Lit being used as a refuge for terrorist propaganda

[mayfly13]

Get the chutney out of your ears. Words mean things and talking about murdering people isn't allowed. There are laws against it. This isn't Pakistan.

I agree with your stance and that he Should stop saying that Stormfront crap. Or be banned every time he does.

What I can't figure out is whether coati is,--rightfully-- annoyed with his unacceptable rhetoric,
or whether he thinks that BotBoy is actually capable of such stuff.

I can't imagine anyone would think he spews that stuff other than with the intent to shock and troll.

 

[coati]

What I can't figure out is whether coati is,--rightfully-- annoyed with his unacceptable rhetoric,
or whether he thinks that BotBoy is actually capable of such stuff.

I can't imagine anyone would think he spews that stuff other than with the intent to shock and troll.

What Gorgoroth is "capable of" is totally irrelevant to the topic of this thread. He advocates for violence against those who disagree with him. That alone violates the standards for civil discourse in a democracy.

 

[icanhelp1]

I agree with your stance and that he Should stop saying that Stormfront crap. Or be banned every time he does.

What I can't figure out is whether coati is,--rightfully-- annoyed with his unacceptable rhetoric,
or whether he thinks that BotBoy is actually capable of such stuff.

I can't imagine anyone would think he spews that stuff other than with the intent to shock and troll.

Coati likes to spew a lot of crap! She rails against Trump and republicans every chance she gets. To *IT* all republicans are deplorable. Fuck *IT*. When you push back *it* whines like a little baby! If ya can't take the criticism then GTFO. If you can't handle someone's rhetoric then, like the snowflake fee fee you are, put the individual on ignore. Most conversations devolve from a normal conversation ta who can come up with the sleaziest one line ad-hom name calling... anyway. If ya don't like shit thrown your way then don't throw it in the first place. Most comments that have a violent tinge to it are hyperbole and are not a threat to anyone. Not once, that I know of, was violence directed at a lit poster.

I've been insulted six ways to Sunday and I've never put anyone on ignore, that would take all the fun out of navigating LIT.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

we can always rely on you to do that

We can always rely on you to complain that other people are held accountable.

 

[SugarDaddy1]

Case in point, an ex-military member who started out on Lit as "BotanyBoy" and is currently posting as "Gorgoroth", but having many other user names along the way because of repeatedly being banned and then returning with a different user name. This particular poster has been banned for offering advice on the best weaponry to destroy an Islamic place of worship, advocating to beat up women who commit adultery, and promoting aerial attacks on border migrants at the southern boundary of the U.S. In his current user name, Gorgoroth has stated that educators, pediatricians, and parents who request basic educational support in schools for children who exhibit any sort of gender difference should be stoned to death or dismembered in a public setting. Lit is allowing this latest violent and hysterical statement to remain posted on the politics forum.

Now, according to Lit's guidelines and the guidelines of many other on-line forums, you can advocate for any position you wish, but you cannot advocate for violent terrorist activities. Riddling a mosque with high caliber bullets? Beating up adulteresses? Shooting all migrants at the southern border on sight from aircraft? Stoning people to death and dismembering them because they advocate for acceptance of gender orientation differences? All of that sounds like terrorism, and he repeatedly makes such statements on Lit with his various user names.

Even the various "BusyBody" alts eventually learned that outright promotion of terrorism was not acceptable, but Gorgoroth has apparently desensitized the moderator on the Politics Board to the point that stoning and public dismemberment are now simply accepted as normal rhetoric that is consistent with discourse standards on Lit.

When the Left promotes violence...

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/praying-for-30-years-god-always-answers.1490296/#post-90064601

 

[LukSkyFokker]

When the Left promotes violence...

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/praying-for-30-years-god-always-answers.1490296/#post-90064601

You spent all morning desperately seeking for an incriminating post and this is all you found.

 

[coati]

Coati likes to spew a lot of crap! She rails against Trump and republicans every chance she gets. To *IT* all republicans are deplorable. Fuck *IT*. When you push back *it* whines like a little baby! If ya can't take the criticism then GTFO. If you can't handle someone's rhetoric then, like the snowflake fee fee you are, put the individual on ignore. Most conversations devolve from a normal conversation ta who can come up with the sleaziest one line ad-hom name calling... anyway. If ya don't like shit thrown your way then don't throw it in the first place. Most comments that have a violent tinge to it are hyperbole and are not a threat to anyone. Not once, that I know of, was violence directed at a lit poster.

I've been insulted six ways to Sunday and I've never put anyone on ignore, that would take all the fun out of navigating LIT.

Fortunately, you are not the one setting basic standards for discourse on Lit. Promotion of violent and terrorist acts that I cited earlier in this thread are not permitted on Lit, nor on any other reputable forum. And no, I'm not going to GTFO or STFU just because I support those basic standards. Promotion of violence and terrorism is rightfully a red line.

