Looks like not. People up there are still celebrating you. I'm joining in too—sorry if I'm late. Happy birthday. Happy Birthday That song was originally written for Martin Luther King. So, clearly, you're quite the VIP to us.🙂
Grace Sanders24 said:Lazarus, I just went through those old photos of Charles from back in the day. Honestly, he was definitely playing the "championship contender" card rather than relying on looks or charm. 🤣
Lemon mentioned you were looking for pictures of Charles, and I honestly thought Lemon was joking.🤣 Yeah, true. He was basically the most eligible bachelor around.🤣
They were trying to set him up with Carolina at any cost.
Morning, everyone. What brings you here? I've got a mountain of reading to get through. Which security topics are we actually talking about? Could someone give me a quick rundown?🤣
Honestly, my conscience probably would. I guess I’ve just had this rebellious streak ever since I joined this forum. Maybe it's because I've spent so much time being penalized, banned, or tossed aside that I ended up feeling a weird sense of solidarity with everyone else getting pushed around. You definitely had it easy with the moderation. edit: I'm not just replying to Jesse Price here; I actually want to know who runs this site? Someone is seriously messing with me.🤔 Everything glitches out while I'm trying to type.🤣
Jesse Price said:If I were a moderator, you’d be banned from this entire forum just for posting this. Save the emotional manipulation for somewhere else. Bye.
Ashley Brooks49 said:To be honest, I couldn't care less. I don't think he was treated unfairly at all.🤣
Edit: Personally, I would've warned everyone in time and tried to stick to the rules I set. That coward quietcrane63 would've been gone long before Siki.☕
How can you guys be so cruel to one another? (I'm talking about everyone who caused a scene and walked out on the US) Where does this sadistic urge to eliminate other participants at any cost come from? Denying anyone the chance to participate is a massive injustice. If you don't know what it feels like to be sidelined, tossed aside, or treated like absolute trash, don't talk to me about injustice. How can you claim he wasn't wronged?
Excuse me? My bad. You're right—I was just trolling. I got mixed up and thought you were talking about Mr. Ostric. Deepest apologies for the misunderstanding.
Michael Doyle5 said:You clearly have no clue what you're talking about. How can you call it freedom of speech when they shut down anyone with a different ideology but let low-quality trolling and total morons run wild? It’s a complete circus right now—a total paradox of tolerance mixed with zero context. Freedom comes with responsibility, but there's zero accountability here. The rules and general Forum Rules aren't even being followed properly. Honestly, if you aren't active in the History and Historical Topics sub-forum, you shouldn't be weighing in on this case at all.
Sure, I'm ignoring the context. You just want to silence someone with a different opinion to push your own agenda. There's no paradox here. You claim to love free speech, but then you try to censor anything that doesn't fit your worldview.
Ostric is a sharp guy. He’s just doing what any sensible person would do. It’s nice to finally see some intelligence on this Forum. Free speech is guaranteed by the Constitution, after all. Those trying to silence others really need a reminder that we live in a free Western nation where being objective isn't exactly the smartest move right now.
bluecyclist64 said:Which is just further proof of how incompetent and ineffective you are as a moderator. People like him drive away potentially high-quality contributors—the kind of users who might actually engage with the subforum you manage. There you go again, treating History as if it were your own private fiefdom where you can play at being a benevolent dictator because, clearly, you possess such a "kind soul" that you refuse to hand out partial bans. And so, we are left with your erratic habit of throwing warnings at anyone who dares to disagree with your specific versions of historical truths. If they say otherwise, they’re simply slanderers and liars, right? A partial ban is a moderation tool designed for a very specific purpose. But I suppose you can't indulge in your little power trips over the users if they don't have access to your private caliphate.
Your hesitation to use a partial ban reminds me of some small-town cop who would pull over a drunk driver, only to let him drive right back home. Because if that drunk fool loses his license, who is left for the officer to vent his accumulated frustration upon? After all, in the grand scheme of things, he's nobody.
Looking at what you've turned into, I feel like Hindenburg—regretting the moment I decided to support a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Just like you and a few others did to me before I stepped away?
bluecyclist64 said:Which is just further proof of how incompetent and ineffective you are as a moderator. People like him drive away potentially high-quality contributors—the kind of users who might actually engage with the subforum you manage. There you go again, treating History as if it were your own private fiefdom where you can play at being a benevolent dictator because, clearly, you possess such a "kind soul" that you refuse to hand out partial bans. And so, we are left with your erratic habit of throwing warnings at anyone who dares to disagree with your specific versions of historical truths. If they say otherwise, they’re simply slanderers and liars, right? A partial ban is a moderation tool designed for a very specific purpose. But I suppose you can't indulge in your little power trips over the users if they don't have access to your private caliphate.
Your hesitation to use a partial ban reminds me of some small-town cop who would pull over a drunk driver, only to let him drive right back home. Because if that drunk fool loses his license, who is left for the officer to vent his accumulated frustration upon? After all, in the grand scheme of things, he's nobody.
Looking at what you've turned into, I feel like Hindenburg—regretting the moment I decided to support a wolf in sheep's clothing.
bluecyclist64 said:Lazarus, did your dealer spike your LSD again? What on earth does The Beatles have to do with this crowd, other than being bands?
You're missing the point. That's on you. Are you feeling okay? Surely you don't think I'm actually comparing The Beatles to The Beatles?🤣 I was just making a point about all the different stage outfits bands wear. Based on the sound, these guys would've toured with Metallica.🤣 based on the vibe.🤣
People with privilege at the Student Union... forget about getting anything written. You're talking about bans, but back in 2014, that Ukrainian song was purely political too. Nobody raised an eyebrow then. Even when Russians were banned from participating, nobody seemed to care. It wouldn't be right to ban The Beatles just because of political propaganda. I think it’d be fairer to just let them go out there and fight for their shot.
Let's be real here. The outfits are just standard stuff, basically recycling uniforms other bands have used forever. Nothing groundbreaking there. Musically? The song isn't great. The visual show is solid, though. The political undertones are obvious, too. Maybe they're defending some kind of freedom—they come off like a bunch of psychos who’ve been left to their own devices. Plus, the song is clearly aimed at Putin. It's basically sucking up to the West. I wonder how they'll fare in New York City. Mexicans might see those tractors as a direct attack on them. There's no doubt the whole thing is political.
It’s not even the worst kind of spectacle. We've seen this before. Artists should have their own way of interpreting the world around us. Personally, I prefer this over the porn stars currently dominating the stage. This "stinky" cheese actually reminds me of an old Ernest Hemingway story about people trying too hard to act sophisticated—like those folks who'd fly all the way to Italy just to buy Gorgonzola, only to toss it in the trash.🤣Total posers.
I see this track as a political parody regarding the war in Ukraine. "little sociopath," and how mother loved the idiot—that kind of thing. The issue is, nobody’s going to get the nuance unless we’re singing in American. That tractor bit also feels like a nod to the old days. Or maybe I'm just overthinking it. It's fine either way.
Ethan Gomez82 said:Yeah. It’s just a caricature of our era, totally devoid of a message. People will find their own meaning if they actually care to look. That's why it works. 😁
Let's hope the viewers and the jury catch what the artists were actually aiming for. Since Eurovision has turned into a private club for a specific crowd, the selection clearly hits their mark. Sending just one woman to Eurovision feels pretty pointless these days.
