Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

pravda is getting a little to comfortable. why is that?


  • Please log in to reply
89 replies to this topic

#21 Odd

Odd

    Guest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 839 posts

Posted 28 February 2003 - 12:42 AM

wali:

zxb you like to goad one of our most esteemed members by pig references. could this in the future be a bannable offense if the present totalitarian self appointed thought police continue with their present tactics?


Careful with what you say Mr pervert, it's bloody inappropiate to speak your mind. Yes, I would venture to say that the next logical step would be to go after the perverts and otherwise objectionable posters here.
:rolleyes:
  • 0

#22 Adrian

Adrian

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1895 posts

Posted 28 February 2003 - 12:38 PM

Originally posted by Odd
wali:


Careful with what you say Mr pervert, it's bloody inappropiate to speak your mind. Yes, I would venture to say that the next logical step would be to go after the perverts and otherwise objectionable posters here.
:rolleyes:



Hi Odd,
I can see that you are pretty much into specualtions these days.
In the thread http://engforum.prav...47710#post47710 you posted another speculation, and it migth be good to finish this first, before continuing the next one.
Let me make it easy, and paste it in here once again.

Originally posted by Odd
<SNIP...>
Obviously you are being lobbied by a group of posters that don't have the courage to speak out in public.

In my book there's a word for such cowardice.

Why is that so obvious?

Who could that imaginary lobbygroup be?

What do you build such a speculation on?


Do you consider me being very unfair, when I suggest that you follow up on your previous acusations?
Strange, I didn't thougth it was your style to run away from a good discussion. Just as you, I have a little book too, where words as cowardice are defined too.
  • 0

#23 Odd

Odd

    Guest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 839 posts

Posted 28 February 2003 - 06:32 PM

Well, here it is, sorry for delay, some matters turned up.

My post:

St Adrian,

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem about occupying too much space is, that it makes it more difficult for other threads to be seen and answered, and I never liked the principle "The one that speaks most and loudest wins", and that was the situation till I merged these threads.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The very same argument could be applied to several other posters. Paint-jobs all over, many with very little new substance and difference from the posters previous production.

Obviously you are being lobbied by a group of posters that don't have the courage to speak out in public.

In my book there's a word for such cowardice.



OK, here's Adrian's response:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Odd
wali:


Careful with what you say Mr pervert, it's bloody inappropiate to speak your mind. Yes, I would venture to say that the next logical step would be to go after the perverts and otherwise objectionable posters here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Hi Odd,
I can see that you are pretty much into specualtions these days.
In the thread http://engforum.prav...47710#post47710 you posted another speculation, and it migth be good to finish this first, before continuing the next one.
Let me make it easy, and paste it in here once again.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Odd
<SNIP...>
Obviously you are being lobbied by a group of posters that don't have the courage to speak out in public.

In my book there's a word for such cowardice.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Why is that so obvious?

Who could that imaginary lobbygroup be?

What do you build such a speculation on?


Do you consider me being very unfair, when I suggest that you follow up on your previous acusations?
Strange, I didn't thougth it was your style to run away from a good discussion. Just as you, I have a little book too, where words as cowardice are defined too.


Well Adrian, let's first consider this: There's NO evidence that you acted without anyone asking for it. Correct?
YES, unless you're on a powertrip. ;)

Who were the posters asking for the banning of Sergio1, formerly chaseheston? Now, I'm at a big disadvantage here since there's no free access to the information you refuse to share.
Still, judging by the sentiments of some posters on this it's not hard to point out a number of them. Why many don't have the guts to openly admit their inclination to exclude nonconformist fellow posters is rather pathetic.

Let me get this straight, no matter how much I loath Sergio1's idiotic posts, I see no reason for banning him. I believe in freedom, no matter what the holier-than-thou posters say.

So, if you take the time to make a list of the complainers, you'll probably find that the distribution don't match the average poster.
Paradoxically, the main argument for getting rid of Sergio1 has been that 'legitimate' posters' threads aren't exposed long enough. Could it be that these 'legitimates' are among the complainers? It would be very hard to believe that anyone hasn't been able to post because of the three abominable culprits.

?s I've stated elsewhere, covertly lobbying the moderator is a sure sign of cowardice. That's what my book says. You don't have to feel singled out unless you think that this sort of behaviour is compliant with common decency.