I can take and dish out other forms of spirited discourse, but not rhetoric about beating up women, mowing down migrants, shelling mosques with high calliber ammo, and stoning trans rights supporters to death. You obviously think that spewing that sort of rhetoric is innocuous and has no impact on the wide range of people who read these posts. Thank God you don't set the standards.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Fortunately, you are not the one setting basic standards for discourse on Lit. Promotion of violent and terrorist acts that I cited earlier in this thread are not permitted on Lit, nor on any other reputable forum. And no, I'm not going to GTFO or STFU just because I support those basic standards. Promotion of violence and terrorism is rightfully a red line.

I can take and dish out other forms of spirited discourse, but not rhetoric about beating up women, mowing down migrants, shelling mosques with high calliber ammo, and stoning trans rights supporters to death. You obviously think that spewing that sort of rhetoric is innocuous and has no impact on the wide range of people who read these posts. Thank God you don't set the standards.

I think what did him in this time was his oh-so-cute invention of a new acronym for pterodactyls, and then accusing those who disagreed with him politically of embracing that particular acronym. Shades of Conager!

 

[icanhelp1]

Fortunately, you are not the one setting basic standards for discourse on Lit.

And neither are you. BotBoy doesn't need me to defend him but some of the back and forth crap I've read on lit is par for the course.

Promotion of violent and terrorist acts that I cited earlier in this thread are not permitted on Lit, nor on any other reputable forum. And no, I'm not going to GTFO or STFU just because I support those basic standards. Promotion of violence and terrorism is rightfully a red line.

With you it's all about one person that aggravates the shit out of you.
You obviously can't differentiate the difference between hyperbolic rhetoric and directly threatening a lit poster, which never happened

I can take and dish out other forms of spirited discourse, but not rhetoric about beating up women, mowing down migrants, shelling mosques with high calliber ammo, and stoning trans rights supporters to death. You obviously think that spewing that sort of rhetoric is innocuous and has no impact on the wide range of people who read these posts. Thank God you don't set the standards.

No one appointed you the content nazis. You hide behind your self righteous virtue signalling facade all the time while calling posters that lean right *deplorables* *deplorable = 'deserving strong condemnation'

I recall several times when BotBoy's wife and kids were disrespected, where were you and your holier than thou condemnation then?. That was a direct affront to him and his wife, which, your selective poutage overlooked. Apparently you believe that kind of rhetoric is innocuous also.

Those comments you speak of were hyperbolic in nature and not directed at anyone on lit, however the wife comments were!

Fortunately, you are not the one setting basic standards for discourse on Lit.

And neither are you. BotBoy doesn't need me to defend him but some of the back and forth crap I've read on lit is par for the course.

Promotion of violent and terrorist acts that I cited earlier in this thread are not permitted on Lit, nor on any other reputable forum. And no, I'm not going to GTFO or STFU just because I support those basic standards. Promotion of violence and terrorism is rightfully a red line.

With you it's all about one person that aggravates the shit out of you.
You obviously can't differentiate between hyperbolic rhetoric taken out of context and promoting terrorism.

I can take and dish out other forms of spirited discourse, but not rhetoric about beating up women, mowing down migrants, shelling mosques with high calliber ammo, and stoning trans rights supporters to death. You obviously think that spewing that sort of rhetoric is innocuous and has no impact on the wide range of people who read these posts. Thank God you don't set the standards.

No one appointed you the content nazis. "Impact on a wide range of people", ARE YOU KIDDING ME! **it's a porn board!!** everyone on this site is demented in one way or another. You hide behind your self righteous virtue signalling facade all the while calling posters that lean right *deplorables* *deplorable* = 'deserving strong condemnation'

I recall several times when BotBoy's wife and kids were disrespected, where were you with your holier than thou condemnation then?. That was a direct affront to him and his wife, which, your selective poutage overlooked. Apparently you believe that kind of rhetoric is innocuous.

I was accused of sanctioning the kidnapping of a governor for something I wrote which was taken completely out of context and hyperbolic, kind of funny! Even though it was second person prose the comment implies I'm a terrorist.

The comments you speak of were hyperbolic in nature and not directed at anyone on lit, however the wife comments were!

LIT has the right to remove anyone it deems a threat to site integrity and in violation of its rules. R U on its board?

I find it comical that you start a thread specifically to rally your leftist minions to banhammer someone you disagree it. Funny, ya never see that kind of shit from the right.

 

[coati]

Ooops, a groupie has hurt feelings about Gorgoroth getting banned again.

