[barfo]

Originally Posted by Talkhard

Yet Hap's thread title about a "delusional" Hillary Clinton is allowed to stand. How do you explain that?

I wasn't the one who changed your thread title, but I'd guess the difference is that your title could be read as a generalized attack ("environmental wackos"). Some on this board consider themselves environmentalists. Whereas Hap's title refers to a public figure. If he'd instead said "Hillary supporters are delusional" then I think you'd have a case, because there may be Hillary supporters on this board. You are allowed to attack public figures, you are not allowed to attack posters. And that includes attacking groups of posters (liberals, environmentalists, democrats, etc).

Now, you could make the argument that you were referring to only the few people you cited in your post as environmental wackos, and that you had no intention of tarring all environmentalists with the same brush. That would be a fine defense in theory, but unfortunately, your posting history and your own followups in this thread tend to discredit that argument.

barfo

[Dan]

Originally Posted by Talkhard

Yet Hap's thread title about a "delusional" Hillary Clinton is allowed to stand. How do you explain that?

wuh oh it's Magic!!


Never believe it's not so..it's magic! You know!

[Talkhard]

Originally Posted by barfo

I wasn't the one who changed your thread title, but I'd guess the difference is that your title could be read as a generalized attack ("environmental wackos"). Some on this board consider themselves environmentalists.

Generalized attacks against "conservatives" seem to be allowed all the time, even though there are people on this board who consider themselves conservatives.

Again, it's the double standard I'm talking about.

You could make the argument that you were referring to only the few people you cited in your post as environmental wackos, and that you had no intention of tarring all environmentalists with the same brush. That would be a fine defense in theory, but unfortunately, your posting history and your own followups in this thread tend to discredit that argument.

And there are those on this board who enjoy making derogatory comments about "the right," and it's pretty clear they are talking about all of the right, yet they are not penalized.

[barfo]

Originally Posted by Talkhard

Generalized attacks against "conservatives" seem to be allowed all the time, even though there are people on this board who consider themselves conservatives.

Again, it's the double standard I'm talking about.

And there are those on this board who enjoy making derogatory comments about "the right," and it's pretty clear they are talking about all of the right, yet they are not penalized.

Yes, one of your posts got a title change. Cry me a river. Practically every one of your posts is a candidate for editing, and you don't get edited very often at all, because no one has the stamina to deal with it.

If I had the time, I'd edit out all attacks on liberals and conservatives both. But there is another solution. If you really want to improve the level of discourse here, restrain yourself from making obnoxious posts. Your own blatant refusal to play by the rules weakens your case that the other team isn't playing by the rules and that the referees are corrupt.

barfo