: $$$$$$$$$$$$For those who support censorship but don't want to use that word, you can always use "They should guard this quality jealously and take steps to prevent it becoming the personal sandbox..." instead. Euphemisms served the Nazi's well too.
*I've never seen anyone as strident as you when it comes to trying to attach yourself to *actual* victims of reprehensible policies in some demented hope that people will be stupid enough to equate you with (in this case, presumably) the victims of the NAZI's. I've stated my criticisms, and in plain King's English mate. Such rhetorical melodrama on your part is further proof (as though more was required of a weak mind IMO. Argue. Debate. Discuss. Cite as many articles in support of your purported POV as you want... link yourself silly. Just stop spamming us with *someone else's* opinion. Everyone here probably suffers the normal anxieties of a having a POV in search of a method (of expression); you, on the contrary seem to suffer the angst of a man who possesses a method in search of a POV.
Suck it up Frenchy. I can understand you resenting my critiques... but that's what you get for showing up on this forum with your shorts around your ankles.* --K
: : --
: : McSpotlight: We do our best. And you should see some of the stuff we reject...
*Have you considered a kind of 'dead letters' room? Where we could go to read them, but it is a 'read only' proposition. I for one would be interested in seeing them so long as I'm not having to wade through all the irrelevancy on the active board. I *do* (BTW) appreciate the fact that you are all doing your best.* --K
: $$$$$$$$$$$$$Yeah, as a matter of fact I have seen some of the stuff you reject.
: McSpotlight: We only reject your stuff if it's irrelevant; but we get any number of truly gross and obscene and hate-filled posts as well.
*Ha ha ha... 'only... if it's irrelevant' ...ha ha ha! OK. I'll permit this figleaf to pass without further commentary...:)* --K