Actually, the various BotBoy alts are not the only situation where posters have been banned for promoting terrorism, gratuitous violence, or violent civil war. A lot of posters have been reported and banned for the same thing. It was a big thing preceding the 2016 election, because the extremists wanted to impress everyone with their veiled threats about kicking everyone's ass if they did not get their way.

I remember one period when four Deplorables were banned the same day for promoting violent civil war. They had been revving each other up in a couple of threads. Most of the Deplorables who were banned for promoting violence, including the BusyBody alts, have been smart enough to eventually drop that schtick.

BoBo, however, never learns. He returned one time and posted that a Lit poster admitting adultery should be beaten so badly that she ends up in the ICU for a month. After he got banned, he came back and continued to defend that position, on the grounds that she was an "abuser".

It says a lot about Deplorables that they still stick up for the ones who don't learn and continue to engage in violent rhetoric.

 

[YDB95]

How can you tell a user was banned? Do their posts disappear? (Already had BoBo's latest alt on ignore, so I wouldn't have seen his posts anyway.)

 

[icanhelp1]

How can you tell a user was banned? Do their posts disappear? (Already had BoBo's latest alt on ignore, so I wouldn't have seen his posts anyway.)

Really, you’re that sensitive LMFAO

 

[pecksniff]

No one appointed you the content nazis.

Yes, they did, I've got Laurel's commission around here somewhere.

 

[icanhelp1]

^^^Good example of why Fox "News" and all the alt right media spinoffs got to the point of facilitating a violent insurrection attempt. Unprincipled wimps like mayfly13 want citizens to retreat or remain silent each time violence is presented as the trump card in an on-line discussion.

No, wimp, it's not all just a joke every time you get called on invoking violent rhetoric. If you advocate for violence against those who disagree with your views in a democracy, you need to suffer the consequences. If you do it repeatedly, you will have even more consequences. Democracies can't thrive if they back down to violent rhetoric.

Like Maxine Waters, hypocrite.

 

[YDB95]

Like Maxine Waters, hypocrite.

She didn't advocate violence, she advocated letting the abusers know our side would fight back.

 

[icanhelp1]

Ooops, a groupie has hurt feelings about Gorgoroth getting banned again.

Actually, the various BotBoy alts are not the only situation where posters have been banned for promoting terrorism, gratuitous violence, or violent civil war. A lot of posters have been reported and banned for the same thing. It was a big thing preceding the 2016 election, because the extremists wanted to impress everyone with their veiled threats about kicking everyone's ass if they did not get their way.

I remember one period when four Deplorables were banned the same day for promoting violent civil war. They had been revving each other up in a couple of threads. Most of the Deplorables who were banned for promoting violence, including the BusyBody alts, have been smart enough to eventually drop that schtick.

BoBo, however, never learns. He returned one time and posted that a Lit poster admitting adultery should be beaten so badly that she ends up in the ICU for a month. After he got banned, he came back and continued to defend that position, on the grounds that she was an "abuser".

It says a lot about Deplorables that they still stick up for the ones who don't learn and continue to engage in violent rhetoric.

She didn't advocate violence, she advocated letting the abusers know our side would fight back.

LMFAO you and your ilk are in fucking denial, such a liar

 

[phrodeau]

How can you tell a user was banned? Do their posts disappear? (Already had BoBo's latest alt on ignore, so I wouldn't have seen his posts anyway.)

If you find a username with the subtitle, “Loves Spam,” it has likely been banned. If you then click on the username to open its page, and an error message appears, it’s definitely banned.

 

[YDB95]

LMFAO you and your ilk are in fucking denial, such a liar

Nope: “We’ve got to stay on the street and we’ve got to get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business.” If you see that as a call to violence, that's your problem.

 

[rockcasbah]

You know who’s REALLY violent?

That Fresh Prince of BelAir guy.

 

[mayfly13]

You know who’s REALLY violent?

That Fresh Prince of BelAir guy.

I was wondering 'what's up with Lance posting here'

 

[mayfly13]

Ooops, a groupie has hurt feelings about Gorgoroth getting banned again.

Actually, the various BotBoy alts are not the only situation where posters have been banned for promoting terrorism, gratuitous violence, or violent civil war. A lot of posters have been reported and banned for the same thing. It was a big thing preceding the 2016 election, because the extremists wanted to impress everyone with their veiled threats about kicking everyone's ass if they did not get their way.

I remember one period when four Deplorables were banned the same day for promoting violent civil war. Most of the Deplorables who were banned for promoting violence, including the BusyBody alts, have been smart enough to eventually drop that schtick.

BoBo, however, never learns.

now here is where your REAL agenda gets clear.
Either to take swipes at, or to make fun of - troll conservative posters.

If right-wingers got banned, it was for their political ideas or for getting annoyed and using stupid figures of speech. Which Left wingers like Sean etc use all the time btw, but never get banned.


