Subject:
|
Re: My Stance
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 21 Oct 2000 23:54:26 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
SSGORE@SUPERONLINE.COMihatespam
|
Viewed:
|
3195 times
|
| |
|
|
Anders Isaksson wrote:
>
> Selçuk Göre skrev i meddelandet <39F0D9E8.9A73C9F@superonline.com>...
> >
> > Eric Kingsley wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> > >
> > > > I'm merely saying that the attitudes on Lugnet that he currently holds
> > > > should be consistent with his site, and we can use that as a meter to see
> > > > his true condition.
> > >
> > > Well we can just disagree on that I guess. I think as long as he carries
> > > himself properly on LUGNET and follows LUGNET's TOS then I could care less • what
> > > he has on his site.
> > >
> > > Eric Kingsley
> >
> > I will be agreeing you on this for a different case but not this. We are
> > not trying to rationalize to TOS him because of his web content. It's
> > just his web content is another evidence for making his (in my mind)
> > suspicious apologies more suspicious than ever.
Friends, I know I'm not very fluent in this language which is native to
me, so I rewording it again:
He started a flame war. He did that knowingly, and he even chose the
person to flame by rather randomly, since he did that just for the sake
of starting a flame war, not for the purpose of flaming a given
individual. He also knew that what he would get as a response, and
actually all his purpose was getting this response. Why? Because he had
a revenge in his head (for an event that took place at least a year
ago), he already had some thoughts about the "community" as he published
at his web site, and he thought that he should better had a live
evidence for his point.
The above is not conspiracy. All of the above from HIS OWN WORDS, from
the messages that HE POSTED HERE IN LUGNET, which are EVIDENCE, as you
already said. If you don't believe me, you should reread his postings.
He even dare enough to say that all this fabricated revenge was to help
us, when trying to rationalize his actions.
And this fabricated revenge thing is why he had been banned I believe,
from Todd's postings. Yes, he already banned. So I have nothing to do
with banning him again.
POINT: I believe no one here could be punished because of anything out
of Lugnet that related to him/her. Do you remember Huw? I was with him.
Do you remember Remy? I was with him. I already believe that, and I
already proved my belief with my past actions.
So, why I still continue to talk about his web content? Because:
His web content is just the proud publication of his fabricated revenge.
In his apologies, he mentioned that it was a wrong thing to do. So why
is the content is still there if he wanted us to believe that he
admitted to himself that he was wrong? I think this is an EVIDENCE.
Besides, I believe that I have right to have my own suspicions about
anything, and have right to express them wherever I find
appropriate.
So, as I already explained that I don't have anything to the with
banning him again, what is my purpose on doing this? I just don't want
him to be allowed here AGAIN, and I'm trying to made myself clear about
the reasoning behind my choice (and yes, it is a choice, just personal
choice). All the EVIDENCE made believing that we are dealing with a
flawed personality, and since this not a therapy club, I don't want some
sick personality lurking around me. That's it.
Regards,
Selçuk
> I don't think 'suspicions' are enough to judge anyone. 'Evidence' is what's
> used for that. The evidence in this case are the messages posted on lugnet,
> nothing else. A web site, paper on the wall, speech on the radio, etc. etc.
> has nothing to do with the lugnet ToS, and cannot IMO be used as an argument
> for excluding anyone.
>
> As for the sincerity of his apologies, who are we to judge on suspicions? Only
> his actions on lugnet can tell...
>
> If you asked me how to proceed, I would say: Let him in again, and throw him
> out for good if the ToS are violated again.
> --
> Anders Isaksson, Sweden
> BlockCAD: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/proglego.htm
> Gallery: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/gallery.htm
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: My Stance
|
| (...) So the ENTIRE flame war was all me, huh? No one else participated at all? No one else helped add fuel to the fodder? That's kinda funny cause that's not exactly how I remember it. (...) Hey look, a conspiracy theory. Oh hey, here's a thought, (...) (24 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: My Stance
|
| Selçuk Göre skrev i meddelandet <39F0D9E8.9A73C9F@su...ne.com>... (...) what (...) I don't think 'suspicions' are enough to judge anyone. 'Evidence' is what's used for that. The evidence in this case are the messages posted on lugnet, nothing else. (...) (24 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
122 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
