NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11625100&postcount=14

Before some accuses me of flaming as well, I gave him this answer:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11625125&postcount=24

I think this two differs as mine wasnt a definitive accusation but a hypothetical guess (notice usage of "if" and "probably").

That whole thread was flamebaiting, and I don't see the need to point to one incident above all the others. Just put it behind you.

That whole thread was flamebaiting, and I don't see the need to point to one incident above all the others. Just put it behind you.

Ok but I consider paedophile a much heavier and more serious insult then ugly....

I'm no mod NN, but it looks to me like you both called each other pedophiles, in different ways.

You worded yours in a way you thought would be acceptable and then reported the one you were responding to in an attempt to sneak around the rules and get other people punished for responding to your flamebait.

I'm no mod NN, but it looks to me like you both called each other pedophiles, in different ways.

You worded yours in a way you thought would be acceptable and then reported the one you were responding to in an attempt to sneak around the rules and get other people punished for responding to your flamebait.

Ex:

a: if you do that, you are a moron.

b: didnt know you were a moron.

See the difference?

Ex:

a: if you do that, you are a moron.

b: didnt know you were a moron.

See the difference?

Yes. User a. is being cute by "suggesting" whereas user b. is being direct. Both are calling each other morons.

Yes. User a. is being cute by "suggesting" whereas user b. is being direct. Both are calling each other morons.

:rolleyes:

If he doesnt do whatever that is, he isnt a moron and that's the point.

:rolleyes:

If he doesnt do whatever that is, he isnt a moron and that's the point.

Except the "that" in your case is:

Dont you think children are cute? If you dont for all of them

So anyone who doesn't think all children are "cute," is a pedophile.

That's most people. Most people can think of at least several non-cute children.

So your comment was obviously designed so that you were calling DK a pedophile and you knew that was what you intended to call him.

Except the "that" in your case is:



So anyone who doesn't think all children are "cute," is a pedophile.

That's most people. Most people can think of at least several non-cute children.

So your comment was obviously designed so that you were calling DK a pedophile and you knew that was what you intended to call him.

I see how u misunderstood me. I guess I should have phraised it like "if you dont, for any children..." Because that was my point. If he thinks attaching cute adjective for a/some child(ren) must mean a sexual level, I said it is PROBABLY because of some repressed paedophilia on his part.

You got a ruling. Drop it already.