You guys are right about BotBoy tho, he needs to drop those idiotic violent memes
that he occasionally uses to shock and troll,
they're disturbing and he's making Lit look like Stormfront when he uses them.

 

[coati]

now here is where your REAL agenda gets clear.
Either to take swipes at, or to make fun of - troll conservative posters.

If right-wingers got banned, it was for their political ideas or for getting annoyed and using stupid figures of speech. Which Left wingers like Sean etc use all the time btw, but never get banned.

You're not very bright, are you? Some of the banned posters I cited dated back to the pre-2016 election days when right wing posters were talking openly about civil war if Trump did not win. They were talking about how they had both an armament and personnel advantage on Democrats. They were bragging about the sympathies of military and police personnel to their cause. These were not "stupid figures of speech", as you glibly state. This was insurrection talk. All of these civil war posts were removed from Lit, and the posters were banned. If those posters came back, most dropped the civil war crap in their new incarnations.

During that same time period, one of the BusyBody alts was banned and his post removed for talking about a bombing a public figure he did not like at a time when bombs were actually being mailed to certain leaders. BusyBody had the sense to cut out that line of rhetoric.

The Gorgoroth alts have always returned to violent rhetoric.

It has not been the "left" who are primarily the ones getting banned on Lit for promoting civil war and violent acts of public retribution when things don't go their way. It has primarily been the right wingers constantly rattling swords. Is it mere coincidence that the January 6th insurrection attempt actually happened? Was there a violent insurrection attempt after Trump was elected in 2016?

Your posts tend to be a pile of equivocation. Do you still not understand the concept of a red line against violent rhetoric? Are you really that dense?

 

[icanhelp1]

You're not very bright, are you? Some of the banned posters I cited dated back to the pre-2016 election days when right wing posters were talking openly about civil war if Trump did not win. They were talking about how they had both an armament and personnel advantage on Democrats. They were bragging about the sympathies of military and police personnel to their cause. These were not "stupid figures of speech", as you glibly state. This was insurrection talk. All of these civil war posts were removed from Lit, and the posters were banned. If those posters came back, most dropped the civil war crap in their new incarnations.

During that same time period, one of the BusyBody alts was banned and his post removed for talking about a bombing a public figure he did not like at a time when bombs were actually being mailed to certain leaders. BusyBody had the sense to cut out that line of rhetoric.

The Gorgoroth alts have always returned to violent rhetoric.

It has not been the "left" who are primarily the ones getting banned on Lit for promoting civil war and violent acts of public retribution when things don't go their way. It has primarily been the right wingers constantly rattling swords. Is it mere coincidence that the January 6th insurrection attempt actually happened? Was there a violent insurrection attempt after Trump was elected in 2016?

Your posts tend to be a pile of equivocation. Do you still not understand the concept of a red line against violent rhetoric? Are you really that dense?

All the while you and your lefty loons, for the past four years, cheered on the riots in Baltimore, Ferguson, D.C, Seattle, Portland all in the name of equity and racial equality. You lefty loons called conservatives racist for years. Cheered on the toppling of statues, burning of state and federal buildings, police departments. You and your ilk projected and cheered on more violence than what we could ever imagine, and you did it on LIT. Coati you're a hypocrite. You and your ilk walked in lockstep with BLM and ANTIFA and in many instances justified the violence in the name of equity. Spare me your selective outrage.

 

[YDB95]

All the while you and your lefty loons, for the past four years, cheered on the riots in Baltimore, Ferguson, D.C, Seattle, Portland all in the name of equity and racial equality.

You wish.

You lefty loons called conservatives racist for years.

If the shoe fits...

Cheered on the toppling of statues, burning of state and federal buildings, police departments.

Toppling of statues of racist traitors, yes. Burning of buildings, no. (What we HAVE done is argue that such things didn't happen anywhere near as often as you always imply they did, and that when it has happened the culprits often turned out to be right-wing counter-protesters, but that ain't the same as cheering on the violence.)

You and your ilk projected and cheered on more violence than what we could ever imagine, and you did it on LIT. Coati you're a hypocrite. You and your ilk walked in lockstep with BLM and ANTIFA and in many instances justified the violence in the name of equity. Spare me your selective outrage.

Don't confuse what you like to think happened with what really did happen.

 

[icanhelp1]

You wish.


If the shoe fits...

Toppling of statues of racist traitors, yes. Burning of buildings, no. (What we HAVE done is argue that such things didn't happen anywhere near as often as you always imply they did, and that when it has happened the culprits often turned out to be right-wing counter-protesters, but that ain't the same as cheering on the violence.)

Don't confuse what you like to think happened with what really did happen.

You've always been disconnected from reality.