consider me very judicial and tolerant to humor...exactly what most want in a moderator.

[Joe Republic]

Well, if a dude who put a picture of black penis in the (certainly) underage member's signature can be a moderator, why can't be jmfcst?

(A) I didn't do that, as moderators don't have the power to change somebody's signature; anybody does however have the ability to change/remove images contained in their own off-site image hosting account, and (B) jmfcst has been temp-banned more than once and has been a chronic troll virtually since Day 1.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

..and (B) jmfcst has been temp-banned more than once and has been a chronic troll virtually since Day 1.

more than once?!  I only remember the one month ban last summer while I was in Boston...when was the other?

and you're confusing humor with trolling...I haven't officially trolled since I used to hijack threads and turning them into biblical discussions.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

What the hell? I just got 4 death points for making a thread, suggesting that it may be good idea to make Jmfcst a part of the moderation team, giving his interest in it, as well as already mentioned lack of Republican moderators.

I also suggested to make AndrewCT moderator, but obviously, this thread was fine. Am I just a collateral damage of moderators personal antipathy toward suggested person or there are some double standards, whom we can discuss as possible moderator?

You know I do not complain publicly about infractions, as I prefer to avoid the drama by simply contacting a moderator, but my recent infraction is just so sensless.

AndrewCT is a legitimate recommendation for moderator.  The suggestion of jmfcst becoming one is pure trollery.

Well, if a dude who put a picture of black penis in the (certainly) underage member's signature can be a moderator, why can't be jmfcst?

Dude... 2 wrongs don't make a right.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

What the hell? I just got 4 death points for making a thread, suggesting that it may be good idea to make Jmfcst a part of the moderation team, giving his interest in it, as well as already mentioned lack of Republican moderators.

I also suggested to make AndrewCT moderator, but obviously, this thread was fine. Am I just a collateral damage of moderators personal antipathy toward suggested person or there are some double standards, whom we can discuss as possible moderator?

You know I do not complain publicly about infractions, as I prefer to avoid the drama by simply contacting a moderator, but my recent infraction is just so sensless.

AndrewCT is a legitimate recommendation for moderator.  The suggestion of jmfcst becoming one is pure trollery.

Well, if a dude who put a picture of black penis in the (certainly) underage member's signature can be a moderator, why can't be jmfcst?

Dude... 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Well, Joe did cause this change and I still consider this as a great practical joke. And he's a fine moderator too, but he's not an example of a netiquette person either. While I don't agree with jmfcst on almost any issue and prefer Joe both politically and as a loveable asshole, he's not really that better than jmfcst in terms of acting onlike.

Look, if jmfcst's record of being a banned member is making it impossible for him to be even seriously considered as a moderator, I can only bow in front of this rule. But making a suggestion, even a silly one, doesn't justify an infraction.

I really hate to bring it up, but PMing Nym (I assume it was him, since Atlas board doesn't have it's own moderator) seems pointless. I bet I'd rather receive an answer from Raoul Wallenberg, than him.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Wow I just got one for posting a clip that was aired on network prime time TV. So the mods here are bigger prudes than the FCC.