NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey Zippy, I've got two words for you: NO SMOKING. Try putting your bong down long enough to look up anti-smoking ordinances on-line.


http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=586630&page=3

As much as Gauthier's post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=14600301#post14600301).

Or any of the other acerbic posts replying to Mittani recently, like here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=14600661#post14600661) and previously in that thread.

Seems like folks need to put each other on ignore.

I think calling a poster a pothead over a simple disagreement is rather different from reminding a poster of stupid things they have said. Especially when that poster continues to use Lord of the Rings metaphors.

I think calling a poster a pothead over a simple disagreement is rather different from reminding a poster of stupid things they have said. Especially when that poster continues to use Lord of the Rings metaphors.
I'll leave the mods to judge, but I'd note that it certainly appears that you and Gauthier are the only ones continuing to use LotR metaphors, in your incessant calls of 'Leroy' and 'Sauron'.

Your hounding gets rather tiresome.

That is all.

I'll leave the mods to judge, but I'd note that it certainly appears that you and Gauthier are the only ones continuing to use LotR metaphors, in your incessant calls of 'Leroy' and 'Sauron'.


Actually, a lot of us do it.

How about everyone starts playing nice, or I start handing out yellow cards and red cards?

KoL, the format of the line you quote seems to me to be a simple riff on the format of the post it's replying to; the content, an individual variation on the common, "What are you on (and can I have some?)" line used when a poster thinks another's argument is so addled it must be drug-induced. So, no.

Using LotR metaphors is a helluva lot more PG-11 than some of the other exchanges on General, so I'm not going to jump on that, either.

There seems to be an unusual sensitivity to New Mitanni's "Obama-is-a-socialist" thing lately.

Please note that all posters are entitled to their opinions, however weird you may find them. Complaints are due only when those opinions are expressed as trolling, flaming or flamebait.

BTW, please link to individual posts, rather than pages, when you bring something to Moderation. Page-view choices vary, which means mods have to search the thread, which is easy enough, of course, but annoying nonetheless.

EDIT: Also, what Kat said.

You know, KoL has an excuse for missing my point. Others complaining about the post in question, not so much. A careful examination of my previous post, to which Gauthier was responding with his usual presumptuous insolence, not to mention flamebaiting, would have revealed that part of my argument was to make drug use as socially unacceptable as smoking! Hence my turning his post around on him and emphasizing NO SMOKING and anti-smoking regulations.

As for putting down the bong, if the shoe fits, wear it.

Ardchoille recognizes what's really going on here: some people who dished it out against President Bush just can't take it against their man.

There seems to be an unusual sensitivity to New Mitanni's "Obama-is-a-socialist" thing lately.

Please note that all posters are entitled to their opinions, however weird you may find them. Complaints are due only when those opinions are expressed as trolling, flaming or flamebait.

Complaints were raised about NM's signature in Moderation, in part, because it was a signature, not an argument. The Mods rejected those complaints, so I presume the matter is settled.

Just as NM is entitled to his opinions, however, others are free to oppose, mock, or debate those opinions, so long as there is no trolling, flaming, or flaimbait, right?

Ardchoille recognizes what's really going on here: some people who dished it out against President Bush just can't take it against their man.

That is not was Ard was saying and you know it.

But just as you "dish[] it out" against President Obama, others can dish it out against your statements. :wink:

Just as NM is entitled to his opinions, however, others are free to oppose, mock, or debate those opinions, so long as there is no trolling, flaming, or flaimbait, right?


True -- as long as it's restricted to the opinions and kept within the rules.

But there's no need to reply every time and drag non-political threads off-topic. If it's plainly out of order (as in, for example, the 'British MP's kid dies' thread, or the first lady fashions one), either ignore it or report an OT post.

Ardchoille recognizes what's really going on here: some people who dished it out against President Bush just can't take it against their man.

No, I don't see it that way. What I see, on both sides, is people relying on namecalling when they could be having a discussion. If you think Obama is a socialist, assemble examples of his policies and actions that you think back up your argument and put them in threads where they're relevant.

If you think Obama is a socialist, assemble examples of his policies and actions that you think back up your argument and put them in threads where they're relevant.

So let it be written. So let it be done.

Ardchoille recognizes what's really going on here: some people who dished it out against President Bush just can't take it against their man.

I'm not a mod, but here's a word of advice: Do not turn this into a political debate in Moderation. This is a place to address NS forum rules, not political ideology.

Shoo. Shoo. All of you!