Go back
It's good to be back !

It's good to be back !

Debates

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by STANG
Sorry but you should have researched my very first posts on this site before making your own public conclusions.
And which would those be?

The link to the RHP ratings graph obscured by text and pictures about the Iraq war?

The claim that bush is a warmonger (something I agree with) ad nausem?

Oh please enlighten me, the ignorant one.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
And which would those be?

The link to the RHP ratings graph obscured by text and pictures about the Iraq war?

The claim that bush is a warmonger (something I agree with) ad nausem?

Oh please enlighten me, the ignorant one.
You need to research back further in time when I posed likely situations of the world in 50 years from now and whether people held concern.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by STANG
You need to research back further in time when I posed likely situations of the world in 50 years from now and whether people held concern.
Oh God, that was a great post. 🙄 Reading it about 20 times over and over again was very educating. It also helped that when someone gave an answer you found to be irrelevant you simply repeated the question.

Quit your goddamn whining, STANG. Innocent women and children are dying in Iraq and all you can think of is how you were banned from a chess site forum? How selfish.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Now say I was to post this in every thread going at the moment and continue to do so when asked to stop. Would I get banned? Yes. Would I deserve it? Yes. What's the difference between that and what you have been doing?
The difference is recent versus past and initial posts. The initial ones need to be looked at.

Vote Up
Vote Down

<Writes the name Stang on a piece of paper and heads off to the toilet!

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Weadley
<Writes the name Stang on a piece of paper and heads off to the toilet!
I can be a pain in the arse.

Critics aren't silent.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by STANG
The difference is recent versus past and initial posts. The initial ones need to be looked at.
I don't care what you posted a year ago. Why should I?
Are you trying to say that because you made some posts ages ago you should be allowed to break the ToS now?
Because I can't see what point you are trying to make if it's not that.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by STANG
I can be a pain in the arse.

Critics aren't silent.
The critics who have been silenced are silent.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
I don't care what you posted a year ago. Why should I?
Are you trying to say that because you made some posts ages ago you should be allowed to break the ToS now?
Because I can't see what point you are trying to make if it's not that.
Please accept my apology. I was comparing a "moderator's" insinuation that I was referring people to pornographic sites to a question as to what type of chess computer you use. Both are outrageous !