First Amendment Now Covers Forum Trolls

[Obi-Ron]

[YT]jKDk-mg1J9Q[/YT]

Video not available

Was that Freedom Rock, man?

 

[Arc-Light]

We need a police state. People are too dumb to govern themselves and be civil.

I know a place like that its called China.....

 

[terry78]

I know a place like that its called China.....

And they're better for it. The ones crying about how their freedoms are being victimized are usually the first ones to cause ****.

 

[Mee]

More on Krinsky. This lady is despicable:

http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/95/29/

jag

Let's ban her!

 

[Darthphere]

Video not available

Was that Freedom Rock, man?

You know it.

 

[Mister J]

Well, turn it up, man!

 

[Zenien]

You know it

Next time, don't be a ***** and post it in an open forum.

Good, don't PM me again. If you had any balls you would have posted that in here, but knowing you would get in trouble and would thwart your efforts to get your thread reopened, you sent me a really stupid PM. And to whoever wrote it, step up and reveal yourself. No use in hiding.

Next time, don't be a wuss in an open forum and the private forum.

See the reason I didn't make a thread for it in the public forum is because it would be closed since it would be a pure flame thread between us which would be against the TOS. So I Pmed it to you, not being rude, with a very simple question to you at the end. Additionally there was no call to make it public.

But what do you do? Instead of 'acting like a man' and replying to me. You Private Messaged a mod to have the mod tell me not to PM you again, instead of I don't know having the balls to tell me yourself.

And now, with that taken care of, instead of actually letting it go like that, you had to be a little coward and act all he man for your net buddies to see. So instead of making a thread for it, you made a totally off topic post in this thread acting like a hard ass.

You hypocrite.

It was pretty clear that the thread wasn't going to be reopened on the first page at least. So no, that's not why I kept it to PM. So sorry, but maybe if you actually had a response for some of the condecending bull**** you've pulled, you might not have run off to a mod and made a snide remark, instead of might have actually taken your own advice eh? "Don't be a..."

The only reason you want it to be posted up in a public forum is so that you can have an audience, if you aren't man enough to actually respond without having other people to make you feel confident, than don't hide behind calling someone else a *****.

But hey if you really wanted to make a thread, you would have made it by now. Though you can still have your little audience if you want to be that petty over it.

Y'know, instead of running off like a baby and getting other people to do your dirty work because you're apparently so manly or some ****. Manly enough to have no answer for the PM, I guess.

Oh and nice job on edited out some of the stuff you said before the thread was locked, mang.

 

[jaguarr]

Well, this thread's going to some interesting places. *gets popcorn*

jag

 

[Venom'sDad]

That is silly because the First Amendments Freedom of Speach Clause only stipulates that the Government Doesn't have the Right to Limit Speach, not Private Entities.

Exactly

Glad to see somebody have an understanding of the U.S. Constitution.

 

[Zenien]

Well, this thread's going to some interesting places. *gets popcorn*

jag

Eh he logged off, I doubt he'll ever see it unless someone pms him.

 

[jaguarr]

Eh he logged off, I doubt he'll ever see it unless someone pms him.

Why this thread, though? Seemed sort of random.

jag

 

[Zenien]

"Next time, don't be a ***** and post it in an open forum.

Good, don't PM me again. If you had any balls you would have posted that in here, but knowing you would get in trouble and would thwart your efforts to get your thread reopened, you sent me a really stupid PM. And to whoever wrote it, step up and reveal yourself. No use in hiding."

He posted that to me, off topic, in the technical debate section of the board in a thread I had made after telling a mod to tell me to not PM him anyone (I've only ever Pmed him once).

What a punk.

 

[Darthphere]

Next time, don't be a wuss in an open forum and the private forum.

See the reason I didn't make a thread for it in the public forum is because it would be closed since it would be a pure flame thread between us which would be against the TOS. So I Pmed it to you, not being rude, with a very simple question to you at the end. Additionally there was no call to make it public.

But what do you do? Instead of 'acting like a man' and replying to me. You Private Messaged a mod to have the mod tell me not to PM you again, instead of I don't know having the balls to tell me yourself.

