Trying to get a mod to delete those posts in the impeachment thread wasn't cool - I don't think suchmoon or nutil were out of line at all considering the general tone of the thread. How often do you report posts like that? You gotta admit, it's kind of funny going back and reading this post and the following like 10 or so responses knowing that you were actually pissed off enough to try and get a mod to delete suchmoons and nutils posts. Hey look some one else who really doesn't like my political views that doesn't know how to separate their emotions from facts. I report off topic posts. I don't report posts just because they disagree with me or whatever you are trying to insinuate. Posting literally nothing but personal attacks is not on topic regardless of what you think the "tone" was, and posts like this going in the other direction are regularly and promptly removed. The entire forum isn't against me, just a small group of very vocal people such as yourself who make a habit of obsessively following me around and commenting on everything I do and say.
You do realize that you're posting in a thread started by nutildah, and complaining about your unhappy participation in another thread created by nutildah? Of course you don't. In your delusional narcissistic universe evil stalker nutildah is creating these threads to trap you and that uncontrollable urge to fight him is also totally nutildah's fault. Who said I was unhappy to participate in any of this? Trap me in what exactly? I am sure you all stand around and stroke each other off over how much you "got me" with these kind of behaviors, but I can assure you I am getting what I want out of this interaction even if you are incapable of realizing how or why. Regale me some more with your tales of pwnage, just don't forget to spit first, you don't want to get rashes from jerking each other off too vigorously. |
|
|
|
What you are doing is simply creating a false equivalency. We aren't talking about immigration, healthcare, or taxes, we are talking about negating the vote of the people completely outside of the law and due process.
I'm just sharing my thoughts. I'm not trying to change your mind or attack you. My point is just that I think at the moment, a lot of Americans feel like they have root for either the Dems or the GOP like it's a Football game. They picked their team in 2016 based on each parties policies and now all that matters is a win at the end of the day (term). Only problem is that the 'official rule book' that everyone swears to defend was written 100 years before electricity was even invented. We've got a bunch of rules that are vague and barely ever used or updated. It's really easy to interpert the rules to benefit the team that you've already decided to be loyal no matter what. I just think that's a super dangerous path. Your little anecdote about debate is nice, but it doesn't excuse ignoring the rule of law, due process, or precedent. You aren't even making an argument for why it is just fine for the Democrats in the house to ignore the rule of law, due process, and precedent.
I don't think it's ok for anyone to ignore the rule of law. Due process is also vital to any civilized society. But politics and the criminal justice system don't go hand in hand like you seem to think. A powerful elected official does not, and should not have the same rights that an American individual does when it comes to being investigated for corruption. For example: Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, in our Criminal Justice system, is based on Blackstone's Ratio (we'd rather let 10 guilty people get away with a crime than jail one innocent person). In reality it's probably much closer to 100 - 1 today in America, especially when it comes to people who can afford to hire the best lawyers. If we make it as easy to get away with corrupt acts for the leaders of our country as it is for private citizens, we risk the country becoming corrupt. If we impeach and remove a president because it seems pretty damn likely they are corrupt, without reaching the same burden of proof that a criminal prosecutor is required to prove, the result is the VP becomes President (same political party), the Cabinet and Congress stays the same, and if the country thinks Congress didn't represent them accurately by removing the president, they get voted out when their term is up. This is a concept I think the founders made clear. The office of the president and the person who holds the office of the president or two separate things with separate rights. That's why they went out of their way to give Congress the responsibility of oversight and impeachment, but not the power to charge anyone criminally. Also the term limits are great. They obviously didn't want a President to be able to use the office to become a King. As for precedent in Congress. It's fine to break it. As long as you aren't breaking any rules, it's up to the people you represent (and your party/committee leader, or 2/3's of the entire House or Senate I suppose) to decide whether or not your actions are acceptable. I didn't ask you about your thoughts or feelings. I am talking about facts that can be demonstrated in observable reality. Your relativist interpretation of the law by characterizing it as some antiquated and murky ill defined thing exists only in your mind. The law is clear. You pretending it is not is an artifact of your own desire to justify ignoring the law while simultaneously drawing false equivalence by claiming "the other side" does exactly what "your side" does. This isn't an argument, it is a logical fallacy. What you or anyone else "feels" about it is irrelevant. Documented facts are relevant. You claim you support rule of law, but when it serves your preferred narrative suddenly the rule of law becomes really subjective and relative all of a sudden doesn't it? What the Democrats are doing has been a