Event What triggers a Mod to delete a thread?

[MarAzul]

he can choose to respond however he wants I suppose.

Yes he can! I'll just take it as his character.

 

[MarAzul]

It's fun watching you trying to portray yourself as a victim.

Funny! I feel like a great victory has been accomplished. Time will enhance the feel.

 

[MarAzul]

lengthy threads about AOC being terrible and something about all the hate filled liberal people

You know, there are only about three conservatives posting in this forum regularly. A couple more jump in from time to time.

 

[BlazerWookee]

$20

 

[barfo]

$20

Depends on the mod. I don't work for less than $1000.

Premium product, limited market.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

I dont know what to tell you, in my opinion CC shouldnt respond like that, but he can choose to respond however he wants I suppose.

Its hard to feel like conservatives on here have it too badly when theres a few pretty lengthy threads about AOC being terrible and something about all the hate filled liberal people or something like that. Mueller is in the thread title of a lot of threads too, did we need new ones?
Not that I think the internets running out of space for new threads anytime soon.

What I find interesting about AOC is that she’s the liberal version of Trump. She hits all he hot button topics that get liberals fired up. She talks A LOT. She hasn’t actually accomplished much, and yet people love her. Exactly like trump. I think it’s interesting that dems haven’t made the connection.

 

[Shaboid]

What I find interesting about AOC is that she’s the liberal version of Trump. She hits all he hot button topics that get liberals fired up. She talks A LOT. She hasn’t actually accomplished much, and yet people love her. Exactly like trump. I think it’s interesting that dems haven’t made the connection.

I just wanna get in her pants...

 

[MarAzul]

I just wanna get in her pants...

 

[barfo]

What I find interesting about AOC is that she’s the liberal version of Trump. She hits all he hot button topics that get liberals fired up. She talks A LOT. She hasn’t actually accomplished much, and yet people love her. Exactly like trump. I think it’s interesting that dems haven’t made the connection.

There's a pretty big difference - she's 29, he's 72. Which one should have accomplished something by now?

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

There's a pretty big difference - she's 29, he's 72. Which one should have accomplished something by now?

barfo

And yet they both have very little experience in public service, no?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

And yet they both have very little experience in public service, no?

At least Trump has Putin to mentor him.

 

[Natebishop3]

At least Trump has Putin to mentor him.

True. That’s a huge advantage. I’m sure Putin clued him in on not allowing his opponents to live longer than necessary.

 

[Minstrel]

And yet they both have very little experience in public service, no?

And if AOC had run for President (or won), that would be a very appropriate comparison. But, at least at the national level of politics, a House representative is the starting point, while President of the United States is more of an end point. If experience is what one is focused on, it seems a lot more important that one have experience when going for and executing the highest office rather than the lowest (again, in the arena of national politics).

You're essentially saying something similar to "This entry level clerk is popular for her ideas, but has no more experience than the CEO! Why isn't she getting as much flak for her lack of experience as the CEO?"

 

[Natebishop3]

And if AOC had run for President (or won), that would be a very appropriate comparison. But, at least at the national level of politics, a House representative is the starting point, while President of the United States is more of an end point. If experience is what one is focused on, it seems a lot more important that one have experience when going for and executing the highest office rather than the lowest (again, in the arena of national politics).

You're essentially saying something similar to "This entry level clerk is popular for her ideas, but has no more experience than the CEO! Why isn't she getting as much flak for her lack of experience as the CEO?"

Actually that’s not what I was saying. I was comparing their tactics for getting attention and pointing out that they’re both windbags. Haven’t accomplished anything.

Barfo was the one who was talking about their age difference in terms of accomplishment and I merely said that they’ve had roughly the same amount of time in public office.

 

[andalusian]

AOC is that she’s the liberal version of Trump

I just wanna get in her pants...

One of these things is not like the other.

 

[Hobbesarable]

For the record I dont know who insulted who, and who started it and all that drama. I dont need to know either.

Buddy, just watch, eat your popcorn, and laugh your ass off. You will not be disappointed.

 

[Minstrel]

Actually that’s not what I was saying. I was comparing their tactics for getting attention and pointing out that they’re both windbags. Haven’t accomplished anything.

That "hasn't accomplished anything" is the point. She's just starting out--it's reasonable that she hasn't accomplished anything yet. Trump is at the "end result" of the political spectrum, as President. It's a lot less reasonable that he "hasn't accomplished anything."

You ask why Democrats "haven't made the connection" between AOC and Trump--it's because their situations aren't very comparable. You perceive them the same because it seems like you consider the fact that they both use the media a lot and haven't achieved much politically to be the most important traits of each. Democrats are unlikely to consider Ocasio-Cortez's lack of accomplishment to be a primary trait because she's just started. She's not supposed to have any achievements yet.