And now, with that taken care of, instead of actually letting it go like that, you had to be a little coward and act all he man for your net buddies to see. So instead of making a thread for it, you made a totally off topic post in this thread acting like a hard ass.

You hypocrite.

It was pretty clear that the thread wasn't going to be reopened on the first page at least. So no, that's not why I kept it to PM. So sorry, but maybe if you actually had a response for some of the condecending bull**** you've pulled, you might not have run off to a mod and made a snide remark, instead of might have actually taken your own advice eh? "Don't be a..."

The only reason you want it to be posted up in a public forum is so that you can have an audience, if you aren't man enough to actually respond without having other people to make you feel confident, than don't hide behind calling someone else a *****.

But hey if you really wanted to make a thread, you would have made it by now. Though you can still have your little audience if you want to be that petty over it.

Y'know, instead of running off like a baby and getting other people to do your dirty work because you're apparently so manly or some ****. Manly enough to have no answer for the PM, I guess.

Oh and nice job on edited out some of the stuff you said before the thread was locked, mang.

LOL! Seems I hit a nerve. Sorry that I don't agree with your assessment that Scientology is this big bad evil organization that needs to be destroyed before it destroys us all. If that makes me an "Educated Idiot" so be it, but I don't need you sending me PMs telling me that. If you want to say something to me, say it out in the open so that everyone can see what a *****e bag you are. I went to the mods mostly because 1) I thought that was completely uncalled for, as I have disagreed with you on everything involving Scientology, but I don't remember ever getting personal or insulting before you sent that PM to you and 2) So they know not to reopen your thread. If that's your answer for every person that disagrees with you, then that's going to cause a lot more problems than solve.

For the record, the part I edited out of my post was "It's funny that you and Scientology have something in common" You know, the whole silencing people that disagree or want to stop me from spreading my views thing. Yeah, apparently, according to yourself, that's the same exact crap Scientology pulls off.

If you haven't earned yourself a little time off due to this tirade, well by Xenu, you must have the gift.

One last thing, it's kind of sad that you need to use another person's words to express your views.

 

[Darthphere]

"Next time, don't be a ***** and post it in an open forum.

Good, don't PM me again. If you had any balls you would have posted that in here, but knowing you would get in trouble and would thwart your efforts to get your thread reopened, you sent me a really stupid PM. And to whoever wrote it, step up and reveal yourself. No use in hiding."

He posted that to me, off topic, in the technical debate section of the board in a thread I had made after telling a mod to tell me to not PM him anyone (I've only ever Pmed him once).

What a punk.

Actually, I posted that before I sent the mods a PM. Ask for time stamps if you don't believe me. Again, another inaccuracy posted by Zenien.

 

[Whirlysplat]

Next time, don't be a wuss in an open forum and the private forum.

See the reason I didn't make a thread for it in the public forum is because it would be closed since it would be a pure flame thread between us which would be against the TOS. So I Pmed it to you, not being rude, with a very simple question to you at the end. Additionally there was no call to make it public.

But what do you do? Instead of 'acting like a man' and replying to me. You Private Messaged a mod to have the mod tell me not to PM you again, instead of I don't know having the balls to tell me yourself.

And now, with that taken care of, instead of actually letting it go like that, you had to be a little coward and act all he man for your net buddies to see. So instead of making a thread for it, you made a totally off topic post in this thread acting like a hard ass.

You hypocrite.

It was pretty clear that the thread wasn't going to be reopened on the first page at least. So no, that's not why I kept it to PM. So sorry, but maybe if you actually had a response for some of the condecending bull**** you've pulled, you might not have run off to a mod and made a snide remark, instead of might have actually taken your own advice eh? "Don't be a..."

The only reason you want it to be posted up in a public forum is so that you can have an audience, if you aren't man enough to actually respond without having other people to make you feel confident, than don't hide behind calling someone else a *****.

But hey if you really wanted to make a thread, you would have made it by now. Though you can still have your little audience if you want to be that petty over it.

Y'know, instead of running off like a baby and getting other people to do your dirty work because you're apparently so manly or some ****. Manly enough to have no answer for the PM, I guess.

