New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

I need a rules explanation please !

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
No I posted of their irrelevance to the topic in that thread.

So do you care to explain how they're relevant in this thread ?

Or are you just showing off your database of them ?
You posted of Chicago

end of story
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
Okay, I'll let it go.....so I can breathe....cause the topic is too hard for them.

Lol. Julie is on the case.

Can't wait for what she makes up next.

She's the expert on race, after all.

Oh, and making up stupid shit .. or did I say that already .,.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
I responded to Julie. No one else had to get involved.

She posted to me and I gave her my take.

If someone else even a mod then responds to that, what ?

I should just ignore their post ?

Also look at how you replied to my post out of the blue.

"Hit the fuc$ing skids you don't like it."

So I was blunt.

I respect the badge officer.

But when you take it off and become just another poster in a thread.

Don't expect that respect because you are just another con whose opinions are to be taken on and dealt with.

EDIT:

Thank you guys for your service in taking on the mod duties.

But when you are off duty, and just another participant don't go waving your gun around.

Here we go...again.. here you are lamenting others entering your exchange with Julie..no one else had to blah blah blah.

I respond diffusely to sw. .. not addressing you directly...giving my take to the input preceding ... Some six posters or more

Delivering the generality.... Don't like it...leave..

And here we are ..again...waaaaah waaaah..it's all about me...waaah


Here..again..

If anyone wants to deliver a racist insinuation against another poster I'm going to jettison you for a few days. Don't like it...don't do it. Or, leave.

That's not a tacit endorsement of any other thing...which we handle as they are found...and then reviewed
 

Spamature

President
Here we go...again.. here you are lamenting others entering your exchange with Julie..no one else had to blah blah blah.

I respond diffusely to sw. .. not addressing you directly...giving my take to the input preceding ... Some six posters or more

Delivering the generality.... Don't like it...leave..

And here we are ..again...waaaaah waaaah..it's all about me...waaah


Here..again..

If anyone wants to deliver a racist insinuation against another poster I'm going to jettison you for a few days. Don't like it...don't do it. Or, leave.

That's not a tacit endorsement of any other thing...which we handle as they are found...and then reviewed
There are racist insinuation/ accusation all the time here. There was a direct insinuation/ accusation against me in that same thread, post #91. It got a complete pass.

Look, as far as I understand it the rule is that you don't call someone a racist. I did not call him a racist or explicitly say was a racist, as far as I can tell.

This seems like a very pliable standard when you talk about accusation and insinuations rather than explicit deeds.
 

Spamature

President
Waaaaaaaaaaa...waaaaaaaaaaa...

This is a message board. If you dont want people to comment on your posts, make them in private, or not at all. Duh.
Actually it was they who were upset with my post, not me with theirs. When the guys with the guns are upset it a bit different than when a regular poster registers their objections. Because I don't know who they are acting as when they say it. Poster or mod.

Okay ?
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
There are racist insinuation/ accusation all the time here. There was a direct insinuation/ accusation against me in that same thread, post #91. It got a complete pass.

Look, as far as I understand it the rule is that you don't call someone a racist. I did not call him a racist or explicitly say was a racist, as far as I can tell.

This seems like a very pliable standard when you talk about accusation and insinuations rather than explicit deeds.

I think you a being a deliberately obtuse
Posturing for your crew or whatever.

You said you thought the poster collected lynch photos and likened it to how a paedo exchanges kiddo porn.

Then their enjoyment of black deaths..

And you're confused as to the standard?

Get real.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
Actually it was they who were upset with my post, not me with theirs. When the guys with the guns are upset it a bit different than when a regular poster registers their objections. Because I don't know who they are acting as when they say it. Poster or mod.

Okay ?

Report it. The owner will handle it
 

Spamature

President
I think you a being a deliberately obtuse
Posturing for your crew or whatever.

You said you thought the poster collected lynch photos and likened it to how a paedo exchanges kiddo porn.

Then their enjoyment of black deaths..

And you're confused as to the standard?

Get real.
I said "like" they do, not that he was one.

As for the rest of it. It was a mistake in identities and I addressed that with the poster in that thread when I found out my mistake.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
I said "like" they do, not that he was one.

As for the rest of it. It was a mistake in identities and I addressed that with the poster in that thread when I found out my mistake.
Great. I'm glad you and they settled your issue
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
I said "like" they do, not that he was one.

As for the rest of it. It was a mistake in identities and I addressed that with the poster in that thread when I found out my mistake.
You said .. below. He..loves it .. he enjoys it...when black people are killed.

Really?

But you say....like....just clears that up.. do tell?


1st post: "No just blacks being murdered in general. You love it and can't stop bring the matter up. I wonder how many of those lynch photos you've saved to your hard drive. I would not doubt if you were a member of a group that exchanged them in the same why pedophile exchange files of those acts of inhumanity...."

2nd post 5 minutes later in the same thread: "...Just admit you enjoy it when gun owners kill black people it reminds you of your favorite lynching photos from your apparent archive of them."
 

Spamature

President
Report it. The owner will handle it
No. That poster did exactly what I was accused. I just wanted to show you the example. I wouldn't doubt if it was that same poster who reported my post. But it's all water under the bridge now. No use in digging it up.
 

Spamature

President
You said .. below. He..loves it .. he enjoys it...when black people are killed.

Really?

But you say....like....just clears that up.. do tell?


1st post: "No just blacks being murdered in general. You love it and can't stop bring the matter up. I wonder how many of those lynch photos you've saved to your hard drive. I would not doubt if you were a member of a group that exchanged them in the same why pedophile exchange files of those acts of inhumanity...."

2nd post 5 minutes later in the same thread: "...Just admit you enjoy it when gun owners kill black people it reminds you of your favorite lynching photos from your apparent archive of them."
It was the only reason I could figure out as to the reason he kept injecting it into the thread. Why don't you tell me why it belongs there, again and again and again ?
 

JuliefromOhio

Senator
Supporting Member
There are racist insinuation/ accusation all the time here. There was a direct insinuation/ accusation against me in that same thread, post #91. It got a complete pass.

Look, as far as I understand it the rule is that you don't call someone a racist. I did not call him a racist or explicitly say was a racist, as far as I can tell.

This seems like a very pliable standard when you talk about accusation and insinuations rather than explicit deeds.
They don't know what's racist and what isn't. They prefer not to study the issue. If they could agree on what's racist, they could create a rule against it. However, they know they'd have too many of their regular clientele up in arms. It's easier for them to minimize and deny what constitutes racist posts. I find that position quite disgusting and shameful actually.
 

Spamature

President
They don't know what's racist and what isn't. They prefer not to study the issue. If they could agree on what's racist, they could create a rule against it. However, they know they'd have too many of their regular clientele revolting. It's easier for them to minimize and deny what constitutes racist posts. It's quite disgusting and shameful actually.
I noticed one poster seems to always escape from the rule you posted.

Edited

That poster's direct and intentionally top post go unscathed to the point of sheer awe.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JuliefromOhio

Senator
Supporting Member
I noticed one poster seems to always escape from the rule you posted.

Edited

That poster's direct and intentionally top post go unscathed to the point of sheer awe.
I've had many discussions with the PJ powers that be about racism. I've reported many of those posts that any fool can see are racist. They don't give a damn. They do love to catch a lib pointing out racist posts......so they can ban US and not the perp.
 
Top