years long pattern of abusing any and all authorities they have to ILLEGALLY overthrow a duly elected president. You can imagine that this is what "the other side" does or would do, but those are assumptions that exist only in your mind with no factual basis in observable reality and in no way justifies it. Their all out effort to retake control of the government is doing tremendous harm to this nation, and the damage they have already done is going to take decades to repair. "A powerful elected official does not, and should not have the same rights that an American individual does when it comes to being investigated for corruption." You are explicitly saying here that elected officials don't get due process, yet you just got done telling me about how its not ok to ignore the rule of law. Yes, even powerful elected officials have a right to due process regardless of any asinine bullshit you imagineer to try to bend over backwards to justify this blatantly illegal coup attempt. Just because you are convinced doesn't negate the requirement for due process, facts, or evidence. That is the whole point of due process, to protect the rights of the individual from angry mobs of retards riled up by bad actors. This whole scam is only happening because Democrats know they don't have a candidate that has a CHANCE IN HELL of beating Trump, so this is their only option to retake power. Meanwhile the simple fact that Trump asks for Biden to merely be investigated, well of course that is impeachable and proof that he is using his position to attack his political opponents! Never mind Biden doesn't have a chance in hell of beating him, and no one pay attention tot he 3 years of endless politically motivated investigations of Trump and anyone who even served him lunch. Sorry, but anyone who buys this narrative at this point is either brain damaged or willfully full of shit and thinks the ends justify the means. Also... you are still strangely silent on the non-subpoena subpoena issue... almost like you don't care about facts and only pushing your preferred narrative. Facts be damned, Trump needs to go, even if it leads to civil war. What is important is the people I agree with are in charge again! Fuck the will of the people, I know whats good for them whether they like it or not! |
|
|
|
Of course they will panic just like if a news should break about holders of bitcoin risked going to jail because of certain law being passed in the country. Panic is sure to set in. While I might not know the details of the provisions of the law, there is no doubt its needed in this era where anyone with access to internet and laptop can declare himself a journalist without apology, send out fake news, have blogs, influence youths because of large followers and if this is not put at bay, it can set the country on fire. There is no need to politicise things by claiming it was done by the democrats. Its an action that needs to be taken to avoid breakdown of law and order. Yeah, you are right. We should start burning books. A free press is dangerous and must be restricted for our own good! |
|
|
|
I did back up my claims, you just imagine I didn't because it serves you. I am not dancing around anything, rules are selectively enforced. You pretend to be confused all you like, what I said makes perfect sense no matter how much you want to pretend it doesn't. Remind me again, speaking of being upset, why is it all of this bothers you so much if it is so completely baseless and based in nonsense? Oh right, that is just you making a pathetic attempt at marginalizing points you can't argue against as usual.
Its hard to argue against points that are based on delusions. I can provide rational counterarguments all day long but you are so caught up in the paranoid delusion that the entire forum is against you there is no way I could get you to actually consider them. You said this: As usual, rules don't count for you, just for when you can use them as a cudgel against others. What rule isn't counting for me, and how do I use it as a cudgel against others? There is no rule against account sales, so you'll have to pursue a different avenue if you want to prove your point. The entire forum isn't against me, just a small group of very vocal people such as yourself who make a habit of obsessively following me around and commenting on everything I do and say. Technically there are no official rules here period, so you could literally make that argument about any "rule" here, because there are no official rules or terms of service posted anywhere on the forum. That is my point. The rules are applied selectively, and some people are held to the letter of the unwritten law, and some people (like you) get endless excuses made for why there should be an exception made for their malfeasance because you polish the balls of anyone with any ability to do anything about it. The entire trust system has turned into one giant protection racket. You sure worked hard to build that reputation in this sea of fraud, it would be a shame of some one were to burn it down using a system that provides you no due process wouldn't it. You'd better agree with us and do what we want you to, or we can't be responsible for what happens to your reputation. You dutifully got down on both knees and proceeded to give those balls presented to you a good lathering, and now you get to enjoy the upside of a duel tiered system. |
|
|
|
