Rules of the Political Forum - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

***PressCoverage*** · 01-26-2007, 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogbuster

Crybaby. You start a fight then go running to mommy.

//

i'm convinced youre 12.... anyhow, who started this? yeah, that's what i thought...

Fogbuster · 01-26-2007, 04:53 AM

All right. Since this is a "political forum", and since I believe in *responsible* freedom of speech, I will not attack you in the same way you attack others who are not present, even the president. You will see (and experience first hand) in due time the fruits of your labor. I do not have to do a thing. You will never be able to cry then that you were not warned.

And you can call it "religious doomsday talk" all you want, but -- apart from being just another form of your ad hom approach to personally attack others -- that alone does not make it false. Think about that. Just because a whole nation may follow a certain ethic, if it is the WRONG ethic, the entire nation goes down, not just those individuals who actively participated in promulgating that ethic. Think: Greece and Rome.

So, I most certainly have as much vested interest in what happens to the U.S. as you do.

It is clear now that your rants have much less effect than I had once assumed, due to your inveterate and uncontrollable habit of verbally demeaning others through your ad hominem approach. If you don't like it, think how you affect others. So do what you think is best. We'll see who's getting pummeled soon enough.

//

***PressCoverage*** · 01-26-2007, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogbuster

All right. Since this is a "political forum", and since I believe in *responsible* freedom of speech, I will not attack you in the same way you attack others who are not present, even the president. You will see (and experience first hand) in due time the fruits of your labor. I do not have to do a thing. You will never be able to cry then that you were not warned.

And you can call it "religious doomsday talk" all you want, but -- apart from being just another form of your ad hom approach to personally attack others -- that alone does not make it false. Think about that. Just because a whole nation may follow a certain ethic, if it is the WRONG ethic, the entire nation goes down, not just those individuals who actively participated in promulgating that ethic. Think: Greece and Rome.

So, I most certainly have as much vested interest in what happens to the U.S. as you do.

It is clear now that your rants have much less effect than I had once assumed, due to your inveterate and uncontrollable habit of verbally demeaning others through your ad hominem approach. If you don't like it, think how you affect others. So do what you think is best. We'll see who's getting pummeled soon enough.

//

i'm not sure what you're getting at here... you're agreeing to a truce, or you're predicting more doom? *shrugs*.... either way, super!

here's the thing, Fog... and read this slowly and let it really absorb:

about the dumbest thing you can do toward anyone with a smidgeon of backbone is to suggest (even vaguely) that they're going to hell or be judged by your rigid idea of God... once you do that, which you have here ad nauseum, you immediately become Public Enemy No. 1 with people like me.... you're not clergy, you're not better than me, and you're not in any position to dictate to people crap like "you'll learn, you'll pay" or "just wait, you'll be judged"... if you can debate here without being such a Swaggert, then you wouldn't make yourself a punching bag... it's really very simple.. and despite what you say over and over, i think you know who started this exchange... it was you, and your overly enthusiastic religious judgements of others... stop being an uppidy zealot, and this never would have been a problem...

Fogbuster · 01-26-2007, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

i'm not sure what you're getting at here... you're agreeing to a truce, or you're predicting more doom? *shrugs*.... either way, super!

here's the thing, Fog... and read this slowly and let it really absorb:

about the dumbest thing you can do toward anyone with a smidgeon of backbone is to suggest (even vaguely) that they're going to hell or be judged by your rigid idea of God... once you do that, which you have here ad nauseum, you immediately become Public Enemy No. 1 with people like me.... you're not clergy, you're not better than me, and you're not in any position to dictate to people crap like "you'll learn, you'll pay" or "just wait, you'll be judged"... if you can debate here without being such a Swaggert, then you wouldn't make yourself a punching bag... it's really very simple.. and despite what you say over and over, i think you know who started this exchange... it was you, and your overly enthusiastic religious judgements of others... stop being an uppidy zealot, and this never would have been a problem...

I've taken far harder punches than you've thrown at me -- or probably ever could. Much harder. But that's not any issue with me, ... your screen-lashings. Haven't lost a minute of sleep yet.

What I'm saying is: this is a debate forum, I guess, and people like to vent on this or that, sometimes in very colorful ways. OK. So you like to go off on certain people, and now that I've seen what happens here, and seen others do similar, fine. It is what it is, so to speak. You say what you want about "X", and, as long as "X" is not here, nobody's the wiser. I'm guessing this is somewhere close to your line of thinking.

Fine. So if you say something that comes back to bite you at the top of your levis, so be it. Not my problem. I've said my piece about it, and I'm moving on. It was meant as friendly advice. Take it for what it's worth. For me to concern myself about the fallout of anything you say here is not a priority. You're a big boy, you'll deal with it, I'm sure. We all do, in our own ways.

***PressCoverage*** · 01-26-2007, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogbuster

I've taken far harder punches than you've thrown at me -- or probably ever could. Much harder. But that's not any issue with me, ... your screen-lashings. Haven't lost a minute of sleep yet.

What I'm saying is: this is a debate forum, I guess, and people like to vent on this or that, sometimes in very colorful ways. OK. So you like to go off on certain people, and now that I've seen what happens here, and seen others do similar, fine. It is what it is, so to speak. You say what you want about "X", and, as long as "X" is not here, nobody's the wiser. I'm guessing this is somewhere close to your line of thinking.

Fine. So if you say something that comes back to bite you at the top of your levis, so be it. Not my problem. I've said my piece about it, and I'm moving on. It was meant as friendly advice. Take it for what it's worth. For me to concern myself about the fallout of anything you say here is not a priority. You're a big boy, you'll deal with it, I'm sure. We all do, in our own ways.

ok, take care Fog... just remember to cease the religious condemnation... and all will be fine...

Fogbuster · 01-26-2007, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

ok, take care Fog... just remember to cease the religious condemnation... and all will be fine...

Never meant as "condemnation", always as friendly advice, delivered in the tone you seemed to respect. Guess you really don't respect it when somebody calls you names, etc. How about that.

PatrioticDynasty · 02-07-2007, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F.B.N.

There shall be no rule to circumvent any rule that rules against 1 poster who is decidedly different from another poster.

If the rule itself cannot distinguish why 1 human is correct and the other human is wrong then no human shall edit the rule or in any way reshape or reword such rule.

The rule itself cannot be binding in all legal jurisdictions because one never knows where the electronic code for such a rule may be at any 1 time.

All rules shall be constructed so as to be quite obvious to all people of average intelligence .... since we do not know what average intelligence is when discussing politics we have a problem and we shall not construct a supreme court of the forum because it is impossible to do so in the time space constrictions of the internet pipelines.

Lastly I'd like to say that any rules here can only be 50% correct because males only compromise @50% of the world. There are no women here to argue against the rules and because most woman are right most of the time perhaps men only account for 30% of correct logic and if that said logic is missing then the rules themselves cannot say that they passed any litmus test of any rational and equal time... in other words we haven't a clue WTF we are talking about.

In other words ... all rules are invalid ....

post at will with all freedoms.

WOW, can we change the room to Monty Pythons Flying circus?