Adrian, this thread could very well turn into great length, can you really afford to get bogged down into a myriad of questions?

There's no hard feelings over here, it's just that this Lilliputian will never bend to injustice and arse-licking.

Ta't med ro,
Odd
  • 0

#24 Adrian

Adrian

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1895 posts

Posted 28 February 2003 - 07:02 PM

Originally posted by Odd

Well Adrian, let's first consider this: There's NO evidence that you acted without anyone asking for it. Correct?
That is correct !
So, the game is that you acuse me for something, and if I can not prove you are wrong, then I'm guilty?
If I say "Odd did bla bla bla bla" then it is the truth, if there is no evidence that I am wrong in my acusations?
That is indeed very Odd. Then everyone of this planet could be acused for being murderes and thiefs.



YES, unless you're on a powertrip. ;)
I am !!!!
Do you then admit, that everything else you wrote was wrong? It is the only natural consequence.
I did it by myself, because I am on a powertrip, and the rest of what you acuse me, or your imaginary lobbygroup for, is WRONG




Who were the posters asking for the banning of Sergio1, formerly chaseheston? Now, I'm at a big disadvantage here since there's no free access to the information you refuse to share.
Pretty much the same case as if I said "Odd stole my bike" and in next sentence sayinbg "But I cant proove it, because he wont let me search his flat and his bla bla. This is completely absurd odd!


Still, judging by the sentiments of some posters on this it's not hard to point out a number of them. Why many don't have the guts to openly admit their inclination to exclude nonconformist fellow posters is rather pathetic.
You migth believe me, or think I lie. Your own business, but...IF someone have complained about Sergio, I would have judged it neutrally (Ok, you dont believe that, so not much of an argument). I honestly don't remember if anyone complained about him.


Let me get this straight, no matter how much I loath Sergio1's idiotic posts, I see no reason for banning him. I believe in freedom, no matter what the holier-than-thou posters say.
Then go after the moderating function, and not for me personally as you did it moderator thread. My languamistakes or lack of mental capabillities have nothing to do with moderation of a forum as a neutral topic. You go after me as a person, not after moderation functions itself.


So, if you take the time to make a list of the complainers, you'll probably find that the distribution don't match the average poster.
Paradoxically, the main argument for getting rid of Sergio1 has been that 'legitimate' posters' threads aren't exposed long enough. Could it be that these 'legitimates' are among the complainers? It would be very hard to believe that anyone hasn't been able to post because of the three abominable culprits.
Noone ever wote "Hasn't been able to post" as you put up as something you dont belive. Again, you make up something all by yourself, and argument against your own words. This is really silly.


?s I've stated elsewhere, covertly lobbying the moderator is a sure sign of cowardice. That's what my book says. You don't have to feel singled out unless you think that this sort of behaviour is compliant with common decency.
There is a complain button, and they use that. If this is rigth or not is not up to me to judge, but its a function implemented here.
By saying that "lobbying the moderator" I also feel that you imply, that I just do what people complain about, and it couldn't be more wrong. It is taking me as a fool, and that is another stupidity from your side now.



Adrian, this thread could very well turn into great length, can you really afford to get bogged down into a myriad of questions?
You can try me.


There's no hard feelings over here, it's just that this Lilliputian will never bend to injustice and arse-licking.
Same with this lilliputian. Your absolutely biggest mistake is that you by strange and mysterious reasons thinks, that just because I try to behave nice, then I feel for arse-licking. You really couldnt be more wrong Odd.
  • 0

#25 nitemere

nitemere

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3986 posts

Posted 28 February 2003 - 07:22 PM

TO THE PRAVDA FORUM EDITORS MAKE "ODD" A MODERATOR BECAUSE HE ADDS INCITE AND LIMIT ADRIAN TO 9 POSTS A DAY SO HE CANNOT COMPLAIN ABOUT LOSING MONEY AND HAIR FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME HE SPENDS ON HIS POSITION WITH THIS FORUM!!!!
  • 0

#26 Odd

Odd

    Guest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 839 posts

Posted 28 February 2003 - 09:09 PM

Adrian Ok,

Well Adrian, let's first consider this: There's NO evidence that you acted without anyone asking for it. Correct?



