Sandy, moderation of

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Buffalo Roam

Registered Senior Member
Plazma Inferno!

How about all of the others on this web who use far more inflamority rhetoric and incite much more haltered? I have seen post that have called Sandy some very nasty names from the liberals on this site and they seem to have not been given a vacation.
 
Plazma Inferno, I'd like to inquire as to what specific remarks got Sandy in the hot seat, why is it that this sort of hand slapping only happens to conservatives? Furthermore, I'd like to know how it is that any liberal biggot can spew their souped up verion social cancer without any ill effects on this particular thread.

Just curious. I mean, if this is a liberals only thread, just say so.

~String
 
superstring99 said:
Furthermore, I'd like to know how it is that any liberal biggot can spew their souped up verion social cancer without any ill effects on this particular thread.
Click to expand...
Spurious is employing irony to poke fun at Sandy's position.

Sandy appears to have adopted a position of a stereotypical red neck. The absence of any attempt to dispel this perception lends credence to its accuracy. As such her observations, though no more extreme than those of Spurious, appear to be motivated from a more hostile agenda.

You will note the important part played in all this by perception. Sandy has the opportunity, at any time, to change that perception. I imagine all true minded liberals are quite ready to have their paradigms shifted.
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
Why should she change just to please you Ophi?

And what exactly is this "hostile agenda" which you say she has?
Click to expand...
Where did I say she should change? I did not.
Where did I say that changing would please me? I did not.

I stated, very clearly to those who have reading skills, that she had the opportunity to change a perception. I expressed no view as to how accurate I thought that perception was, how attractive I thought that perception was, or how I felt about any plans on her part to change that perception. I merely described the character of the perception and her potential for amending it.

Nowhere in my post do I say she has a hostile agenda. (You really need to learn the importance of words, sentence structure, and the like. I realise you are uneducated, but you do not need to remain so.) I very clearly state that she appears to be motivated by an agenda more hostile than that of Spurious. The arctic is very much warmer in mid winter than the surface of Pluto, yet it is still bloody cold!
So I have stated that she appears (you understand what appears means, do you?) to have a more hostile agenda than an individual whose agenda hostility rating I have not commented on.

I am not surprised to see you jumping to a concussion so readily. It appears to be a speciality of yours.
 
Buffalo Roam said:
Plazma Inferno!

How about all of the others on this web who use far more inflamority rhetoric and incite much more haltered? I have seen post that have called Sandy some very nasty names from the liberals on this site and they seem to have not been given a vacation.
Click to expand...

Plazma Inferno deleted some of my posts which were in no way inflamitory. I want to post it as a new thread and see what the hell he (or anyone else) thinks was so terrible. Even Sandy who is no where as radical as I am thought there was no basis for my post being deleted. I wasn't even given a reason for why the post was deleted or even who was responsible. I had to find out through James R.
 
Last edited:
Ophiolite said:
Spurious is employing irony to poke fun at Sandy's position.

Sandy appears to have adopted a position of a stereotypical red neck. The absence of any attempt to dispel this perception lends credence to its accuracy. As such her observations, though no more extreme than those of Spurious, appear to be motivated from a more hostile agenda.

You will note the important part played in all this by perception. Sandy has the opportunity, at any time, to change that perception. I imagine all true minded liberals are quite ready to have their paradigms shifted.
Click to expand...

You've got to be kidding!!!! Deleted by John...dont want to get banned now.

Spurious is employing irony to poke fun at Sandy's position.
Click to expand...

When it is agreeable to you it is irony huh?;)
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
What a load of B.S.
Click to expand...
That is fairly typical of the quality of your contributions: you are inacapable of applying logic, building a structured argument, or employing the English language for the purpose of communication rather than obfuscation. You are out of you depth and would be well advised to quit while you are behind.
 
John99 said:
You've got to be kidding!!!! No offense but why does your type allway's try to dictate what other say and think?



When it is agreeable to you it is irony huh?;)
Click to expand...
Dear me John, you are falling into exactly the same trap as Ice Age despite having had the benefit of my explanation to him. I have expressed no opinion whatsoever on Sandy's contributions. Can you understand that? I have described what her posts may have created the appearance of. I have expressed no view on whether such an appearance is accurate, whether I approve or disapprove of that appearance.
Despite this, you rather remarkably jump to several parallel conclusions. You assume that I am expressing my views of Sandy. You stereotype me as 'your type' - just exactly what is 'your type', by the way.
Please be good enough to identify exactly where I have dictated to Sandy in any shape, form, or fashion. When you have reread my post and realised that I have not done so, then perhaps you will feel it appropriate to apologise for your unwelcome, false accusations.

As to Spurious's comments, if you are unable to see that he is using irony - that my comments are thus an objective, not a subjective description, - then it would seem that you are even more foolish, less observant, and exceedingly more driven by emotion, than I had previously imagined.

And, just so you get it fully clear, for you seem to have real comprehension difficulties. I have neither explicitly, or implicitly expressed a view on Spuriou's use of irony. Please do not ascribe opinions or viewpoints to me that I have not expressed. It is a habit many consider to be rude and uncouth.
 
Last edited:
IceAgeCivilizations said:
You are so full of bull that you don't even know it.
Click to expand...
Gosh. Am I starting to get you? Feeling a little rattled, are you? Never mind. A quick retreat to your fantasy land should solve that problem. (I notice, as always, you are wholly unable to address specifically my detailed destruction of your attempt to chastise me. How does it feel to be so talentless?)
 
Conservatives have all the radio and TV channels, we have the net and Sciforums...

I think it is a fair deal, stop whinning... :)
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
Ophi, you're doing a miserable job of trying to defend Darwinism and Uniformitarianism, they are hard to defend, but you just go along thinking things are just hunky-dory.
Click to expand...
man, you have got the brass IAC

you have utterly FAILED to answer my questions on evolution.

oops, i lied, you have answered them . . . with this:
It's a science fictional notion from what I can tell.
Click to expand...
and this:
Ok, it could miraculously happen?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top