Posts by coppersailor28

driftingtinker said:

velvetskipper11 said:...
Did you just ban me from politics forever?
And why did you put me in the ban corner? What exactly was your logic there?
...

I don't have that kind of authority.

colleague @velvetskipper11/">@@velvetskipper11velvetskipper11 She thinks she’s got it figured out. Partial. Allows for an appeal. (i.e., writing) I'm still waiting on the rest of that thought. You can't just leave me hanging with a single character.ban corner' 🤷

test:

mistyotter35 said:🙂 I suppose one might wonder if he even bothered to fix up his profile, considering the last time he actually posted on this forum was way back in 2009.

🙂

Michael Newman3 said:test

I’m stunned by how flawlessly that little trial of yours went. 👍

(I assume the secret lies in years of meticulous preparation for such an undertaking.)

Don't expect an immediate reaction.

First, they get a 45-point red card.

If they post that again, they're banned for a month...

Once they return, if they pull the same stunt again,
then it's a year-long ban.🤷(and so on.)

placidlynx18 said:...Why don't you just take a break and come back whenever you feel like it?

It’s essentially the same logic as asking,
"Why don't you just hop on that damn train to retirement and return when you can or want to?"...

These "issues" regarding ban appeals or permanent bans could probably be solved by a megathread in the 'congratulations and greetings' subforum.

There, someone who doesn't want to—or can't—participate for a while could simply notify their forum "inner circle":

Smart Guy said:I won't be posting on the forum for a few weeks (months, ...). Greetings to everyone who loves what the kids love.
See you all again in a few weeks (months, ...). 👋

Commenting on a thread like that would be penalized, obviously. Likewise, opening threads for ban appeals here in the 'General Discussion' subforum would also be penalized.

neoncrane64 said:..so, no kidding 🤔

... thanks, man. 👍

There isn't any—that's just how it works.

If we don't look out for one another, who will? 🤷

👍

neoncrane64 said:..so what's the verdict? Is there any way I could end up being a
total wrecking ball,
instead of just getting suggestions, maybe she could discreetly slide some photos into my inbox🤔

What can I say...

In your situation, those "explosions" aren't going to last long. Honestly, it’d be smarter to just ask her to send over some shots of you while you're still in your prime and looking sharp

(I'm telling you, take my word for it).

neoncrane64 said:...
..is this even 🍿

You can reach out to my colleague @Casey Bennett 👍

(if you want to speed up that whole username change process
or if you just want her to list a few names that actually suit you,
just let her know discreetly that I sent you, @coppersailor28)

Casey Bennett said:LOL... yours is flickering like a broken traffic light, while Old Mantelov😁's avatar just blinks in and out so fast I can barely catch the animation. You have to stare at it longer.

LOL... honestly, you have to stare at mistyotter35's username for a while too... though the letters
(as if he’s some edgy guy, judging by his avatar and his handle 🤣).

I edited his original (the one from the forum) avatar while I was online; shortened the frame duration on the individual images (four total—two unique ones and two duplicates)

Casey Bennett said:

mistyotter35 said:Look, my avatar is an animated GIF, 75x75, 11 KB, uploaded from my PC, and it's been working fine for over 10 years.

Sure, except it isn't actually animated. 😉

Then what is it?

Charles Wood73 said:I'll handle it myself. 🙂

I'll give it to you. Let's go. 🙂
He’s still reeling from the shock.

Much appreciated, colleague. 👍

So, this forum user...Sanimarine. So, she showed up here just to complain about that comment claiming women have worse memories than us real men.
So, then, following all the necessary protocols for something like that.
Enter your username. Type in the correct password. Check the box that says "Keep me logged in" until further notice. Simple enough.
I'm not quite sure where I'm supposed to be posting this or which thread actually needs the link. My bad.
Or maybe she just misread what she actually linked.

Kenneth Cruz67 said:Well, I suppose your soul will be suffering in eternal hellfire forever and ever! Honestly, Satan seems like quite the creative type, so he’ll probably have little demons circling you constantly, mocking you just for being a woman. 😁

Wait, an apple inside a pig? 🙄

Actually, I think roasted pork with a squeeze of pink lemonade sounds pretty tasty, especially since it helps prevent heartburn later on. As for the apple, it isn't really for eating, but rather to keep the pig's mouth propped open so it cooks more evenly and beautifully.

An apple in a pig? Seriously? 🙄
... Besides, the apple isn't actually food. It’s just there to keep the pig's mouth open so it cooks more evenly.
For Eve's daughters, that apple wasn't even about nutrition. It grew on the Tree of Knowledge primarily to enforce the rule "don't talk with your mouth full".

