William of Walworth said:
Do you not agree he was breaking the FAQ though?
I hope you don't imagine he was 'unfairly censored for speaking the truth' or something.
Eh?
What gives you that idea - all ive said is ill miss the guy, and listed what i consider to be his outstanding attributes. I have NOT commented or speculated on the reasons for his being banned.
Well, i cant comment on the C+P issues, as its been snipped but ill agree it seems likely that he broke the FAQ in this case. However, a fair bit of the FAQ is pure nonsense anyway - one one of the main lines ('sheeple accusing gun nuts...') about 1/2 of that sentance is composed of cliquey made-up words like 'conspiraloon' - with no clarification of what EXACTLY they might means.
I know its Editors site and hes entitled to his rules etc - im pointing out that you cant reasonably expect other people (ie me) to interpret what all of those 'rules' actually are.
Your post reads like that of a fellow-conspiracist -- what's 'hypocritical' about finding bonkers made up nonsense from well dodgy sources tedious?......
lets take a look in the bin;
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=177899
ill admit the thread title could be more explicit - thats in the FAQ iirc, yet how many similarly poor-titled threads do you see outside the bin, by popular posters?
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=177902
what is the problem here exactly? I seriously doubt it'd be in the bin if id have posted the same thread/replies.
Whilst some people here may feel a genuine heart-felt need to express themselves strongly on certain Azrael23-related issues, i dont think anyone (if being honest with themselves) could disagree that theres often a playground bullying/lynch-mob mentality at work here - and im not the first to say i find that quite sickening.
And as for 'closedmindedness' ... people should mind that their 'minds' are not so 'open' that their brains fall out, in a much repeated but entirely valid axiom .... in this context.
Lets take reptilians/UFOs as a favourite example - such imagery is widely documented across the ancient world, references appear across cultures, continents and millenia.
Yet any mention, even the openminded 'maybe' position is automatically ridiculed and arrogantly filed under the 'fruitloop' label.
The 'fruitloopery' of such (IMMENSELY well-sourced) speculation is apparently deemed so obvious, as to dispense completely with the need to examine the source material - and launch straight to the ad hominem abuse.