So exactly why is it you running a business here and making your trust system choices on your own "selfish reasons" is A-OK, There is no connection between my " trust system choices" and running my business. Provide evidence to the contrary if you want to make that claim. but because a regular contributing member wants to earn a few Satoshis on a signature campaign, that is just despicable? By his own admission he isn't a " regular contributing member" is he? Legitimate users put a lot of time, monetary risk, and effort into building a reputation here. Are we still talking about the OP, or are we talking about your insatiable desire to be on DT1? If that is not treated seriously then all you are going to get is a deluge of bought accounts because anyone who dares to do it right is perpetually incentivized not to. Or they simply just leave because their investment can be burned at the drop of a hat by control freaks like Timelord that more than anything just love to have people begging them to have their property restored, most often as users without the knowledge or community connections to resist in any way. Grasping at straws to make a connection, and sounding like a "broken record" (your words, not mine) while you're at it, but I'll entertain a response none the less. Timelord2067 isn't burning any accounts. He's 9 votes down in the hole from reaching DT2. His reviews aren't ruining anyone's account any more than the reviews left by game-protect. If a campaign manager chose to not allow members into his campaign due to the reviews left by game-protect, who are we to argue? It's his campaign to run anyway he chooses. There's no obligation for any campaign manger to allow anyone into their campaign, no matter how much you may dislike the decision. But, that's not what this is really about, we both know it. So please, next time you want to attack me for my vote to cast you off DT1 just start a fresh topic about that subject. Trying to constantly tie it into other topics is a thinly veiled strategy of yours and we're both likely to have our replies removed. I am only making connections you yourself made with your own words. I have my reasons for valuing Timelords efforts. I run a business here that leaves me very vulnerable to those who abuse alt accounts. So, yeah I find "his efforts are a tremendous contribution." I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings." If you're going to quote me, please be thorough, not selective. Did I selectively edit anything out? It looks to me like you are saying that you value Timelord's ratings because it personally serves you economically regardless of the negative impact his irresponsible shotgun approach has on others. No, not by his admission, by your opinion. He returned to earn in a signature campaign by his own words. Just because you unilaterally declare that as making him worthless doesn't make it so. Not everyone can feed off of the trust system parasitically like you can loan sharking. If he was not contributing to the forum HE WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE HERE. He would be removed from the campaign for shitposting and or banned. Just because you deem his presence as worthless from your pedestal of righteousness and judgement doesn't make it so. You are both here to earn. You are not better than him. I am talking about the OP, and the long standing culture of having no regard for the time, effort, and cost people expend building their reputations and defending them from people such as yourself preaching from a self proclaimed position of superiority justifying the destruction of this community for self serving purposes. There is a whole protection racket evolved around this forum's trust system. It would be a shame if something were to happen to your hard earned reputation for not doing what we tell you... This is a pattern that repeats over and over and over again. You think you are better than these people and you have a right to discard their grievances, because it serves you more to do so than to hear them, not because it serves the cohesiveness of the overall community. Timelord is burning people's reputations, he is directly removing the ability to earn from people based on little to no evidence with frivolous accusations. This thread is direct evidence of the damage he is causing. I am not even criticizing Yahoos choice, I am criticizing Timelords actions, so your argument about him running the campaign anyway he likes is a non-sequitur. It is clear you are well on your way to seeing yourself as a special boy with special privileges and special rules. Just make sure you toe the line, because you know what happens to people who have their own opinions around here don't you? Yeah you do special boy. |
|
|
|
But this isn't going to happen on the federal level in the US mostly because of business and other interests from the people listed below:
Police Unions
Correctional Officer Unions
For Profit Prisons AND REGULAR PRISONS
Big Pharma
Defense Lawyers
and so on.
- big pharma can actually make more money supplying a 'newly available drug but your right about the for profit prisons and defense lawyers. locking up someone for drugs is far cheaper to investigate, arrest and convict than say a murder investigation is Except of course if a drug like marijuana that can be grown easily and freely by everyone suddenly makes the billions of dollars of research expended on creating hundreds of types of different drugs irrelevant because it works much better, more safely, and less expensive than their options... |
|
|
|
He blocked you because you're an asshole, not because he can't tolerate your ideas. If you could perhaps try to make your point without being such a flaming nugget of condescension and assholery, perhaps your ideas would be better entertained by others. Has that ever once occurred to you since you've been a member of this forum? I'm willing to tolerate alternate viewpoints just fine, so long as they aren't being given by someone who can't help but work personal insults into every response.
Worst case scenario: California freelancers are limited to 35 submissions per employer per year. That is hardly "the end of freelance journalism" or an "apocalyptic event."
Best case scenario (and most probable): lawmakers work with lobbyists/concerned citizens to make sure the bill has absolutely no negative impact on freelance journalists.