Oh and nice job on edited out some of the stuff you said before the thread was locked, mang.

You always pm. stuff to people as flames, rather than say it in public. You sent me one last week. DP is right.

 

[bullets]

 

[The Senator]

You always pm. stuff to people as flames, rather than say it in public. You sent me one last week. DP is right.

Same thing happened to me, too, because I didn't agree with the "great war" against Scientology.

 

[Zenien]

You always pm. stuff to people as flames, rather than say it in public. You sent me one last week. DP is right.

Actually the only people I've ever Pmed personally would be you 3.

And anyone could tell you were trolling the thread, you responded to people quoting articles about the new york times with "lol, your grammar sucks".

Like, seriously, you can't be so blind as to actually claim you're some sort of victim in all of this.

LOL! Seems I hit a nerve. Sorry that I don't agree with your assessment that Scientology is this big bad evil organization that needs to be destroyed before it destroys us all. If that makes me an "Educated Idiot" so be it, but I don't need you sending me PMs telling me that. If you want to say something to me, say it out in the open so that everyone can see what a *****e bag you are. I went to the mods mostly because 1) I thought that was completely uncalled for, as I have disagreed with you on everything involving Scientology

That's your right, I was just asking you a question. You could have had the guts to answer it, or just simply said "don't PM me again". Y'know I don't even agree with some of the things that guy said, but all you did in that thread was make fun of people, so eh. I don't even think that Scientology needs to be destroyed. In fact the only reason I sent you that was because of your conduct not your point of view. Jmanspice may have selectively ignored a bunch of stuff (I don'
t believe that they infiltrated the government, I post the actual incident, "Don't link from wikipedia it's biased despite all of the referenced sources being at the bottom")but at least he was debating and that was fun.

but I don't remember ever getting personal or insulting before you sent that PM to you and 2) So they know not to reopen your thread. If that's your answer for every person that disagrees with you, then that's going to cause a lot more problems than solve.

For the record, the part I edited out of my post was "It's funny that you and Scientology have something in common" You know, the whole silencing people that disagree or want to stop me from spreading my views thing. Yeah, apparently, according to yourself, that's the same exact crap Scientology pulls off.

Funny because when Jmanspice asked me to stop PMing him I did, yep, I sure want to try and silence critics, yep. Except not, look at people like Jerry who posted in that thread, I had no issue with them at all. because they were respectful in the first place instead of coming in and laughing at people.

I have no issue with you expressing your view, when it takes the context of "let's all laugh at and mock people who think that something (note something) should be done, or that attention should be drawn to an issue, I get fed up.

And congrats on having no answer to my, and no answer to my actual comments on how you handled the situation, tough guy.

If you haven't earned yourself a little time off due to this tirade, well by Xenu, you must have the gift.

You're the one who took a PM situation to the public forum and called someone a *****, if anything it would be both of us.

One last thing, it's kind of sad that you need to use another person's words to express your views.

Hilarious, but wrong.

Seriously dude just stop being a *****e about it and only coming in to be a *****e, you've always seemed likea cool guy otherwise.

 

[StrainedEyes]

So, about trolls... They have crazy hair.

 

[The Senator]

Actually the only people I've ever Pmed personally would be you 3.

And anyone could tell you were trolling the thread, you responded to people quoting articles about the new york times with "lol, your grammar sucks".

Like, seriously, you can't be so blind as to actually claim you're some sort of victim in all of this.

We didn't come into that thread to post "The war on Scientology is teh suxors! lolll!1!1." We came to debate why we disagreed with it. For the most part, we succeeded in debating the topic without trolling or acting like complete idiots. We gave you our reasons why we didn't support the 'war'; we told you that we disagreed with what the church was doing, but we didn't see the war as a success; and we only got confrontational when you started putting words in our mouths.

You're the one who acted irrationally, not only accusing us of supporting what was going on in the church hierarchy, but going on tirades over how unintelligent we were because we wouldn't "look at the evidence" or praise the protesters for their "heroic" actions.

Then, you took it one step further. You PMed all of us. You continued to PM us until you got the answers you were looking for, which was stupid considering the same debate was going on in the open forum. You crossed the line, and for what? To terrorize us because we didn't agree with you?

