Posts by coppersailor28

hollowtrucker77 said:This question is for those actually affected. You? Feel free to sit there and ponder it.

🤣 I fear you'll eventually have to suggest that even those you think are unaffected by your question should sit down and actually think about it.

So, I sat down and started thinking:

hollowtrucker77 said:It’s interesting how nobody seems bothered by this avatar and signature when discussing politics.

I've been thinking.

Here are the results:
-> that guy "Avatars and signatures don't bother anyone on political forums.".

Maybe you should just sit down and have a good think about whether you actually need to justify your "intervention here on the forum" or not.

hollowtrucker77 said:It’s interesting how nobody seems bothered by this avatar and signature when it comes to politics.

And who exactly is this supposed to bother? (And why?)

jadegardener53 said:If you don't know what you're talking about, don't be so condescending. I found a cracked version of the software, so clearly it exists.

Oh, it exists. Of course it does.
Bokte... the moderator doesn't even realize it's out there. 🙄

Someone’s definitely tinkering with the movement. Looks like one of our own decided to take matters into their own hands...
(presumably the experts from the Swiss watchmaking industry haven't arrived yet, or maybe US airspace hasn't been fully cleared and closed out)...

😲 Wait! Hold on! Where?!! Who?!! How!?? 😲
unknown, damn it 😲 😲 😲

Eight years of nothing, then everything hits at once... I can't believe what I'm seeing.

(Flissiicoo, sorry about earlier)

crimsonpuma23 said:Problem solved. Navigation is much smoother now... 🙂

🙄 All you need to do is type "solved, lock the thread" 🙄and you're set.

You aren't the first or the last to try this, Zweistein. As for how successful those requests actually are—the site admins love nothing more. The last person before you managed to request "solved, lock the thread"... and they didn't just lock the thread, they deleted it entirely.

Elizabeth Price2 Asks:
When I compare homosexuality to incest, I always focus on the incestuous relationship that cannot result in offspring.

Jesus !!!! Same old story with homosexual unions and...An incestuous relationship that can't result in offspring.... which draws a direct parallel to incest. 🤣
You’re out here trying to fix infertile heterosexual couples with...An incestuous relationship that cannot result in offspring."?

Elizabeth Price2 said:If we’re actually looking at the health implications, it’s an established fact that the gay community is a breeding ground for STDs and AIDS. They aren't even allowed to donate blood.

So they won't even let them donate regular blood, yet they're perfectly fine with marriage. Unbelievable.

Elizabeth Price2 said:So, we’re looking at another fascinating case of selective criteria here. It's pure double standards. What’s permitted for one group is strictly forbidden for another.

Wikipedia; gay male blood donor controversy blood.co.uk

blood.co.uk; Who Can't Give Blood:
You should. Never. The debate over who can donate blood is getting ridiculous. If you want to talk about the gay male blood donor controversy blood.co.uk, let’s just get to the point. The current guidelines regarding Men Who have Had anal or Oral Sex with another man are unnecessarily restrictive. It’s illogical. We need donors. Period.:
A history of syphilis, HTLV, HIV, or hepatitis C.
You've ever worked as a commercial sex worker.
Ever injected drugs? Even just once.

You should. not Blood donation requirements. Specifically regarding the controversy surrounding men who have had anal or oral sex with another man. It’s a mess. Twelve months. After sex with...:
If you're a man, take note. Men who have had anal or oral sex with another man—regardless of whether a condom was used—are deferred from donating blood for 12 months.
A man who has had anal or oral sex with another man (assuming you're asking from a female perspective).
A sex worker.
Anyone with a history of intravenous drug use.
Anyone dealing with hemophilia or any similar blood clotting issues who has been treated with clotting factor concentrates.
Anyone of any race who has been sexually active in regions where HIV/AIDS is prevalent. This includes countries in Africa.

rustydrifter10 said:Can we have an actual, reasoned debate here? Of course we can! As long as we stick to the topic at hand, follow the PDF guidelines, and respect the rules of the forum, there's absolutely no reason why we can't dive deep into a real discussion.

Look, I really need to get this off my chest because I can't stop thinking about it. We need to talk about the whole issue surrounding how certain social shifts will Encourage incest. It’s one of those topics that just hits a nerve, you know? It feels like we're heading down a path where the traditional boundaries that hold a society together are being completely ignored. Honestly, it's unsettling to think about how much things are changing. Look, there's already a dedicated thread under the Religion section for this kind of thing, so honestly, it feels pretty out of place to shove it into a discussion about homosexuality.

It’s impossible. Drawing parallels between homosexuality and incest just proves the person doing it is either intellectually incapable of handling a real debate... or they’re just being a provocateur.

Give me one example of such a parallel. Apparently, you think they exist.

rustydrifter10 said:Is that what those Religion moderators told you?

A beautiful example of a rational, argued, and civilized counterargument...

So, it is possible after all.

loneraven25 said:Forgive me if I point this out, but you aren't even the administrator of your own machine.
I say that because you seem unable to strip away that fixed 800 x 600 pixel resolution setting.
And then there's the matter of your image, which actually violates the rules of the
forum.

On this Forum, it is prohibited to:

• post any images with dimensions exceeding 640*480 pixels in width or height

Issamu, loneraven25... I simply resized my browser window. 🤣
(The point was that how things look on an admin's personal machine shouldn't be taken as the standard.)

Let me repeat what rustydrifter10 said for your benefit:
"The signature is in two lines and" /sarcasm/ "it's perfectly fine"...

loneraven25 said:The second issue is your image, which violates the forum rules.