Ah look at that. Someone who understands what exactly is going on here. The intention of the bill wasn't to end freelance journalism, and I highly doubt that is going to be what comes out of it. This is a bill that was forcing companies such as Uber, Lyft, Doordash, etc to pay their 'INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS' as EMPLOYEES. As the employees in their company were getting screwed and making nothing. If this did present a real issue, it would be fixed. But until it is an issue, I highly doubt anything is done -- because no negative action will be taken against journalists. You know what they say about intentions don't you? What they intended is irrelevant. You might intend to stop all pick pocketing by chopping off everyone's hands, that doesn't make it effective or magically make the counterproductive results of such a policy go away. Freelancing is VOLUNTARY. No one is forcing them to take these jobs. As some one majoring in a field related to economics, one would think they would teach you that central top down dictated economies don't work, but I guess not. Your assumptions that if it is a problem it would be fixed, and your proclamations that it won't hurt journalists is nothing more than a blind assumption on your part. All these kind of restrictions do is raise the regulatory bar high enough that smaller companies can't compete, big companies will ALWAYS find a way around it. Anyways I really don't give a fuck if he or anyone else likes me. Being liked is overrated. People who measure their self worth on the approval of others are fucking losers.
Yes I understand. You're not here to be liked. You're here (in a politics section of a social media forum) to tell people what's what because you know what's best for them. Limiting a freelance journalist to 35 submissions a year IS effectively the end of freelance journalism
No, its not. You're making a hyperbolic statement because you so badly want to "get" the dems. That's the only reason you posted this in the first place -- so you could say "See??? Look what the dems are doing! Dems bad!!!" Of course you know better than The American Society of Journalists and Authors, because what would they know about their own field of focus? You are Nutillduuuhhhh after all, and you know more about their jobs than they do.
Hey dildo. I am a freelance journalist. I'm sure The American Society of Journalists and Authors would let me into their club if I paid the fees. Your assumptions that it will all be worked out are meaningless. This is a backdoor restriction on free speech with all the worst elements of a minimum wage and excessive government regulation.
This is just your paranoid, conspiratard mind running amok. Its what happens when you are pathologically unable to consider alternate viewpoints, which is a common side effect of inceldom. Let's see what happens on January 1st. I'm willing to bet it won't be the "end of freelance journalism" (in California or anywhere for that matter). It is not hyperbolic at all. Are you claiming some one can make a career as a freelance journalist only submitting 35 articles annually? No? Then that is effectively the end of freelance journalism in that state. By definition the bill intends to force companies to hire permanent employees, thus its DIRECT INTENT is to restrict freelance journalism to the point that it is effectively not a viable career option. Didn't you just get done preaching about personal attacks... seems like you like to preach a lot but don't follow your own sanctimonious proclamations. Whats new eh? Amazing, you call me a "conspiritard" incel literally for pointing out alternative view points as you directly accuse me of being unable to consider alternative viewpoints in the same breath. You might as well douse yourself in gasoline and light a match and accuse me of being on fire. Clearly free speech is under attack in this country (and others), and your constant screeching refrain of personal attacks and "NO U!!1" arguments doesn't change that. |
|
|
|
TwitchySeal: It's a shame that political discussion is driven by hyper-partisanship.
TECSHARE: HOW DARE YOU BELIEVE THAT DEMOCRATS AREN'T ALWAYS WRONG AND REPUBLICANS AREN'T ALWAYS RIGHT!
It would appear that the Always Trumpers are just positioning themselves to cry foul when impeachment inevitably happens. There is a chance that the dems could still blow the whole thing, but I don't see real evidence being put forward that they are violating any standards or precedents, rather just posturing from the opposition.
If the impeachment doesn't happen, I am willing to concede that it just wasn't meant to be. However, if it does happen, I'm quite certain that TECSHARE will not accept the outcome as legitimate. That's the danger of being hyper-partisanized -- just an utter unwillingness to accept that perhaps that a favored political party could be wrong about something.
At the end of the day, we're all just shooting the shit. None of us really have any idea as to what the outcome will be.
