Iraqis, Coalition Troops (2 Viewers)

[Xayma]

Who are these IHC and gaybasher fellows? Should I be aspiring to meet their lofty standards of dislike?

Not if you dont want to get banned

 

[400miles]

Yeah OK, thanks for that. Top notch contribution and all. Probably the best of your 100 posts so far.

Thanks darling. Unfortunately we're still waiting for a good one from you.

 

[400miles]

Who are these IHC and gaybasher fellows? Should I be aspiring to meet their lofty standards of dislike?

Why not? You already seem to be getting up a few people's noses. Why not go the whole way?

 

[Rorix]

400miles
Join Date: June 2004

Rorix
Join Date: June 2003

You're obviously in a great position to judge

Asquithian: I assume that "ultra right wing" is hyperbole, and if presenting the alternative that half of the country, give or take 5%, agrees with is to the disgust of most of the members, then the members need to develop a little more tolerance.

 

[neo o]

Because the members are racist

 

[Rorix]

Please explain.

 

[neo o]

I am the walrus

 

[Rorix]

Please Explain

Or I Will Go Back To Cooking The Fish.

 

[neo o]

Don't worry, I think you better check the halibut

 

[Rorix]

:greenspan:

 

[neo o]

I don't like Freemasons.

 

[Rorix]

lol you got band roofle doofle

 

[neo o]

you got 111lollercoaster'd lollercoasters

 

[400miles]

400miles
Join Date: June 2004

Rorix
Join Date: June 2003

You're obviously in a great position to judge

Well... I've seen people react (and done so myself) to IHC and gaybasher... And I've talked to people who've been annoyed at what you say. So regardless of the fact that you've been "contributing" to the board a year more than I, I think I'm in a perfectly good position to say what I think.

 

[Rorix]

So, your case is that you've seen two other members.


And you've talked to some people (whom you haven't named [although I'm sure I can guess a couple of them]), who are intolerant of a conservative political view (unless they're unhappy with the way I'm expressing it, but you didn't seem to draw this distinction.

Well, that's a sound case.

Well anyway, why don't you single out some posts in the News and Politics forum that you thought were particularly good examples of your contributions to the forums. I don't have the best memory, but all I can remember from you of late is trolling me in several different threads. You also seem to be arguing that your parents deserve a pay rise or something.

http://www.boredofstudies.org/community/search.php?searchid=2996
There's a list of posts to give you a head start.

 

[400miles]

I didn't realise I needed a case. I didn't realise I needed more than 'some people' who are intolerant of an aggravating poster. All I said was that you're already getting up people's noses, why not go as far as IHC and gaybasher. I didn't realise I'd need to call witnesses and have concrete evidence to support my opinion. Well sorry, your honour, but here I was thinking that I was just voicing my opinion.

I've contributed to many News threads along the way, but most significantly to (as you pointed out) the Teachers Payrise thread and the Ban on Gay Marriages thread. I also contributed quite a bit to the Schools Acceptance of Homosexuals thread.
I have only contributed "trolling" posts lately because I have found no thread urging any argument that takes my attention. Except stupid posts that you make and that I feel the need to point out.

But in the end I don't really have to justify myself to you. Your opinion of me doesn't concern me the slightest.

 

[neo o]

I didn't realise I needed a case. I didn't realise I needed more than 'some people' who are intolerant of an aggravating poster.

He isn't an aggravating poster.

He has a different opinion to you, and seemingly, you can't accept that.

 

[AsyLum]

I am the walrus

I am the eggman
they are the eggmen

 

[neo o]

I am the eggman
they are the eggmen

goo goo g’joob g’goo goo g’joob.

 

[Rorix]

I didn't realise I needed a case. I didn't realise I needed more than 'some people' who are intolerant of an aggravating poster. All I said was that you're already getting up people's noses, why not go as far as IHC and gaybasher. I didn't realise I'd need to call witnesses and have concrete evidence to support my opinion. Well sorry, your honour, but here I was thinking that I was just voicing my opinion.

So, I say you were in a great position to judge, you say it's not just based on your opinion, and now you say you were just voicing your opinion. OK.

I have only contributed "trolling" posts lately because I have found no thread urging any argument that takes my attention. Except stupid posts that you make and that I feel the need to point out.

Please link me to a post where I presented a position which you responded to, pointing out its flaws. That's responding to a stupid post. Your responses are more like

<comment>

Haha you're an idiot.

But in the end I don't really have to justify myself to you. Your opinion of me doesn't concern me the slightest.

So, put your money where your mouth is and stop responding.