That is correct !
So, the game is that you acuse me for something, and if I can not prove you are wrong, then I'm guilty?
If I say "Odd did bla bla bla bla" then it is the truth, if there is no evidence that I am wrong in my acusations?
That is indeed very Odd. Then everyone of this planet could be acused for being murderes and thiefs.


What's up, Adrian you sure are aggressive and unpleasant.
Just answer the question. The point is: You didn't act without anyone asking you to act?


YES, unless you're on a powertrip.

I am !!!!
Do you then admit, that everything else you wrote was wrong? It is the only natural consequence.
I did it by myself, because I am on a powertrip, and the rest of what you acuse me, or your imaginary lobbygroup for, is WRONG


Now, please stop that childish behaviour, can't you answer a few simple questions without going loco?

Who were the posters asking for the banning of Sergio1, formerly chaseheston? Now, I'm at a big disadvantage here since there's no free access to the information you refuse to share.

Pretty much the same case as if I said "Odd stole my bike" and in next sentence sayinbg "But I cant proove it, because he wont let me search his flat and his bla bla. This is completely absurd odd!

OK, you refuse to give a coherent answer.


Still, judging by the sentiments of some posters on this it's not hard to point out a number of them. Why many don't have the guts to openly admit their inclination to exclude nonconformist fellow posters is rather pathetic.

You migth believe me, or think I lie. Your own business, but...IF someone have complained about Sergio, I would have judged it neutrally (Ok, you dont believe that, so not much of an argument). I honestly don't remember if anyone complained about him.

Are you seriously stating that you banned Sergio1 without any input whatsoever from posters? If so, you are dangerously close to earn a new title.


Let me get this straight, no matter how much I loath Sergio1's idiotic posts, I see no reason for banning him. I believe in freedom, no matter what the holier-than-thou posters say.

Then go after the moderating function, and not for me personally as you did it moderator thread. My languamistakes or lack of mental capabillities have nothing to do with moderation of a forum as a neutral topic. You go after me as a person, not after moderation functions itself.

Please don't go paranoid on me. Adrian wake up, YOU are moderator, YOU are responsible for your competence and actions.

So, if you take the time to make a list of the complainers, you'll probably find that the distribution don't match the average poster.
Paradoxically, the main argument for getting rid of Sergio1 has been that 'legitimate' posters' threads aren't exposed long enough. Could it be that these 'legitimates' are among the complainers? It would be very hard to believe that anyone hasn't been able to post because of the three abominable culprits.

Noone ever wote "Hasn't been able to post" as you put up as something you dont belive. Again, you make up something all by yourself, and argument against your own words. This is really silly.

Sure, I'll dig up the phrase.

?s I've stated elsewhere, covertly lobbying the moderator is a sure sign of cowardice. That's what my book says. You don't have to feel singled out unless you think that this sort of behaviour is compliant with common decency.

There is a complain button, and they use that. If this is rigth or not is not up to me to judge, but its a function implemented here.
By saying that "lobbying the moderator" I also feel that you imply, that I just do what people complain about, and it couldn't be more wrong. It is taking me as a fool, and that is another stupidity from your side now.


Well, wasn't libdeth banned after you were lobbyed by Firecat?
Or are you still maintaining that you act solely out if your own wims? Please quote me correctly:' covertly lobbying...


Adrian, this thread could very well turn into great length, can you really afford to get bogged down into a myriad of questions?

You can try me.

I'm only trying to give you some time off. ;)


There's no hard feelings over here, it's just that this Lilliputian will never bend to injustice and arse-licking.

Same with this lilliputian. Your absolutely biggest mistake is that you by strange and mysterious reasons thinks, that just because I try to behave nice, then I feel for arse-licking. You really couldnt be more wrong Odd.

This your idea of being nice? I really wish you could show some coherence and logic to your arguments.
Frankly, this sordid business has nothing whatsoever with me personally to do. It all falls back on if we should accept this ubersturmbannfuhrer behaviour. No questions allowed, Mr besserwisser knows what's best for the poor posters etc.

OK, shall I cut 'n paste all of the outstanding issues from the 'sticky' thread? Or are you continuing on your unfinished previou post in this thread?

Hvorfor blir du sa elak?