Oh look, more false equivalence and strawmanning. This has been a non-stop effort at fraudulently ousting Trump from day 1, and every failure is some how justified because "oh but Republicans would do it too", not because of facts, but because you declare it so. Simply just point back at your opponent and screech about equivalence. There is a difference between hyper-partisanship and ignoring the rule of law, which is exactly what Democrats have been doing over, and over, and over again. You aren't providing any evidence of wrongdoing, you are just claiming it and declaring equivalence. I am providing actual evidence as well as a long history of failed fraudulent efforts. Still not seeing anyone addressing the non-subpoena subpoenas. Hey, after all... "TwitchySeal: It's a shame that political discussion is driven by hyper-partisanship. TECSHARE: HOW DARE YOU BELIEVE THAT DEMOCRATS AREN'T ALWAYS WRONG AND REPUBLICANS AREN'T ALWAYS RIGHT!"  Just accuse your opponent of exactly what you do, and vomit up tales of equivalence over and over again. No need for fact based discussion or debate. |
|
|
|
While I am sure you would love it if we could just talk about you for hours, that is off topic. All some one has to do is look at your post history for plenty of examples. Plenty of people totally lose their reputations for doing exactly what you did and condemned others for, but you get the special rules because you fondle all the right balls. Nothing is ever a rule here, that is part of the problem. It is only a rule when people want it to be a rule, and when they don't want it to be a rule there is always some excuse why it doesn't apply to their buddy or some one who agrees with you. Again, this kind of system is what breeds chaos, conflict, and lack of respect for authority.
Okay, so I just as I suspected. You actually have nothing to back up your claims. How can I be the recipient of special rules if, as you just mentioned, the rules don't exist? Stop being cryptic and dancing around the issue. If you had something specific in mind, then say it. If the rules don't exist, what are you making such a big deal out of? You're not really saying anything anymore. Its clear that you're pretty upset over not having non-rules enforced to your liking. Other than that, I have no idea what you're getting at. I did back up my claims, you just imagine I didn't because it serves you. I am not dancing around anything, rules are selectively enforced. You pretend to be confused all you like, what I said makes perfect sense no matter how much you want to pretend it doesn't. Remind me again, speaking of being upset, why is it all of this bothers you so much if it is so completely baseless and based in nonsense? Oh right, that is just you making a pathetic attempt at marginalizing points you can't argue against as usual. |
|
|
|
The point is not that. The point is why would I get kicked out of a campaign where I was following every rule? I did come out of the wood but I did not spam. I even earn merit from suchmoon when I come back. So why should everyone else get a chance to earn from that campaign and I kicked out because of one bully?
I dont expect the community to stick out their neck for me. Not many people know me here. But I hope at least the man that is managing a large campaign like this, would be fair. Am I wrong to assume that?
My first post in this thread is expressing my opinion that he's wrong in this case, and I don't feel like expressing my honest opinion is "sticking my neck out." It's just my opinion, like Timelord's review is his own. But I think you're missing the point of the forum. By your own admission you only came here to earn a few sats, rather than to be a participant in the community and discussion of bitcoin. It's my opinion that alone makes you a spammer, regardless how many merit you earn and from whom. I thought the philosophies of a libertarian forum like this would be more in line with famous jurist William Blackstone's ratio:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." I like that, and although I don't describe myself as a libertarian I tend to agree with the sentiment. But the trust system isn't a court of law. No one is going to jail because Timelord leaves a negative review on his trust wall. We are all adults, and we are all entitled to take every review any way we choose. I have my reasons for valuing Timelords efforts. I run a business here that leaves me very vulnerable to those who abuse alt accounts. So, yeah I find "his efforts are a tremendous contribution." I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings." If you're going to quote me, please be thorough, not selective. So exactly why is it you running a business here and making your trust system choices on your own "selfish reasons" is A-OK, but because a regular contributing member wants to earn a few Satoshis on a signature campaign, that is just despicable? Fuck everyone else, you got yours right? Legitimate users put a lot of time, monetary risk, and effort into building a reputation here. If that is not treated seriously then all you are going to get is a deluge of bought accounts because anyone who dares to do it right is perpetually incentivized not to. Or they simply just leave because their investment can be burned at the drop of a hat by control freaks like Timelord that more than anything just love to have people begging them to have their property restored, most often as users without the knowledge or community connections to resist in any way. |
|
|
|
Pretty lame. All that digging and that's the best example you could find?
What you are referencing from 5 years ago has never even been a rule... It has nothing to do with "rules," only the lack thereof. After hilariousandco explained to me its not against the rules to sell accounts, I stopped giving a shit about it. And that was over 5 years ago!
Care to try again? Find an actual example of me using the rules against others while insisting they not be applied to myself.
You've been here for longer than most yet your understanding of how the forum functions remains pretty pitiful.
Edit: After scouring my post history for hours, TS is most likely now firing off long-winded PMs to theymos, cobra, satoshi, Gavin Andresen, Donald Trump, the U.N., Chuck Norris and Roger Goodell in hopes that somebody will take very seriously this egregious injustice that has been committed and bring a restorative balance of order and fairness to the universe.
While I am sure you would love it if we could just talk about you for hours, that is off topic. All some one has to do is look at your post history for plenty of examples. