New arrivals

[14edsullivan]

It's pretty funny how you, a socialist, correct?, call us nazi's, who were in fact national socialists.hmm

Ed

[14edsullivan]

I'm not a commie, why do you just assume I am? I'm an anarchist. Don't jump to conclusions. Fascist. (Just assuming.)


Was I directly refering to you? no, many of the "others" that came at relativly the same time as you, and were the reason of this thread, called themselves commies, so I said commies in my post.

Ed

[All Dead]

It's pretty funny how you, a socialist, correct?, call us nazi's, who were in fact national socialists.hmm

Ed
Nazis call themselves socialists alot, I am not apart of that grouping, and you my freind are a conservative, not a socialist. Unless the nazi kind.

[14edsullivan]

I had never said or implied I had any beliefs in common with socialists and if I do, the method of procuring those beliefs into reality are very different. The nazis call themselves socialists, because they were socialists.


Ed

[All Dead]

They were fascists.

[14edsullivan]

Nationalsozialismus

I think that you are taking the nationialistic part of National Socialism, and mistaking it for pure fascism.

Ed

[Wadi66]

Nationalsozialismus

I think that you are taking the nationialistic part of National Socialism, and mistaking it for pure fascism.

Ed*whispers* Ed, I think you're talking over his head.

[All Dead]

*Whispers* Haha, you're funny, how'd you get out of the zoo?

[Wells]

This thread hasn't beenhijacked or anything but...

I guess I would qualify as one of those liberals that are just joining. But I am here for civilized banter. And now that I am in, may I propose that at a certain number of users (lets say when the site reaches 400 users) the membership be cutoff, i.e. a closed membership? Meaning one would have to apply and be approved for membership by the mods. I am unsure whether this idea was put out before because I didn't wade through the 7 pages of Socialist, anarchist and Facist bickering. But I would far prefer something such as that rather than have my posts edited for content.

[CognitiveTruth]

If you notice, many of the members we have don't do anything. I suggest we have a time period that you have to post to remain a member unless you discuss it beforehand with IHL, like 3 monthes.

[IHL]

Closing membership of the site is an interesting idea. I'm not sure about that one though since new members are required to keep the site fresh and introduce new ideas.

Members that have not logged on in a defined number of days are easily removed. I have removed some already. This is a new area that I haven't given a lot of thought to simply because I haven't had to until the site started getting more crowded.

Something will be done about off topic posts and bickering however. I don't see the number of users as being a problem as much as the rambling and useless posts that don't contribute to the topic.

All of these are just growing pains that will be dealt with. I do appreciate the comments and suggestions though so don't be afraid to share your views.

[Icer]

"And if you think that nobody posted gibberish, then you obviously weren't on last night."

you make it seem like an organised attempt to utterly destroy the site
it was not

"Please explain how deciding what you are going to do with your own property is naziismWe are constantly called nazis and fascists but nobody can explain why. We fought against the damn nazis, the very country and system that you hate. Nazis would never let anyone of the opposing view speak at all. If it was decided that you wouldn't be allowed to speak you would be gone already.
"

censorship is fascism. Believing you are better than others (which impression republicans/conservatives etc sometimes tend to give).

The very country and system only went to war with germany after pearl harbor and after hitler declared war on the US, and after the that same country used nazi scientists for their own benefit.

In the US, one can say what one wants, except when that person is actually a threat, in which case he/she gets eliminated (malcolm X, MLK, countless balck panthers, members of the Communist Party). This is no different under the democratic party I admit, but i do not support that party either. Kerry is just as much a fascist as bush You've got to be the most brainwashed person I don't know. And thank God I don't.

[HealthyCommie]

He is not.

[Republican_Anthem]

So we shouldn't censor porn on these boards? :icon_ques

Just kidding... :biggrin:

[IHL]

"We" will censor what ever "we" want. It's not censorship either. We've had this discussion before so you can complain until you are blue in the face, I don't care.

So when the liberal morons attacked this site and posted 45 messages in a row that said nothing more than "I am Gay" - I should have just left them on my site because that was their right? Go ahead, someone tell me it was their right to disrupt my web site. Oh, go ahead. Not even the most liberal among you will take that stance.

[Icer]

Nazis call themselves socialists alot, I am not apart of that grouping, and you my freind are a conservative, not a socialist. Unless the nazi kind.
Nazis had more in common with socialists than with fascists.

[NightOne]

"We" will censor what ever "we" want. It's not censorship either. We've had this discussion before so you can complain until you are blue in the face, I don't care.

So when the liberal morons attacked this site and posted 45 messages in a row that said nothing more than "I am Gay" - I should have just left them on my site because that was their right? Go ahead, someone tell me it was their right to disrupt my web site. Oh, go ahead. Not even the most liberal among you will take that stance.


You are indeed right that these forums are a privately owned venture paid for by the owners.

I too agree that you should delete messages that are nohing more than SPAM and posted multiple times by someone whose only purpose is to disrupt.

However, I think for the forum to establish/maintain integrity to the audience, it needs to allow free debate as long as it is carried out in a non-disruptive manner. (i.e. don't delete it just because you don't like what it says)

Of course, you're fell free to do what you want. :biggrin:

[HealthyCommie]

"We" will censor what ever "we" want. It's not censorship either. We've had this discussion before so you can complain until you are blue in the face, I don't care.

So when the liberal morons attacked this site and posted 45 messages in a row that said nothing more than "I am Gay" - I should have just left them on my site because that was their right? Go ahead, someone tell me it was their right to disrupt my web site. Oh, go ahead. Not even the most liberal among you will take that stance.

Those were not liberals, they were kids.

[jackalope_herder]

http://www.chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm

lower numbers are better right? arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr


**whisper**i hope those damn liberals dont relize that we fixed the election yet mwwahahahaha


search google for "misrable failure"

Its sad
some stupid liberals did that
omg i hate those liberals, caring about people and stuff


money is obvioulsy more important than people!!


As much as I hate to say it, maybe closing off membership for a little while isn't such a bad idea.

[thumbelina]

His link is false (http://www.ihateliberals.com/vbforum/showpost.php?p=9220&postcount=29), jackalope_herder and the other posts have not added to the forum. I'll be surprised if he/she is around much longer if the posts continue to be the same.

[CognitiveTruth]

Closing membership of the site is an interesting idea. I'm not sure about that one though since new members are required to keep the site fresh and introduce new ideas.When I made that suggestion, I was thinking of all the people in the member's list who have zero posts. Surely that takes up a lot of space and I was just saying that removing their account might help a little bit.

[Slider]

However, I think for the forum to establish/maintain integrity to the audience, it needs to allow free debate as long as it is carried out in a non-disruptive manner. (i.e. don't delete it just because you don't like what it says)



Ummm, haven't all those points been made clear? What is the point to that arguement? I see posts that maintain integrity to this sight in a non-disruptive manor. Can you not form a better arguement than implying that posts are deleated because IHL does not like their opinion. Seriously, did I miss something in your post because i dont see the point?