I'd like to petition for the reopening of the Columbine thread, on the foundation that discussion of the Columbine "tragedy" is a totally legitimate topic of discussion, specifically in light of the fact that Sederenzi was posting it in light of allegations made on a website in regards to a big cover up and such. Whether or not this is true is another thing entirely, but there was nothing in and of itself objectionable about it.

Let us please stop with with the moderator censorship of topics for no reason whatsoever.

I'd like to petition for the reopening of the Columbine thread, on the foundation that discussion of the Columbine "tragedy" is a totally legitimate topic of discussion, specifically in light of the fact that Sederenzi was posting it in light of allegations made on a website in regards to a big cover up and such. Whether or not this is true is another thing entirely, but there was nothing in and of itself objectionable about it.

Let us please stop with with the moderator censorship of topics for no reason whatsoever.

this world is controlled not by us but by totalitarian regime of James R. and other moderators. Respect the moderators or they will punish you severely. All their actions are justified...because they hold power over us...because they use force.

Eww. I made a typo on the thread. Sorry about that everyone. I detest when that happens.

I have as little compassion for Sderenzi or the fate of his thread as I do for those killed at Columbine. However, I find the reprimanding of Sderenzi for being uncompassionate to be quite disturbing.

It's against the rules to be uncompassionate now?

This is incredibly lame.

Indeed it is.

That topic deserved termination. There is no Columbine conspiracy.

Doesn't mean you can't talk about it.

Sderenzi wasn't cited for posting a fallacious conspiracy thread, rather he was cited for uncompassionate statements.

That's no reason to close a thread.

The thread was closed because querying whether the Columbine shootings happened or not is blatantly brainless. The closure had nothing to do with sderenzi's failings as a human being.

The thread was closed because querying whether the Columbine shootings happened or not is blatantly brainless. The closure had nothing to do with sderenzi's failings as a human being.

...You take yourself for God, don't you?:bugeye:

No.

No.

what right do you have than to judge who has failed as a human being?

The thread was closed because querying whether the Columbine shootings happened or not is blatantly brainless.

Who questioned whether the shootings happened?

The issue was the veracity of the official version, not the actuality of the event.

Did somebody not even bother to follow the link?

:rolleyes:

Hello. Sorry to change the subject somewhat, after all, we all know how vitally important sderenzi's rights to free-yeauk! are - but I just couldn't help wondering, are you at all familiar with a fellow we have around here, goes by the name of Meanwhile at all...?

Hello. Sorry to change the subject somewhat, after all, we all know how vitally important sderenzi's rights to free-yeauk! are - but I just couldn't help wondering, are you at all familiar with a fellow we have around here, goes by the name of Meanwhile at all...?

what are you implying...that its the same persona since they got same ip addresses or somethin? :bugeye:

what right do you have than to judge who has failed as a human being?

The same right as any other fellow human being.

Note also that I didn't say that sderenzi has failed as a human being.


Who questioned whether the shootings happened?

The issue was the veracity of the official version, not the actuality of the event.

Did somebody not even bother to follow the link?

:rolleyes:

Weren't the thread title and the attached poll sufficient to get the meaning?

If not, the initial post should have been clear.

I'm paying for what I download, and I'm not about to watch every youtube movie posted here just to check on its contents.

what are you implying...that its the same persona since they got same ip addresses or somethin?

.... Oh, perish the thought old man. Just merely asking a polite question is all. Similar view points, mannerisms and so forth... Wondered if possibly they were related.

:eek: I'm staying COMPLETELY out of this brouhaha.:cool:

.... Oh, perish the thought old man. Just merely asking a polite question is all. Similar view points, mannerisms and so forth... Wondered if possibly they were related.

Im not an old man.! I am a man allright, but not old.

... I love that word, brouhaha.

Im not an old man.! I am a man allright, but not old.

That depends entirely on ones perspective. Everyones older than someone, simple law of averages...

That depends entirely on ones perspective. Everyones older than someone, simple law of averages...

well...I define myself not old....relative to age of universe.!:rolleyes:

Tell me honestly, which would you prefer: the occasional, cordial and prudent"old man/old chap/old stick, etc...." in passing reference to your excellent self or the persistent and sustained recourse of me using the reference "young man..." all-de-live-long-day....?

I'm nothing if not utterly amenable.

Tell me honestly, which would you prefer: the occasional, cordial and prudent"old man/old chap/old stick, etc...." in passing reference to your excellent self or the persistent and sustained recourse of me using the reference "young man..." all-de-live-long-day....?

I'm nothing if not utterly amenable.

umm....lemme see...."Sir...draqon" would be jus fine. or..."young draqon"....thatll work. Mr. Anonymous.

Then sulphur breath it shall be! Hence forth, let it be known, etc, etc....

Then sulphur breath it shall be! Hence forth, let it be known, etc, etc....

:eek: but that's rotten eggs...my smell is jus fine...ill be using methane gas.

Well, I could of course always change it to "young and environmentally damaging", if y'preffer.... :(

Weren't the thread title and the attached poll sufficient to get the meaning?

Obviously enough, that would depend upon the prejudice.



If not, the initial post should have been clear.

There is nothing so unclear about "Listen to clips then chose".



I'm paying for what I download, and I'm not about to what every youtube movie posted here just to check on its contents.

In which case the disqualification compounds the offence.

What next, a lecture on blaming somebody else for one's own fault?

Nothing would surprise me here.

... Are you absolutely positive you're not related to Meanwhile?

this world is controlled not by us but by totalitarian regime of James R. and other moderators. Respect the moderators or they will punish you severely. All their actions are justified...because they hold power over us...because they use force.
i cannot vouch for the world but this forum is, or didn't you read the agreement you signed when you joined?
this isn't your forum, technically you or anyone else except the admins have any say whatsoever about what happens here.
the mods do not have to have a reason to ban you or to close threads.
something to keep in mind the next time you decide to bitch about what goes on here.

...something to keep in mind the next time you decide to bitch about what goes on here.

...and then they'll never know what the sycophantic creeps really think of them, so farewell then to the science of proof and reason.

:rolleyes:

Are we done here?

A real tragedy is the closure of this thread:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=1234531#post1234531

Clearly James R cannot appreciate satire. This saddens me.