Nicholas Barnes74 said:Haha, just a little more follow-up on the Religion topic: Second off, nobody’s saying women are less intelligent—it's more about, I don't know, a certain lack of focus... or maybe they're just more forgetful... especially during their period.
(
Everything passes eventually 🤦

Slow down a second.

I don't get why you feel the need to start your post with an excuse:
("I didn't say women were stupider, just lacking intellect ...or rather, they're more forgetful... especially during their menstrual cycle")

Something is off with that link you posted—any idea why?

If that actually is a link, wouldn't it be much smarter to delete that broken link
(again, assuming that's actually what happened)
instead of using it as an intro?

Nicholas Barnes74 said:Haha, just a little more follow-up on the Religion topic: Second off, nobody’s saying women are less intelligent—it's more about, I don't know, a certain lack of focus... or maybe they're just more forgetful... especially during their period.
(
Everything passes eventually 🤦

Well, damn, nothing lasts forever...

I remember when you joined this Forum back in 2018;
God, what an intellect, what a memory! Back then, you could accurately cite a post number from two months ago, even noting the exact minute it was sent...

Yeah...

feralpilot0 said:The user is complaining about being called a bigot and mentally deficient, and instead of pushing back, you're busy explaining to her why she's absolutely right.

If the goal here is to label every believer as a homophobic hater, then this PDF is essentially useless—just scrap it, release a "woke" version, and merge it with Middle East politics.

Where are you? to* Did you read it?

*(to...that it happens.
'One user is complaining because she was labeled a hater and told she’s mentally deficient.'
I'm ready. Send the content. to Give her that.
'I am still clarifying why that designation is justified.')

Even if you posted this on some random sub-forum. (on 'Religion.(Let's say) And it was true—no, I’m convinced it wasn't.

...so even if it were true, 'The public.You informed her about that. Like this:

feralpilot0 said:This entire thread is proof of the kind of nonsense happening in the Religion section—it crossed the line of good taste and civilized behavior a long time ago.

@ Nicholas Barnes74Nicholas Barnes74 I'm in that one. "This one.In his post. He was responding to exactly what I said, which I quoted.
So, she came here just to complain. new Problem. This thread was dead for nearly a month.:

Nicholas Barnes74 said:Religion again.
The second a moderator thinks someone is being homophobic, they just shut the whole thread down immediately.
Check out this snippet from yesterday: "Actually, Catholics are the biggest idolaters and cursed ones before God—it’s clearly stated in the Bible." (
Now, just imagine if they had said "gay people" instead of "Catholics."
The sanctions would have kicked in right away, I guess.
But hey, you can say whatever you want about Catholics. No rules there, apparently.
P.s. I reported it, but like always, it was pretty much useless.

feralpilot0 said:This entire thread is proof of the kind of nonsense happening in the Religion section—it crossed the line of good taste and civilized behavior a long time ago.

😲

I went out of my way to give my previous post a professional touch—you know, like when I jump onto a live TV news segment titled
"What is your opinion on building a nuclear power plant in the middle of downtown Chicago,"

and then, using my most distinguished, gentlemanly, and clearly educated vocabulary, I declare:

"Hello? Hello? If you're asking me, electricity? Yes. Atoms? Absolutely not... Hello?! Electricity? Yes. Atoms? No way! That’s all you get from me, thanks and goodbye... Hello?! Hello?!"

Can you point out one/certain parts of that post of mine which serve as
proof for you, which would/would justify your interpretation of that same post as evidence that
"everything has long since crossed the boundaries of good taste and civilized behavior"?

Nicholas Barnes74 said:Religion again.
The second a moderator thinks someone is being homophobic, they just shut the whole thread down immediately.
Check out this snippet from yesterday: "Actually, Catholics are the biggest idolaters and cursed ones before God—it’s clearly stated in the Bible." (
Now, just imagine if they had said "gay people" instead of "Catholics."
The sanctions would have kicked in right away, I guess.
But hey, you can say whatever you want about Catholics. No rules there, apparently.
P.s. I reported it, but like always, it was pretty much useless.

If that were true, then most threads under 'Religion' would be locked whenever anyone cited the Bible.

So, what we have here is 'homophobia' coming from the Bible itself (meaning, 'homophobia' from the side of Yahweh and Jesus):

Nicholas Barnes74 said:... Here is an excerpt from yesterday:
"Catholics are actually the greatest idolaters and the most cursed before God, that is plainly stated in the text." ( ...

User @ESvijetJeprevar
(his posting history is about as appealing as yours—meaning, zero points)
believes Catholics practice idolatry.

That opinion cannot exactly be called homophobic...
...and as far as the Bible goes, God Yahweh has his own rules regarding idolatry, so those rules should be respected by those who claim to be Catholic(the American Catholic Church).

Rather than whining here, it would be more rational to ask him on what basis he thinks Yahweh and Jesus view Catholics as cursed.
I am certain that even user @ESvijetJeprevar (not just me or anyone else) could easily find more than enough material in the Bible to support such a claim...

Nicholas Barnes74 said:... Now imagine if instead of "Catholics," it said "homosexuals." ...

🤣 It is hard to imagine such a thing. The Bible is a holy book, after all...
But in that case, it really could be described as homophobia.

From the Bible's perspective, homophobia:

The Bible said:- (Leviticus 18:22) Do not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination;

- (Romans 1:27) and so men have left the natural use of the woman, and burned in lust one toward another; men with men committing shameless acts, and receiving in themselves their own due penalty for their error;

- (Romans 1:32) doing what is not fitting... They know the decree of God
that those who practice such things deserve death;

- (...) ... .

From a non-homophobic forum perspective (depending on the context, obviously):

"Yahweh says in the Bible: (Lev. 18, 22), (Rom. 1, 27), (Rom. 1, 32), ..."

Nicholas Barnes74 said:... Sanctions would kick in immediately. ...

If you were the one calling the shots, then most likely, yes.

Nicholas Barnes74 said:... But they can go after Catholics. Whoever wants to.
P.S. Reported, though as usual, to no avail.

Isn't it obvious why the authorities ignore your reports most of the time?

nimblepilot19 said:The moderator's title didn't just fall from the sky.

It shouldn't have happened, really.
Let’s be real... firewood doesn't exactly grow on trees. Last year, prices were low enough to make you think they just sprouted out of nowhere.

nimblepilot19 said:Now, I have a question for you all: ...

That's exactly why we're here. 👍

nimblepilot19 said:Is this actually normal?

Don't worry about it. It isn't normal. 🙂

nimblepilot19 said:Even if I actually did what he accused me of—if I was indeed trolling—it wouldn't change much.

It isn’t even normal, even if you assume it is. 🙂

nimblepilot19 said:Hopefully not. All. Members who aren't pro-Ukraine have been trolling, spamming, or otherwise violating the forum rules.

Don't they have those over there?
Maybe the users who aren't pro-Ukraine just don't feel like posting in that thread?

nimblepilot19 said:... So how else do you explain their absence from that thread? ...

😵 Maybe because they simply don't want to post in that thread?

I have no idea how to explain it—honestly, I don't even see the point in explaining why the aggressor's sympathizers aren't posting there.

If you really want my take:
who cares if they aren't part of the Niš Quote crowd 🤷

nimblepilot19 said:... Do any other moderators have a comment on this? ...

Look, you should be asking them, not me. 🤣
(I mean, how should I know if they have a comment or not?)

nimblepilot19 said:... Anderson?

Nope. You must have me confused with someone else...

Nicole Moore9 said:I don't have any sympathy for Jesus here, just for the murdered unknown

Every day, my understanding of whatever happened there continues to diminish...

Basically, this argumentative unknown killed that even more combative unknown.
Fine, I get the gist of that much. ☕
But listen, Nicole Moore9,
let's be honest—if you didn't actually kill her, I probably would have done it myself within a week or two...

...regardless, you are responsible 🤷
(because, damn it, people shouldn't just murder others on a whim)

Regardless, the most concerning part of your post is where you claim they won't let you onto 'Psychology':

Nicole Moore9 said:I don't have any sympathy for Jesus here, just for the murdered unknown

They can't either. 🙂

As far as I am aware, psychologists don't have the right to conscientious objection,
so accordingly, you should at least be granted access to the 'Psycho-couch' subforum...

Mind you, that's without a referral or needing to explain why you might benefit from talking to some professionals (or even your layperson companions) over there...
😵 let alone having to beg inflexible, heartless bureaucrats here like you're at some local town hall just to get permission.

Nicole Moore9 said:I killed off my old account, so I'm using this one now. I'm not interested in posting from an account that's stuck with partial bans on three different subreddits.

It's not like you guys can permanently ban me from the psychology board, no matter what I do... So why can't these partial bans just be lifted? Seriously, what kind of rules are these? Get it together.

Appealing to logic is useless here—you can't make bricks out of mud on Reddit. ☕

wearybison63 said:Then don't go applying for the moderator position. It’s hardly a prerequisite for having an opinion. 😛

☕ It looks like my colleague @Honey was right after all...

(If you ask me, put you straight on the factory floor—let's see if you fall in love with a wrench just as easily)

wearybison63 said:I’m being dead serious here—it hasn't kicked me out for months now.

The admins aren't kicking any of you out while you sit there getting fat on the payroll.👎