Could have been pride, his wife's boobys are sensational.

I flagged your post because it contains clickbait.

Indeed that was exactly the word that got me here Benkei :D But anyway, why is someone banned for posting his wife's boobies? I mean, sure delete the post and quickly have a talk with the guy, but a ban? Isn't that a bit like... puritan? It is not that this is a forum that caters to 10 year olds....

It is not that this is a forum that caters to 10 year olds.... — Tobias

...are you sure? Certainly seems like it sometimes, seen the Trump thread at all?
Gotta be at least a handful of 10 year olds here.
Anyway, taking bets on the next person banned. My money is on counterpunch. Place by your bets!

I have a theory that @counterpunch is @Chester...

And that @jamalrob is putin.

I'll set my AI on the case.

I recognised him when he said something about people having a few mega tonnes of nuclear weapons aimed down their throats. He said that before. I quite liked him, but I wasn’t exposed to the smut.

Didn't even have time to close this between bannings...

Banned @Brett for using racial slurs against another poster. Considering the rest of the post's content, it looks like another suicide by mod.

I have a theory that counterpunch is @Chester... — The Opposite

They don't read the same to me, Chester was quippy, counterpunch is an essay writer.

Banned Brett for using racial slurs against another poster. Considering the rest of the post's content, it looks like another suicide by mod. — fdrake

Ah. Yeah, I got that impression too. I don't think he meant the racial slur literally, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the convo, just seemed like a "Ban me already". Even without the politics his posts were the worst. 50% seemed to be "What do you mean by 'cat'?" "What do you mean by 'people'?" "What do you mean by 'the'?" Pain in the aeiou.

I don't think he meant the racial slur literally, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the convo, — Kenosha Kid

I don't think the intent should matter when calling another poster a racial slur.

just seemed like a "Ban me already". — Kenosha Kid

It did.

Like the rest of the Trumpers, @Brett ran out of arguments. That was all he had left.

I don't think the intent should matter when calling another poster a racial slur. — fdrake

Oh, I agree, definitely banworthy.

I want to get back to boobs. I think on close examination and scrutiny we may find them subjects of philosophical significance. Maybe even their own forum? The mind boggles - or mine does, anyway.

And what was the reason?

I still think bannings ought to happen when the site guidelines are explicitly breached.

Calling another poster "Jew nigger fucking fag" or something.

See above. Don't have the exact quote. But that's pretty close.

They don't read the same to me, Chester was quippy, counterpunch is an essay writer. — fdrake

So then you are not denying that @jamalrob is putin? I knew it!

Calling another poster "Jew... — Benkei

Probably because I kept singing:

Seditioooooooon, sedition !
Baaaarp de de parp parp barp
SEDITION!

Seditiooooooooooooon etc.

Like the rest of the Trumpers, Brett ran out of arguments. That was all he had left. — Baden

Never read a post from him that wasn't a complaint.

Re: Boobs. I told my friend Paul how I used to be active on this site. He said, "So you discuss that if the Earth was a breast, where its nipple would be?"

Never read a post from him that wasn't a complaint. — Wayfarer

In a way all counter-arguments are complaints. In a way.

In fact, if anyone says anything, they want to make a point; which point is different how they think others see the situation; which is a criticism of the status quo; which means all utterances are complaints.

Thus: "I like ice cream" is a complant against those, who may believe, with or without evidence, that I don't like ice cream.

ETC.

Having just glanced through some of Brett’s discussions I would guess that his issues with the forum stemmed more from his apparent lack of appreciation of science than differences in political ideologies. Just a casual guess but maybe something to keep in mind when dealing with other likeminded folk.

...do we have an attempted insurgency of ex- Parler enthusiasts?

...do we have an attempted insurgency of ex- Parler enthusiasts? — Banno

Twitter also banned 70,000 QAnon accounts. They're full of anger and spite. They say the same ridiculous things over and over.

Nothing unique about that.

My question is, why are so few headed here? This is obviously the best forum for such discussion...

My question is, why are so few headed here? This is obviously the best forum for such discussion... — Banno

This forum isn't conducive to a hive mind like Twitter or Facebook. Here it's possible to pin your interlocutor to a wall in a way that just can't be done elsewhere.

I'm sure there are other reasons.

Ah, but do they realise this?

I'm being facetious, of course; but it is not unreasonable to expect some new members over these interesting times.

Yep.

...do we have an attempted insurgency of ex- Parler enthusiasts? — Banno

That isn't the first time I've seen this suggested (though the other times may have been you as well), but I haven't seen anything to suggest it. Point me at suggestive evidence?

The person indicted may well be he whom your present interlocutor habitual refers to with the perpendicular pronoun. I made the same suggestion elsewhere.

Just rambling. It's probably my inability to intuit large numbers... 70,000 and more folk looking fo a new home; some might be expected to drop past our residence. But while a few score thousands is a lot of folk to me, it's small in the grand scheme of the interweb.