 

[Natebishop3]

That "hasn't accomplished anything" is the point. She's just starting out--it's reasonable that she hasn't accomplished anything yet. Trump is at the "end result" of the political spectrum, as President. It's a lot less reasonable that he "hasn't accomplished anything."

You ask why Democrats "haven't made the connection" between AOC and Trump--it's because their situations aren't very comparable. You perceive them the same because it seems like you consider the fact that they both use the media a lot and haven't achieved much politically to be the most important traits of each. Democrats are unlikely to consider Ocasio-Cortez's lack of accomplishment to be a primary trait because she's just started. She's not supposed to have any achievements yet.

It’s a sliding scale. Can a president accomplish more than a freshman congresswoman? Absolutely. But regardless of size or magnitude of accomplishment, has she accomplished anything tangible? Anything at all?

 

[Minstrel]

It’s a sliding scale. Can a president accomplish more than a freshman congresswoman? Absolutely. But regardless of size or magnitude of accomplishment, has she accomplished anything tangible? Anything at all?

She's two months into her first term. Is that relevant to your criticism?

Also, it's not just "this is Trump's first political experience too." Lacking political experience or accomplishment at the start is common for a freshman Rep--it's not common for a President.

 

[Natebishop3]

She's two months into her first term. Is that relevant to your criticism?

Also, it's not just "this is Trump's first political experience too." Lacking political experience or accomplishment at the start is common for a freshman Rep--it's not common for a President.

It’s relevant in that neither of them have earned the admiration that they have garnered. She hasn’t accomplished anything. Show me, don’t tell me.

 

[Minstrel]

It’s relevant in that neither of them have earned the admiration that they have garnered. She hasn’t accomplished anything. Show me, don’t tell me.

A smart politician does both. She already has more influence than a first term Representative should have, because she's good at the retail side of politics. It's up to her do the "show me" part--the fact that she hasn't within two months isn't an indictment. If she never gets to that stage, then it will be.

 

[Chris Craig]

Ah! Good point.

I did PM the mod that appeared in the duty list to the right. I asked him if he deleted the thread? While actually hoping he would also tell me why. Let it sit there a long time. No response

So I started this thread. (the attack position as you call it! )

Still no response.
Until I come back this evening and see that Craig had answer "No". So I asked, Do you know who did?

Craig answers back, "No and I don't give two fucks about your threads. Ask Sly"

So here we are. I can't even recognize the thought in the new subject I was trying to bring forward in what they call a merge.

I still could care less about your multiple threads about the Mueller investigation. When you PM'd me assuming I had deleted your threads, I was stressed about the Nurkic injury. While I had earlier considered merging your many threads (there was no cause to delete them) after I recieved a complaint about them, I decided against it. I saw no reason to interupt your circle jerk. I saw no harm in your threads. I would not give you the further benefit of dressing such an action as political bias and rendering it as a tool to attack a mod, to attack a liberal. It seems my absence from playing such a role of the culprit didn't stop you.

Logically, I deduced it was probably Sly who had in seeing the same or a similar complaint had decided to merge them.

Since our last discord I have tried my best to agree to disagree with you. I don't appreciate you insulting me. I can assure you my head has been no where near my anal cavity. I do not suffer from made up illnesses. I am sometimes rude. As often are you. It is our inalienable right.

 

[Mediocre Man]

When they look in the mirror and see how small their penis is

 

[MarAzul]

I still could care less about your multiple threads about the Mueller investigation.

>>> Thank you for your indulgence.

When you PM'd me assuming I had deleted your threads

>>> You were the only mod listed as online when I noticed the threads were gone. It seemed logical to ask you first.

I was stressed about the Nurkic injury.

>>>Really too bad about Nurkic. Dammitt! Sorry you were stressed.

I saw no harm in your threads

>>> Cool! Neither do I.

I would not give you the further benefit of dressing such an action as political bias and rendering it as a tool to attack a mod

>>> I had no intention initially of attacking anyone. I simply did not know what had happened to my Thread. I do not know why I would be expected to know.

It seems my absence from playing such a role of the culprit didn't stop you.

>>> Thank you for your patience. I didn't get piss for not knowing what happened for most of a day. I did not create this thread until many hours had passed, nearly a day later than the thread in question, with no answers.

I deduced it was probably Sly

>>> Thanks for sharing.

Since our last discord I have tried my best to agree to disagree with you.

>>>You have done well too. I appreciate it.

I don't appreciate you insulting me.

>>> I did not intend to do so. I did not insult you or I sure don't know where I did.
You point out the insult to me, I will apologize.

I can assure you my head has been no where near my anal cavity

>>> Good to hear. However, I don't think I asked or suggested.