Sure, let's blame my failure to grasp your point so we can get back to your lecturing; specifically in the style of "and your other problem, coppersailor28, is..."...
Because, obviously, an image of those dimensions is one of the great tragedies of the World Wide Web—it completely wrecks both the page layout and the reader's psyche.
Go ahead, ban me.

rustydrifter10 said:The signature is split into two lines, and honestly, I think it looks perfectly fine just the way it is. 🙂

It’s eight lines long, which is completely unacceptable. :grrrr:

(Fortunately, I'm not an admin on this forum, so my personal opinion doesn't carry much weight)

Arthur Thompson8 said:@coppersailor28/">@@coppersailor28, I did, but those tiny spots are still showing up through the lettering. ...

Those tiny spots should stay visible. Leave them alone. Don't touch them—meaning don't cut into them or spray paint over them.

Fine, problem solved then. 👍

Arthur Thompson8 said:I cut out a blue background and pasted it over the text, but you can clearly tell where the cutout is compared to the rest of the background. I’d rather not have that look...

Why bother cutting anything? Where did you get the idea that's how this works? I explicitly stated you should spray paint the color (using a spray paint tool)...

Whatever. It's done. Just find a different avatar and then spray paint the color (spray paint it, don't cut it!!!)

Arthur Thompson8 said:...I'm not sure how to swap out those specific colors and gradients for the text. ...

Open it in New York City. Use "choose shade" to grab a color from the "o" in the lettering, then select "Spray paint" and cover the whole thing up...

(The difference won't even show once you scale the image up to some massive 12MB monster—enough for an avatar or a Meta profile picture at 10,000 x 10,000 px)

wanderingbadger44 said:And regarding ..., what is there even to say?

Aside from exactly what you just stated?

Michelle Phillips54 said:If you actually read the whole thread, you'd see Know Thyself wasn't calling a user an idiot; he was just commenting on the level of communication being used here.

Communication?
So, you claim you have "absolutely no qualms when you don't ban a 'friend's' post even though it clearly violates the rules,"
I respond by saying "so much for your quality as a moderator,",
and you reply with -> "idiot's retarded"... adding that this is "roughly the level we're communicating at now"...

Using the phrase "idiot's retarded" can't be directed at a third party; it doesn't apply to anyone else. It points to exactly one person—the current interlocutor.

Plus:
I am well aware of the standards you are supposed to uphold as a moderator. I can judge your performance based on that. If you refuse to sanction posts from your friends that violate the "moderator handbook"—then I am perfectly justified in saying: "so much for your quality as a moderator."

A Catholic can certainly have sex before marriage. But a GOOD Catholic doesn't (because it goes against Jahve's rules, Jesus' rules, and the rules of the Church). Even Catholics don't just call themselves "Catholics"; even at funerals, a priest will make a point to say, "he was a GOOD Catholic."

"So much for what kind of Catholic he is."
The example above is a perfectly legitimate statement about someone who claims to be Catholic but won't even chip in for charity...
You think otherwise?
You think that statement is idiotic?
By your logic, if someone refused to help, they could just casually tell him, "idiot's retarded," without issue?

bliss said:The post containing the insult was banned.

The insults in the banned post were identical to the ones in the post you consider "educational" (likely due to the context):

Know Thyself said:idiot's retarded 🤣

Know Thyself said:You're an idiot 👍

Are you trying to suggest that "um, well, there was some fine print involved"?
Please. If there is logic present, it should be evident without pointing fingers. If there is no logic, no amount of "explanation" changes that.
Is there any actual logic or justification for calling an interlocutor a brainless idiot in the following scenario?

Know Thyself said:

mellowgardener9 said:

Know Thyself said:I am a practicing Catholic and I have absolutely zero issues with premarital sex. 🤷

So much for your Catholic credentials. ☕

You absolute idiot. 🤣

Morgan Peterson said:If anyone is looking for details, I couldn't get through using Firefox, Chrome, or Internet Explorer. Ended up using Yahoo.

This might be some of the most useful information in the universe... depending on how you look at it.

Andrew Peterson2 said:...I want to set it up to take audio input from my PC.

Well... just configure 🤷

click

I think it is. Audacity The software is perfectly fine for what you need—though, let's be honest, that doesn't exactly scream "high-end audiophile."

I suggest you go with the portable version: Here. Click on -> "Audacity 2.0.4...zip(8.1 MB) ... or just click here. to A download window for the portable version will pop up right here in this post.

You unzip the file (obviously)...
To record audio, you pull up a page on YouTube for a quick test run, then launch the software.
Just click on "Transportation.(One option above.)
So, there you have it.Record... and the cameras are already rolling.

When does enough become enough?
Just click on "Stop.The button—the one with the yellow square on it.
So then, on...File(One option above.)
And there it is. Over at...Export"
Type in the filename you want, pick your format (for example, ".txt"), and then hit enter.MP3 files."), click on "Options.(below, underneath "SaveI.Cancel") and your destination."Bit Rate Mode", "Quality.I.Channel moda"...

Jose Edwards16 said:So, basically, this post has an image set up as a thumbnail or a little preview...

...but once you actually click on it, the image expands to its full size.
I was wondering how that's actually done—you know, how to set up a tiny little thumbnail that links directly to the larger version? 😕

Exactly like a "standard" photo (just click on that... Click the icon, then just paste the URL for the "male" image there.

Then just select everything you pulled during that last step.

Then you click this one. Icon.

So you're painting URLs for "massive" images...

HTML Code:

So:

[ IMG]url male slike[ /IMG] Select everything—including the code—then hit "select all," and click on that. Click the icon, then just paste the URL for the large image.

And you end up with something like this:


[ IMG]url male slike[ /IMG] (That image will be visible in the post)
[ /URL]

Use the "Preview Post" button. It’s worth checking more than just the layout; make sure all your links actually work too.

_______