Odd
  • 0

#27 wali

wali

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 7667 posts

Posted 01 March 2003 - 12:10 AM

adrian.
i believe you to be a nice person. indeed when you first joined the zoo that is pravda i thought you may not be up to the aggro.
now it seems that i was right, pravda does not suit you so you are manipulating it into an addrian friendly forum.
i do not say what i do with any malice, as i say i believe you to be a good person.
people have been banned for issuing death threats you say.
personaly i have no problem with death threats, ultimatly they are just words.
i do not wish you any ill my friend, i just do not think pravda is the place for you as is proved by the amount of time you waste on trying to keep us happy. we do not like to be happy. we like to bitch , fight and to threaten to kill each other.
  • 0

#28 stakhanov's cat

stakhanov's cat

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 01 March 2003 - 12:39 AM

we do not like to be happy. we like to bitch , fight and to threaten to kill each other.

***********


Oh no we don't, you sonofabitch! Blow it out yer arse!

*Aaagh he's got an offensive font and he's trying to kill me with italics. Put that bold print down or I will cyber-kick you in the hyperlink....
  • 0

#29 Adrian

Adrian

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1895 posts

Posted 01 March 2003 - 03:51 PM

Originally posted by Odd

That is correct !
So, the game is that you acuse me for something, and if I can not prove you are wrong, then I'm guilty?
If I say "Odd did bla bla bla bla" then it is the truth, if there is no evidence that I am wrong in my acusations?
That is indeed very Odd. Then everyone of this planet could be acused for being murderes and thiefs.


What's up, Adrian you sure are aggressive and unpleasant.
Just answer the question. The point is: You didn't act without anyone asking you to act?
I did, yes. I said that before too, and I wonder why you keep repeating the same question over and over again.
Is it because you wonder WHY?



YES, unless you're on a powertrip.

I am !!!!
Do you then admit, that everything else you wrote was wrong? It is the only natural consequence.
I did it by myself, because I am on a powertrip, and the rest of what you acuse me, or your imaginary lobbygroup for, is WRONG


Now, please stop that childish behaviour, can't you answer a few simple questions without going loco?

So, I am childish now?
Because I used same words as you (powertrip) I am childish? Hmmm...
When it comes to the question itself, I have answered several times.




Who were the posters asking for the banning of Sergio1, formerly chaseheston? Now, I'm at a big disadvantage here since there's no free access to the information you refuse to share.

Pretty much the same case as if I said "Odd stole my bike" and in next sentence sayinbg "But I cant proove it, because he wont let me search his flat and his bla bla. This is completely absurd odd!

OK, you refuse to give a coherent answer.


In previous posting I answered on that. You didnt read it? Then please allow me to drop the quote here.

You migth believe me, or think I lie. Your own business, but...IF someone have complained about Sergio, I would have judged it neutrally (Ok, you dont believe that, so not much of an argument). I honestly don't remember if anyone complained about him.





Still, judging by the sentiments of some posters on this it's not hard to point out a number of them. Why many don't have the guts to openly admit their inclination to exclude nonconformist fellow posters is rather pathetic.

Odd, I now realise that you are more irritated at other than on me.
However, case is this: Many have complained about Bushtapo, and there are an overall agreement that he shouldn't spam all over. hence I collected his crap in a thread, and because Sergio is doing exactly the same as Bushtapo do (But Sergio is fun, I admit that), I had to do the same with Sergio.
If I have not done that, it would be doublestandards and I would be biased. It's is not meant as a joke, but it is the simple fact.
So, I did it on own initiative, to keep a neutral line as possible.
You can call it powertrip if you like, but it dont changes the fact, and please keep in mind the reason to why I did it.
And, I did not just ban Sergio. He got many warnings and I negotaited with him before. The final drop was a new kuku thread about Vig, that noone complained about.




You migth believe me, or think I lie. Your own business, but...IF someone have complained about Sergio, I would have judged it neutrally (Ok, you dont believe that, so not much of an argument). I honestly don't remember if anyone complained about him.

Are you seriously stating that you banned Sergio1 without any input whatsoever from posters? If so, you are dangerously close to earn a new title.
So be it. Read answer above.


Then go after the moderating function, and not for me personally as you did it moderator thread. My languamistakes or lack of mental capabillities have nothing to do with moderation of a forum as a neutral topic. You go after me as a person, not after moderation functions itself.

Please don't go paranoid on me. Adrian wake up, YOU are moderator, YOU are responsible for your competence and actions.


