Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0

Let it go, referees make the best decisions they can at the time they make them and they're human - some more than most.We need them and Phat's heart is in the right place. Give him a break.

this guy's a spammerEvC Forum: lingua Topic Index{Taken care of. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : {Taken care of. - Adminnemooseus}

fishmicon is a spammer

They're back!Service Temporarily UnavailableThe server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.Apache Server at EvC Forum: Home Page Port 80

By a moderator, yes, by someone who wishes to close down an inconvenient contrary argument no. I'm not discussing the third world. I'm pointing out to you the obvious fact that you can't make radical changes to the economies of the first world without affecting the economies of the third. If you're intent on making an argument about marginal utility, you can't do it by excluding the majority of the people on the planet.And shame on you for running crying to mummy.

Not necessary, I made a mistake by assuming that the thread was about economics. There's therefore little more to be said about Jon's fantasies if he won't discuss their economic implications except that's interesting, dear."

They got shot, one by one, by the sharp arrows of reason. The ones that limped away hurt now stay on their reserves talking to themselves.

I did suck air in between my teeth when I read the word 'month'. If I was a defence lawyer, I'd be appealing the sentence. She's got plenty of previous tho' so I'd be at 3 days.
And a tag. And ordered to serve lunch to Muslim at a refugee centre. And say two Hail Maries and an Our Farther. In a Catholic church.I also agree that you should have spent more time in the sin bin too.

Nah, but I think you admit to getting away with rather too much. Mostly, I suspect, because it's amusing. Which I like, if you're going to insult, at least do it with style. Well no. Personally I'd go for all forums being a near free for all. I'm not too keen about the idea of a judge in session with no published punishment tariffs. But I also recognise the need to moderate and I do accept that this is just a forum where we go to play. So it doesn't matter much. But 30 days is too much.

I've been wondering about this for a while; is he lying or is he just deluded?I've decided he's both. He's also quite probably stark, staring bonkers. And it's this last that's the major issue.I also wonder why we do this, it's a bit like taunting the local village idiot. It doesn't feel right. It also can't work, these poor sods are only reinforced in their delusion by our efforts. They don't have the capacity for independent thought.I'm considering my motives.

Davidjay is now off his meds.Can I suggest that he's not allowed to start any new threads until he's proved he can sustain an argument in the ones he has open already? He's currently spraying random posts eveywhere with no consistency, argument or method other than to assert nonsense and preach.If it was possible to stop him posting anywhere except his 'Selection' thread so that he's forced to address all the posts that he's deliberately avoiding it would be great.Otherwise he's heading for a ban - it's not funny now.

Can't your finger slip? We would tell on you. Promise.

I'm not engaging with Davidjay anymore, he's just a nut case but it really is time he was reined in. He's totally impervious to anything said to him. This

quote:

---

So according to your wild unproven theory, bats are our common ancestor or are chimps also in there, or did they mate together upside down and produce right side up humans.

---

Is just deliberate, trolling stupidity.

Is nobody promoting new threads any more? Is there nobody home?

He's not debating is he? He just wants to post his stuff. He's here to lecture not discuss.