We're not victims, because this sort of behavior should be expected from certain posters. But at least we're not childish enough to PM everyone we disagree with to tell them they're wrong and that they should leave the thread.

 

[Zenien]

Except I didn't terrorize any of you. Whirlysplat never replied and I left it at that. You decided to reply and make up a story about how omg I was attacking you for your opinion when really I was PMing you because you were being a glib *****e. You asked me to stop Pming you after we argued for a bit, and guess what I did. I didn't get any answer from any of you.

And sorry bucko but there were a lot of people I disagreed with in that thread, and not just one 1 side of the issue, but you didn't see me PMing or argueing with Jerry because he was being respectful on the outset.

Have fun with the rest of your revisionist history, it's easy to do that when you ignore sources solely because they came from Wikipedia in a compiled format.

And no, when you acted gleeful about the issue not getting any coverage in your local newspaper (among many other things) I merely said that in effect that meant you were supportive of the issue of an organization that commits crimes everyday not having attention drawn to it. Hence you were acting in support of their crimes by acting ina fashion to promote a detremental outlook to their crimes being brought up and rallied around, that's all. Not that you yourself support or contribute to the the activities.

As much as you'd like to think I "PM everyone who I disagree with" it had little to do with your opinions and more to do with conduct. If you're angry about being tied to a troll like Whirlysplat, how's about you don't tied yourself to him in the first place by piggy backing off of him.

and we only got confrontational when you started putting words in our mouths.

You're the one who acted irrationally, not only accusing us of supporting what was going on in the church hierarchy, but going on tirades over how unintelligent we were because we wouldn't "look at the evidence" or praise the protesters for their "heroic" actions.

All aboard the fail boat on taht one. You outright said false things and than refused to admit you were wrong, and you did so by selectively ignoring sources that had the words 'wikipedia' in them.

I never went of tirades over "how unintelligent" you were, or how you wouldn't ptaise the protestors "heroic actions". In fact the only times the word heroic really appeared in the thread was a news article.

In fact you left the thread after You made a post outlining why you were against it was more or less debunked on the points of its factual innacuracy.

 

[The Senator]

Except I didn't terrorize any of you. Whirlysplat never replied and I left it at that. You decided to reply and make up a story about how omg I was attacking you for your opinion when really I was PMing you because you were being a glib *****e. You asked me to stop Pming you after we argued for a bit, and guess what I did. I didn't get any answer from any of you.

Actually, I told you to stop PMing me in my first reply:

From jmanspice to Zenien, 2/10/08
Why don't you stop harassing people who don't believe what you're promoting is beneficial to the overall well-being of society?

Keep this **** on the forum. Don't clutter my inbox with it.

Then you responded by calling me a troll, accusing me of forfeiting my personal accountability; then I told you I held myself accountable for everything I said, and from there it went back and forth for almost a full day.

And sorry bucko but there were a lot of people I disagreed with in that thread, and not just one 1 side of the issue, but you didn't see me PMing or argueing with Jerry because he was being respectful on the outset.

Have fun with the rest of your revisionist history, it's easy to do that when you ignore sources solely because they came from Wikipedia in a compiled format.

I ignore articles from Wikipedia because they can be edited by anybody. I told you to provide me with a link to a credible source, and instead of doing that, you gave me a bunch of links to biased, over-the-top websites more interested in promoting a bigoted agenda than providing factual information. After reading through everything you had posted, I told you my opinion was still unchanged, and then you responded with name calling, such as your own 'glib *****e' remark up above.

And no, when you acted gleeful about the issue not getting any coverage in your local newspaper (among many other things) I merely said that in effect that meant you were supportive of the issue of an organization that commits crimes everyday not having attention drawn to it. Hence you were acting in support of their crimes by acting ina fashion to promote a detremental outlook to their crimes being brought up and rallied around, that's all. Not that you yourself support or contribute to the the activities.