From
http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=5151

Adrian: "I was granted moderator status automatically"
Odd: Anyone notice how stupid that statement looks?

Adrian: "Any special skills is needed to be moderator?"
Odd: Nope, it doesn't look so by the merits you yourself admit to lack.
Odd: Correction, one essential skill is to appease the loudmouths.

Adrian: "I will also ERASE posting to this thread"
Odd: Of course you will, can't have any dissident stuff in here! ;)



How does this relate to moderating?

Especially the last above erasing was really to piss at me, 'cause you know yourself how much that cut have twisted my words, when it was taken out of the correct content. That was really low done of you.




Well, wasn't libdeth banned after you were lobbyed by Firecat?
Or are you still maintaining that you act solely out if your own wims? Please quote me correctly:' covertly lobbying...

How on earth do LIBDETH-Firecat relate to this Sergio issue?


There's no hard feelings over here, it's just that this Lilliputian will never bend to injustice and arse-licking.

Same with this lilliputian. Your absolutely biggest mistake is that you by strange and mysterious reasons thinks, that just because I try to behave nice, then I feel for arse-licking. You really couldnt be more wrong Odd.

This your idea of being nice? I really wish you could show some coherence and logic to your arguments.

Where do you thing the coherence is missing?
Only missing coherence I saw till now, is when you suddenly made a shift from talking about Sergio, and then suddenly about LIBDETH-Firecat



Frankly, this sordid business has nothing whatsoever with me personally to do. It all falls back on if we should accept this ubersturmbannfuhrer behaviour. No questions allowed, Mr besserwisser knows what's best for the poor posters etc.
What questions arent allowed here?

OK, shall I cut 'n paste all of the outstanding issues from the 'sticky' thread? Or are you continuing on your unfinished previou post in this thread?
I think it is most correct to take them inside the sticky thread

Hvorfor blir du sa elak?

Fordi jeg fornemmer at det mere handler om va end det handler om mig. Desuden er det ogsa min fornemmelse at du tror at det handler om rovslikkeri, hvilket er det sidte der er tilfaldet. Ja, firec rovslikkede mig i den trad, og fra samme tidspunkt fik jeg nok. Svarede jeg tilbage der? NEJ!
Er der generelt rovslikkeri here? Jep...helt bestemt. Er det noget jeg generelt reagerer pa, eller prover jeg bevidst at ignorere det? Se fair lige pracis pa dette punkt. Ok, jeg siger "tak" sommetider for en god opbakning, men det er ikke det samme som at falde for den slags, og det giver ikke nogle fordele til nogen.
Sa, kort fortalt, mener jeg at du projecerer va over pa mig, uden at have noget overhovedet at begrunde det med.
Toppen af det hele er dit svar i sticky traden, som jeg mener simpelthen er under lavmaalet. Jeg har sgu altid v?ret aben overfor rimelig kritik, men du trak det ned pa et meget personligt plan mener jeg.
Adrian

  • 0

#30 nitemere

nitemere

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3986 posts

Posted 01 March 2003 - 08:46 PM

Originally posted by Adrian

Hvorfor blir du sa elak?

"Fordi jeg fornemmer at det mere handler om va end det handler om mig. Desuden er det ogsa min fornemmelse at du tror at det handler om rovslikkeri, hvilket er det sidte der er tilfaldet. Ja, firec rovslikkede mig i den trad, og fra samme tidspunkt fik jeg nok. Svarede jeg tilbage der? NEJ!
Er der generelt rovslikkeri here? Jep...helt bestemt. Er det noget jeg generelt reagerer pa, eller prover jeg bevidst at ignorere det? Se fair lige pracis pa dette punkt. Ok, jeg siger "tak" sommetider for en god opbakning, men det er ikke det samme som at falde for den slags, og det giver ikke nogle fordele til nogen.
Sa, kort fortalt, mener jeg at du projecerer va over pa mig, uden at have noget overhovedet at begrunde det med.
Toppen af det hele er dit svar i sticky traden, som jeg mener simpelthen er under lavmaalet. Jeg har sgu altid v?ret aben overfor rimelig kritik, men du trak det ned pa et meget personligt plan mener jeg."
Adrian




I MIGHT BE DUMB BUT ADRAIN CAN YOU TRANSLATE THIS!!!!
  • 0

#31 Odd

Odd

    Guest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 839 posts

Posted 01 March 2003 - 10:46 PM

in Danish. Not very pleasant reading, it's rather personal I believe.

