Should constant flaming result in a temporary ban?

For a day.
11% (5 votes)
For a week.
56% (25 votes)
Nah, Revol can do what the fuck he likes, the little blighter.
33% (15 votes)
Total votes: 45

Posted By

Jason Cortez
Nov 23 2005 00:13

Tags

Share

Attached files

Comments

Jason Cortez
Nov 23 2005 00:13

Why are threads split just so the lovely revol can continue insulting people? Maybe there should be consequences for continual flouting of posting conduct codes? Mr. T

Nick Durie
Nov 23 2005 00:39

There's no option for permanently barred... confused

nosos
Nov 23 2005 02:15

Intermitantly funny and interesting but god damn he contributes to these boards looking as shit as shit as they do to the casual observer. roll eyes

oisleep
Nov 23 2005 06:48

i think he's right on a lot of occassions, it's just a shame that that usually get's lost in a bout of stamping, screeching & jumping up and down like a child and all that comes across is the perception that's he's a total wanker

ironic that the things he has to say should be interesting to most people here, but on the whole all people see is a tedious wee wankstain arguing in the playground, and in terms of attracting more people to these boards from the "libertarian communist" community, it hasn't got a hope in hell

it's a shame, because he's the exception to the rule that empty barrels make the most noise, he's got a lot of interesting things to say and knowledge to back it up, but in the end he thinks that compensates for the way he behaves and the way he treats people with a total disdain

i couldn't really care either way if he stays or go's, both options seem attractive when considering different aspects of him

big al
Nov 23 2005 08:57

I'm fairly new here, and from what I've seen he has alot of interesting stuff to say....but its usually overshadowed by the childish name calling and the fact that it looks like he only posts sometimes to piss people off. And it is a bit off-putting to new people I think.....

He does have a certain charm of his own though tongue

the button
Nov 23 2005 10:30
revol68 wrote:
thank fuck for this poll, I was beginning to feel unappreciated, it's been nearly 5 months since the last one.

Cock you are. roll eyes

tongue

Bodach gun bhrigh
Nov 23 2005 10:54

Sometimes right, sometimes shite, but aren't we all

WeTheYouth
Nov 23 2005 10:59

Why pick on revol, he scares away the primmos. He's like the guard dog of libcom.

oisleep
Nov 23 2005 11:01

Refused
Nov 23 2005 14:18
WeTheYouth wrote:
Why pick on revol, he scares away the primmos. He's like the guard dog of libcom.

And he smells delicious.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Nov 23 2005 14:21
WeTheYouth wrote:
Why pick on revol, he scares away the primmos. He's like the guard dog of libcom.

Like fuck he does roll eyes He doesn't seem to have done a good job of scaring off the substitutionist activists, why's that? tongue

WeTheYouth
Nov 23 2005 16:08
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
WeTheYouth wrote:
Why pick on revol, he scares away the primmos. He's like the guard dog of libcom.

Like fuck he does roll eyes He doesn't seem to have done a good job of scaring off the substitutionist activists, why's that? tongue

Because you have broad shoulders, and if you went it would be like losing a part of the furnishings of libcom.

JoeMaguire
Nov 23 2005 18:14

The fact that this is a libertarian web-forumn and those amoungst many who constantly act in an almost amoral way are laughed at, instead of being challenged is quite fucking sad.....

Lazlo_Woodbine
Nov 23 2005 19:15
WeTheYouth wrote:
Because you have broad shoulders, and if you went it would be like losing a part of the furnishings of libcom.

embarrassed

Steven.
Nov 23 2005 23:08

Loads of people have started saying "amoral" meaning "immoral".

It pisses me off almost as much as people saying "inflammable" meaning "not flammable".

Lazlo_Woodbine
Nov 24 2005 12:08

All real communists should be amoral, surely? confused

wink

nosos
Nov 24 2005 12:46
John. wrote:
Loads of people have started saying "amoral" meaning "immoral".

Surely in an awful lot of cases amoral and immoral are interchangable because the scope of the term is ambigious? Like in OL's case, either amoral or immoral would be fine. In fact as a libertarian, I'd say amoral would make a lot more sense in the context within which he used it then immoral....

Apologies, can't resist pedantically correcting pedantry. black bloc

nosos
Nov 24 2005 12:48

eh? confused

Grace
Nov 24 2005 12:55
nosos wrote:
Surely in an awful lot of cases amoral and immoral are interchangable because the scope of the term is ambigious? Like in OL's case, either amoral or immoral would be fine. In fact as a libertarian, I'd say amoral would make a lot more sense in the context within which he used it then immoral....

Apologies, can't resist pedantically correcting pedantry. black bloc

I've always thought that amoral was where the person just doesn't know anything about morals, what's 'right' and 'wrong' and so on, so can't be expected to act morally, whereas immoral is when you know right from wrong and just choose to do the morally wrong thing. In the case of OL criticising revol I'm not sure what revol's behaviour has to do with morals, he's just a cock wink

nosos
Nov 24 2005 13:03
Jack wrote:
well, being amoral (for a communist) is a good thing. You said he was that, and then argued that you meant it.

No I didn't - read more carefully, sir...

How is it a good thing that communists are amoral?

Grace
Nov 24 2005 13:07
revol68 wrote:
I feel so objectified! cry

actually I'd be happy to be objectified, commodified and fetishised all fucking day long at the moment.

You're an awesome object, if that helps. Teehee.

the button
Nov 24 2005 13:22
Grace wrote:
awesome object

#2 image search result for awesome object on google grin

Lazlo_Woodbine
Nov 24 2005 13:22
nosos wrote:
How is it a good thing that communists are amoral?

Acting out of morality implies obedience to a higher authority, rather than acting out of mutual self-interest.

Grace
Nov 24 2005 13:24
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
nosos wrote:
How is it a good thing that communists are amoral?

Acting out of morality implies obedience to a higher authority, rather than acting out of mutual self-interest.

Depends how you define morality though, surely? I mean I'd say I have a moral code of how I think it's right for me to behave, but I don't take it from any higher authority, more from what I personally perceive to be beneficial for myself and other people.

Grace
Nov 24 2005 13:29
the button wrote:
Grace wrote:
awesome object

#2 image search result for awesome object on google grin

Was the first result a picture of revol?

Caiman del Barrio
Nov 24 2005 13:43
Jack wrote:
Grace wrote:
You're an awesome object, if that helps. Teehee.

Cock!

Grace
Nov 24 2005 13:44
Jack wrote:
Grace wrote:
You're an awesome object, if that helps. Teehee.

Cock!

Absolutely 8)

Grace
Nov 24 2005 13:46

Not small enough for your pockets, haha.

Grace
Nov 24 2005 13:48

Touché. Likewise wink

Grace
Nov 24 2005 13:51

Awesome innit grin