Richard_P_Feynman
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2017
- Posts
- 1,449
There are assholes and mental midgets here.
Yeah. You're one of them, bitch.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There are assholes and mental midgets here.
There are assholes and mental midgets here.
So what?
There are assholes and mental midgets all over the place.
"The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions."
Ishmael
true, old timer...
but the road back needn't necessarily be littered with spent casings either...
extremes breed.
have you considered that this age of trump
may be savant's blessing...
forcing all to reevaluate
what seminal values
indeed still apply...
i'd bet (again by experience - and a long view of history)
that they are not so far
from... moderate.
tides
...and indeed - religiously - appreciate my ability (at times) to offend you
almost as much as i respect your ability (at times) to do the same to me...
speak, motherfucker!
it's how i know i'm e-live.
it is better with 'them' gone, i hear...
between the 'oh, but it's become necessary' sentimental lines.
i remain unthreatened by 'them' - whomever 'them' the them du jour might be...
i come here to be challenged
not to be coddled;
(it's the only real price in the free admission)
and am strong enough to weather whatever i might deem reprehensible.
this is about personal responsibility and...
well...
* wasted breath *, i fear;
the group has begged its deliverance.
iggy is, and always has been a baton in the struggle...
one's own voice, one's contribution,
is really the only responsible other.
...or choose - as many have - to move on....
censorship is ...oh so nefarious an instrument
once openly unholstered...
morphs from water pic
to seemingly unmanned runaway firehose...
anyone, really, could be sent to the corn.
rules. yes.
the privileges of ownership. yes.
the chimera of "free speech - no spam", even... yes.
but the ultimate responsibility remains - or rather - should remain
in our individual purview...
are there ban-able offenses? sure.
there are any number of posters i choose not to read;
others i choose not to follow...
(for whatever pecunious offense that might ignite me)
but even the ones i find reprehensible, or just tedious - or simply dull...
have, for the most part, as much standing in our free little litter box.
are there ban-able offenses... sure.
but there also seems to be a very ready vigilance brigade
with ever thinning hide
more and more itchy to find reason to push the un-like button...
( some brag of who hit the button first - "me too" - 'i'm in"!... saving... us)
bahhhhhh....
this community shows its vulnerability
(and eventual mortality)
when it craves to be a mommy state...
and it cannot be much fun...
for mommy.
Other than the too-consistant cleaving into stanzas, that was a good cleaver impression.
Ehhh... no ellipses
~ chuckle ~
Ssssnnooowwwfffflllaaakkkeeessss
Leftist idiots; where there are loads.
Ehhh... no ellipses
Your grammar is degenerating, Fuckwit; do something about it.
The rules have never changed, the posters have.
A semicolon would have been grammatically appropriate and showcased better continuity with picking on his post.
You're welcome.
If I'm not mistaken, the only changes to those rules in at least the last several years (and probably longer) are that final part of Rule #2, and the fact that the powers that be have gotten more strict about enforcing Rule #3 (I would say that, conservatively, at least 10,000 of Original Recipe busybody's posts were violations of that rule).
If it seems people are getting banned more often, it's not because the rules have changed or because there are more of them.
Please refer us all to the rule that explicitly bans anyone from calling another a sexual pervert.
Me? I've taken a different tack. I've engaged an 'hacker' to track those specific individuals down to their actual address. While costly, I have no doubt as to the effectiveness. In that respect Laurelmanu might be viewed as 'enablers'.
Ishmael
there is
cold-cool fucked
in all of that.
free free speech....
yeah.
If I'm not mistaken, the only changes to those rules in at least the last several years (and probably longer) are that final part of Rule #2, and the fact that the powers that be have gotten more strict about enforcing Rule #3 (I would say that, conservatively, at least 10,000 of Original Recipe busybody's posts were violations of that rule).
If it seems people are getting banned more often, it's not because the rules have changed or because there are more of them.
Last edited by Laurel : Today at 12:22 AM.[Threats of action IRL against other users are prohibited per our forum guidelines] and are cause for permanent banning. - Last Warning
there isIshmael said:Originally Posted by Ishmael View Post
Please refer us all to the rule that explicitly bans anyone from calling another a sexual pervert.
Me? I've taken a different tack. I've engaged an 'hacker' to track those specific individuals down to their actual address. While costly, I have no doubt as to the effectiveness. In that respect Laurelmanu might be viewed as 'enablers'.
Ishmael
cold-cool fucked
in all of that.
free free speech....
yeah.
Last edited by Laurel : Today at 12:23 AM.[Threats of action IRL against other users are prohibited per our forum guidelines] and are cause for permanent banning. - Last Warning
Last edited by Laurel : Today at 12:22 AM.
Last edited by Laurel : Today at 12:23 AM.
what the fuck? over...
this becomes sick game...
with thin skins and bruised egos...
words? scenarios? tests?
because one might assume x could do such a thing as asserted above then....
(without a shred of proof.... poof?)
sell.
sell now.
it's become a fright-wig of a place!