;)
  • 0

#32 Adrian

Adrian

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1895 posts

Posted 02 March 2003 - 01:47 AM

Originally posted by Odd
in Danish. Not very pleasant reading, it's rather personal I believe.

;)



I answered in a scandinavian language, 'cause I was questioned in scandinavian too, with odds words "Hvorfor blir du sa elak?"
  • 0

#33 Odd

Odd

    Guest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 839 posts

Posted 02 March 2003 - 01:51 PM

Hej Missionbabe, so you have penetrated the coded letters with dots and small rings on top? Excellent ;)
  • 0

#34 Odd

Odd

    Guest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 839 posts

Posted 02 March 2003 - 02:12 PM

Hejsa Adrian,

There's still the unfinished post of yours in this thread plus the reference you made in sticky thread about continuing that discussion in here. And the points in your e-mails as well.

I'm presently not sure if to make one big chunk of it or smaller nibbles. Stay put.

Have keyboard, will post. :cool:
  • 0

#35 shydove

shydove

    Registered User

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 6974 posts

Posted 02 January 2005 - 05:14 PM

Cover up the words you don't want
Everyone to hear.
Never thinking we hear them anyway.
So what if some are
Offended! It is our
Right to hear them, buy them, and
Say them!
How can we survive
If everything is covered? Is it
Possible?


Throughout history, more and different kinds of people and groups of all persuasions than you might first suppose, who, for all sorts of reasons, have attempted -- and continue to attempt -- to suppress anything that conflicts with or anyone who disagrees with their own beliefs.


paraphrased:

The words will not disappear because moderators delete them. It just makes Moderators look silly.


To silence your opponents is to admit the weakness of your case.



censorship is, ultimately, a contest for control of ideas. It's quite obvious that any censorship represents fear of the idea expressed. But even more than that, on the social-censorship side, it means to me that someone is afraid to be wrong. The idea per se is not the scary thing, but rather the fact that the person against the idea may be wrong. Censorship is the attempt to generate conformity with one's own ideas precisely because it's lonely in the cold, and some people are so weak that they can't stand to be the only one believing something.

The minute something is banned, it gains credence. It implies that someone, somewhere has got something to hide. And whether that's true or not, that's how it looks. I'd strongly suggest paying attention to what people don't want you to see.


I'm all for continuing to ban things. It tells me where to find the Truth faster, because if you're afraid of it, it must be True. If it's a threat to your way of life and your comfortable nine-to-five existence, I'm betting it's True.


We should be very stern when somebody tries to shush someone else. That says, 'I'm frightened by free speech, and I don't want you to talk.' What we need is more free speech, more robust dialogue. We need a cacophony of voices. Let's hear all sides here.


Do not ban an idea. It is the suppression of an idea that threatens each and every one of us.
  • 0

#36 KoWT

KoWT

    Guest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8238 posts

Posted 02 January 2005 - 05:21 PM

notice this thread (excepting the last few posts) is almost two years old?

Some complaints are eternal
  • 0

#37 shydove

shydove

    Registered User

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 6974 posts

Posted 02 January 2005 - 05:23 PM

Originally posted by KoWT
notice this thread (excepting the last few posts) is almost two years old?

Some complaints are eternal




absolutely they are!


its just interesting to see how the people who complain.........switch sides ;)
  • 0

#38 Guest_piehunt_*

Guest_piehunt_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 January 2005 - 05:25 PM

2 years old but still very interesting all the same. :) How things change eh? Nice one Plsek! ;)

This thread will probably get deleted now..... :cool:
  • 0

#39 Source

Source

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9046 posts

Posted 02 January 2005 - 05:27 PM

Fine and dandy in an ideal world - unlike the one we inhabit which is chock full of large children masquerading as adults, clueless as to what they're saying, strangers to even themselves, all spouting off about freedom of speech.
  • 0

#40 ganapati

ganapati

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10170 posts

Posted 02 January 2005 - 05:29 PM

Originally posted by shydove
its just interesting to see how the people who complain.........switch sides ;)


That's old an trick! If someone presistently complains about authorities being unfair, put him/her in authority and watch the fun :)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru