Forum etiquette

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Have you alerted any of his posts or otherwise tried to alert the moderators? If you strongly object to him having multiple accounts (which certainly seems to be the case given the evidence you have presented) then the first step is to alert the moderators.

If it seems someone is ducking out, it may be because they have not yet tried to take the time to go look up the Greek when it comes to the bible or Hebrew for the Old Testament.

An answer can take preparation. Don't assume that someone is "hiding" just because it takes a long time for an answer.

ThinkOfOne wanted me to respond on Ezekiel 33. I don't mind responding, but it will take looking at the Hebrew and I have not done that yet.

I get online at a grocery store and at McDonalds. I stand up in both places. I don't get online at home. Of course, I want to respond on Ezekiel 33 and on the last 2 verses of John 8: 30-36.

Also, if the questioner constantly says the answer doesn't apply, they may blame it on the OP person, however, the people who question should be willing to try to understand the OP responses in light of the general questioning. Don't be so quick to think that only responses that are answering exactly as the questioner wants to be answered, are not answers to start with.

The bible has more verses than a single verse passage to provide answers with. When determining what the bible means in one verse passage, other bible passages may be used to help come up with an answer.

The bible can interpret the bible. Taking one verse passage and demanding that the one passage is all that applies to us can be vain and destructive. For a person who demands that we can work for our salvation, that person is against the bible and against Christ's sacrifice. Refusing Christ as the Savior through denial, what else can that person be called but an anti-Christ?

Again, don't be so quick to say someone's answer doesn't answer our questions just because we want to be answered in a way that pleases us. I am not saying that direct answers are wrong, but I am saying that the bible can say things that we don't understand or even believe. In that case, we should say right out off the bat that we don't understand it or believe it. And if an answer given is intended to help answer someone's questioning, then why disbelieve the bible and blame the OP person for answering our questioning in a way we don't want to hear?

P.S. If someone gives an answer trying to help someone else, and the questioner criticizes the answering person, how is that using etiquette?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Source code for Duchess v1.0.

function getPissy() {
const OPPONENT_NAME;
int n_chars = 0;

string barb;
while(n_chars <= 2000) {
barb = OPPONENT_NAME + random(insult);
alert(insult);
n_chars += barb.length
}
}

Originally posted by twhitehead
You have misunderstood me. I did not say you misquoted me, I said that right after announcing that we would look at what I actually said, you then asked how it would be [b]interpreted - as opposed to what I intended, or what it actually means (if such a thing can be said to exist).
I am more than ready to apologize for things I said - interpreted in ...[text shortened]... parties motives - all without submitting apology - or even acknowledging that you have done so.[/b]

I think you owe all of us an apology for assuming we are all too stupid to know what you really mean.

You are owed an apology for someone challanging your senseless attacks... yeah, okay, I guess that does make sense, so... never mind.


as you were

Just now finished reading all the posts. Who would've guessed a thread entitled "Forum etiquette" could attract so many fine and high minded people...

Originally posted by galveston75
Well I could be wrong, I don't think so but we all know this is pretty much directed at Robbie and myself. IF I'm wrong I apologize for my asuming so.
I've been letting this thread go to see what comments come up and generally they are all good with good points for all to consider.
I could come back with some colorful comments about this but I'm not ...[text shortened]... pect to all and accept, not agree with, but respect whatever answers are given or are not given.

In reading this post I would have to conclude that you have a completely naive or misconceived perception of how this board functions and your reflections here cast some light on why you repeatedly cross the boundaries of what several of your regular combatants feel is reasonable forum etiquette.

Forum etiquette. . . okay?

However, don't forget that people can become sick or die too. Humans are critical by nature, so people can even complain for a non-response without knowing whether or not someone is sick or even dead. We should not take these cases for granted either.

Originally posted by lemon lime
Just now finished reading all the posts. Who would've guessed a thread entitled "Forum etiquette" could attract so many fine and high minded people...

lemon lime, whodey's 'high minded' on weather in a light hearted way.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I do not post forum messages with any other account. If you think the forums will be a better place without my contributions then you will also think you are doing everyone a service by putting an end to them. And I am sure they will also think that it's got absolutely nothing to do with me calling you out yesterday on your sheer hypocrisy in lecturing people on not dishing out "personal attacks" and on "accepting criticism".

Originally posted by divegeester
In reading this post I would have to conclude that you have a completely naive or misconceived perception of how this board functions and your reflections here cast some light on why you repeatedly cross the boundaries of what several of your regular combatants feel is reasonable forum etiquette.

What? Ok here we go........I don't believe in any forum that being rude or asuming they know it all and have the right to condemn or question what, when or who I or anyone else communicates with or ignors and then call ones out just because they don't get an answer to a question they don't like or agree with. I think as another poster said that you are just arrogent and as a result will never take a no for an answer and even worse if you don't get an answer.
Then to have the nerve to say someone is dodging or using one's mother's health as an excuse to answer or not to answer a question is getting way out of hand.
And on top of that going out of your way to see when I may make a chess move or answer another thread is just flat getting weird.
You've done this before and it's getting really old.
You sir are the one who needs to learn what etiqutte is and stop hiding behind your monitor and BACK OFF.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

If you succeed in stopping me from cheating at chess, then I suppose that will be a positive to come out of all this, even though I had no intention of trying to manipulate chess ratings.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Assuming they do ban (which I doubt), he just comes back with another account.

Nicholas Bourbaki.

Some other suggestions:
Nick the Dutchess
Nick the dick
Nick Borebacky
etc.