I told you I didn't support the "war" against Scientology. That doesn't mean I support the crimes some of their members committed. The protests looked like nothing more than an overzealous Halloween party, but with more signs and megaphones. I responded by telling you that these protests didn't make it into any nationwide paper because you were convinced that the amount of media coverage these protests would have would be the first step in derailing Scientology. When the nation's top papers and top media outlets had zero coverage on those protests, I thought it was my duty as an opponent of this protest to point that fact out to you.

Of course, you've developed a "George W. Bush" mentality when it comes to this whole stupid mess. I'm either with you, or against you. If I don't support some ******ed protest, I must be a Scientologist by proxy. I can't just be an objective onlooker who realizes that the protest was not only poorly organized, but poorly covered by the media and poorly performed by the protesters.

Two-hundred-something people protested in Washington DC. Wow. In contrast, close to a hundred thousand protested the war in Iraq last March. Why did the protest against Iraq have so many followers? Because it was better organized and covered extensively by the media. Someone's protest against Scientology doesn't rank high with the media, and that's a true fact. It'd be like if there were worldwide protests against the Amish. The media simply doesn't care, and the media coverage a 'movement' receives is the stepping stone to a global revolution.

As much as you'd like to think I "PM everyone who I disagree with" it had little to do with your opinions and more to do with conduct. If you're angry about being tied to a troll like Whirlysplat, how's about you don't tied yourself to him in the first place by piggy backing off of him.

So, instead of disagreeing with you, I shouldn't say anything? This is a public forum. That thread wasn't "A Thread for Those of Us Who HATE Scientology," it was a thread discussing the 'war' on Scientology, which I didn't agree with. Therefore, I posted my feelings, and you gave a pretty trite response if I remember correctly. Actually, you must have done that, because if you didn't, I wouldn't have kept responding over and over again.

All aboard the fail boat on taht one. You outright said false things and than refused to admit you were wrong, and you did so by selectively ignoring sources that had the words 'wikipedia' in them.

I outright said false things? So opinions can be false now? Or is truth false? I told you that this 'war' was a way for people to lash out at all Scientologists, which was verified throughout the course of that thread, considering about a quarter of the posts there basically said "Scientologists are stupid" or "their beliefs suck! I love anonymous!" Most people who posted there didn't know a single thing about what was going on at the top. They wanted a place to bash Tom Cruise and anyone else who believed that an alien created humanity or whatever they believe in.

Essentially, because I saw something you failed to see, and you disagreed with it, I therefore had to admit I was wrong. No matter how many times I told you I disagreed with the Scientologist hierarchy, you acted like a child and told me I was wrong or that I didn't know anything--despite the fact that I told you I was well aware of what was going on, and even denounced the actions of the Scientologists. But because I wouldn't say the 'war' was justified, you jumped on me throughout the thread, misquoting me and making accusatory statements.

Again, I don't read wikipedia articles which can be edited by everyone. I asked/ told you to give me an article from a credible source, and instead you gave me an article from websites who were promoting this protest. That's would be like if I asked you to give me information on the African American south, and you directed me to the KKK's website. You had numerous chances to give me something reliable, and you couldn't do that. Chalk my inability to believe what you had to say to your inability to prove me wrong.

I never went of tirades over "how unintelligent" you were, or how you wouldn't ptaise the protestors "heroic actions". In fact the only times the word heroic really appeared in the thread was a news article.

In fact you left the thread after You made a post outlining why you were against it was more or less debunked on the points of its factual innacuracy.

I left the thread because I got sick and tired of getting into tiffs with someone who has nothing better to do than promote an extremist agenda against a religious organization. I left the thread because you kept bombarding me with nonsensical post after nonsensical post, and then kept bombarding me with accusatory PM after accusatory PM. It's one thing to come here and debate a topic with people who disagree with me; it's something else entirely to be harassed by someone who can't let something go.

You did refer to me as unintelligent, or at least hinted to that, in several posts. You've also acted like a child several times since, referring to people as *****ebags and *****es. And really, the fact that you can't finish a post without using high school slang shows why posters shouldn't take anything you say seriously.

 

[Kelly]

Lol....funny thread.

Very interesting First Amendment Discussion.....

Some need to go back to school.......*winks*



Closed....



http://www.flayme.com/troll/trollone.html perfect for little trolls.