My only interest is that this thread, and its ilk, stop, and that these kind of mindbendingly useless--and possibly damaging-- discussions never start.
So let me be clear what you want.
You want to further limit free speech under the existing rules, and you appear to wish that some limitations on what we talk about be installed under the rules here. Something about this type of thread and it's "ilk", something regarding "mindbendingly useless--and possibly damaging-- discussions". So you feel we have several types of damaging discussions and this is one of them?
OK. I have a suggestion for you. Let's bring it up to management and see what they say about your idea. If they rule for you and design new rules or guidelines to follow, I'd be happy to follow them. If you start a discussion about that, I'll chime in. You'll have to define the following:
A. mindbendingly useless discussions
B. possibly damaging discussions
C. What other types of threads (ilk) there are that you disagree should be posted.
No Hal...You obviously are not clear. I do not have an "idea"
Nowhere in my post did I talk about speech limits or Forum rule changes. So bollocks to that.
My stated wish/interest and personal desire
that threads like this not get started, does not at the same time express a desire as well to limit free speech here and change Forum Rules to reflect that, so don't even bother trying to nail me on that one. I adamantly support free speech, but I also adamantly support pointing out and ridiculing the trash talk that comes out of it.
You claim that your hypotheticals' are for entertainment purposes only. That's nice, and most times they are, and knowing you we already knew that. But on the rare occasion when it's not funny for some, don't get your back up and those knickers in a knot if someone tells you so and disses it outright. Your a big boy so I'm sure you know how to take one on the chin by now...... Chin and grin man.
Others may have found the thread fun and that's their business not mine, but no apologies from me Hal, for the fact that I personally find this type of thread unnecessary, unproductive, and not entertaining
in the least. It blows actually, and I've expressed one reason as to why. The fact that you want to have some fun and provide some entertainment with the most vile and mind destroying doctrine in human history does not automatically mean that all others will also..... As well, I won't be going on any further with your last suggestion so you can just pipe that idea. My point doesn't need to be explained any further.
Lets face it--you came into this entire thing with fangs down and talons out and proceeded to tear a strip off Nam
I want to thank Nam for this topic. Here's what Nam says about it-
Quote from: Nam on June 06, 2012, 07:38:24 AM
If Biblegod was shown 100% to exist, I'd be happy to burn forever (sic) in Hell.
I think that's a ridiculous claim - that you have enough knowledge of the consequences of eternal Hell to make such an arrogant claim. As I said - talk on the Internets is cheap. When it comes to reality (if this were true) who here would choose to go to Hell and burn forever?
So if your original thread was meant for fun and entertainment--then why the attempted slapping around of Nam ?
Why not just start your thread without
holding Nam out as model of idiocy and arrogance like you did ? ....Seriously dude, can you not see that what you did, started wrong, and kept being wrong right until this moment ?
I've made it clear to you that I don't want to be at odds with anyone, and I don't feel that here, but man you owe it to Nam to admit that you blew it at the beginning of all this and to make sure there is no hard feelings between the two of you. I think that "hypothetically" that would be a good thing to do.