The one that started:

"There's a lot of talks around and about as usual about things."?

If so, I would be of the opinion it should stay where it is. And I'm going to ask you again to put more effort in your OPs and stop posting so many OPs. It doesn't do you or us any good. You're capable of better and we need to maintain standards. Thanks.

The problem is not only your low quality posts, but your endless stream of new discussions. I'd like you to participate in discussions started by others instead of posting new ones every day. I've been deleting your discussions and will delete more of them as they appear.

Ok, got the message.

Thanks.

The one that started:

"There's a lot of talks around and about as usual about things."? — Baden

No, that thread was an issue regarding playing devil's advocate and attitude formation, which ultimately culminated in a version of developing an online 'reputation'. A guess it was a quixotic attempt at pointing out when it's OK (on an online forum such as this one) to play devil's advocate and when it isn't. A pertinent issue in my mind if you think about it, and don't think that I don't think about what you we're thinking about what I was thinking about.

The "Psychobabble" one was already in the lounge area, which kind of makes it redundant to delete already; but, I digress.

The "Psychobabble" one was already in the lounge area, which kind of makes it redundant to delete already — Wallows

The Lounge shouldn't just be the Wallows dump.

Can, I post a pic of your implicit threat made via PM to me?

Can, I post a pic of you're implicit threat made via PM to me? — Wallows

Sure, or I can post what I wrote myself.

Fine, your call.

Is there something there that you'd like to see addressed in some way? What is the threat you're referring to?

Is there something there that you'd like to see addressed in some way? What is the threat you're referring to? — jamalrob

I'm not going to become emotional here; but, isn't this quote in your sig:

To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker.
—Frederick Douglass

Even if it is an "implicit threat", what's the problem? I reckon it would be something like the following:

"Stop posting new discussions yourself (because it is causing a problem, and if the problem continues, then we will take action to resolve it)".

You are free to say whatever you like, but here, we make editorial decisions to maintain quality. It has nothing to do with free speech, any more than when I delete posts about embroidery.

Ok, I'm going to cool off here and not get riled up jamalrob over you personalizing the issue along with Baden about my post quality.

My point is that you want me to self-censor, and I ask why again?

I have told you why. Your discussions in themselves are mostly not very good, but the fact that they are so numerous--I'm guessing you post two or three new discussions almost every day--makes it a more serious problem. In my opinion, your posting behaviour dominates the forum to its detriment.

You're taking it personally, but we're doing what we always do which is trying to maintain quality. Tbh you could have gotten yourself banned for all the literal gibberish you were posting last week if some of us hadn't been sympathetic to you personally. So, that cuts both ways.

And, now I appeal to others to my defence or guilt of meeting with unspecified standards, which I hope on polishing up on as a fictitious homework assignment for me for Easter.

Anyway, my advice, take a moment, think about it. It might not seem such a big deal then.

You're taking it personally, but we're doing what we always do which is trying to maintain quality. Tbh you could have gotten yourself banned for all the literal gibberish you were posting last week if some of us hasn't been sympathetic to you personally. So, that cuts both ways. — Baden

I have never been ungrateful and have always praised this place on the internet. But, if I can't post topics anymore according to what jamalrob has said, then I think I'd better so-to-speak;

1. Get emotional and decry heresy against my ego.
2. Work on a solution to the problem (jamalrob's one wasn't quite as helpful as the requests I have made about quality standards in the Shoutbox, which you actually provided and I've been quietly working on)
3. Just leave?

Or, you know, just create less discussions. Or better ones. (I guess that falls under number two).

Or, you know, just create less discussions. Or better ones. — S

Yeah; but, there's no solution if I can't make any more at all, can I? So, I guess it is what it is?

Yeah; but, there's no solution if I can't make any more at all, can I? So, I guess it is what it is? — Wallows

I don't get the need or desire to do so with such frequency. If I had the ability to create discussions revoked, it wouldn't bother me that much, in practice. There's already a million interesting enough topics to comment on.

Well, I don't post discussions by choice, so I suppose it's harder for me to relate to why it's so important. But maybe negotiate with jamalrob about it over time.

And what @S said.

I don't get the need or desire to do so with such frequency. If I had that ability revoked, it wouldn't bother me that much in practice. There's already a million interesting enough topics to comment on. — S

I don't need a mediator, man. What I want is a jury. So, I'll sleep over this thread and see if anything magical happens.

You could try grouping you ideas together into larger, less frequent, posts?

I don't need a mediator, man. What I want is a jury. So, I'll sleep over this thread and see if anything magical happens. — Wallows

Interesting term to use. I'm not trying to be a mediator, I'm just speaking my mind, and it just happens to come across that way. Sometimes I speak my mind and it comes across as fiercely critical. You probably wouldn't think of me as a mediator in that situation.

What I want is a jury. — Wallows

Guilty.

Guilty. — unenlightened

They're all guilty, even the innocent ones.

Guilty. — unenlightened

Really? Then on your authority (you were even the person who dubbed my nick I borrowed from the old PF), I won't post anymore.

Really? Then on your authority (you we're even the nick I borrowed from the old PF), I won't post anymore. — Wallows

Or less?

Anyway, I thought you were going to sleep over it. You were supposed to wake up to the magic, like an excited child on Christmas morning. You've peeked!

On my superior authority, I demand that you reconsider.