Originally posted by FMFWhat would you collectively describe them as?
You would seek to pass off the serious sexual assaults that Bill Cosby is accused of as having been "infidelities"? His alleged offences include drug facilitated sexual assault, sexual battery, rape, and child sexual abuse. Why would you refer to such acts as merely "infidelities"?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo, who would make such a ludicrous suggestion? Dasa wasn't banned "for merely thinking". What utter nonsense to suggest such a thing. So, do you concede you have been hypocritical?
Are you suggesting that the site administration banned Duchess64 for merely thinking?
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePresumably because someone alerted posts that they did not like and the moderators took action ~ as was the case with Dasa. However, the on-topic question here is: why are you not defending Duchess64 in the same way as you defended Dasa?
So why was Duchess64 banned then?
Originally posted by FMFSo Duchess64 was banned because someone did not like them? Is that what you are saying?
Presumably because someone alerted posts that they did not like and the moderators took action ~ as was the case with Dasa. However, the on-topic question here is: why are you not defending Duchess64 in the same way as you defended Dasa?
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePresumably Duchess64 was banned because someone alerted posts and the moderators took action. The same happened to Dasa.
So Duchess64 was banned because someone did not like them? Is that what you are saying?
So why are you choosing not to defend Duchess64 in the same way as you defended Dasa?
Originally posted by FMFThey baned them merely because someone did not like them and alerted thier posts is that what you are saying?
Presumably Duchess64 was banned because someone alerted posts and the moderators took action. The same happened to Dasa.
So why are you choosing not to defend Duchess64 in the same way as you defended Dasa?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn Dasa's case you chose to defend him but in Duchess64's case you are doing the opposite. It would be interesting to hear how you can explain this without demonstrating hypocrisy.
They baned them merely because someone did not like them and alerted thier posts is that what you are saying?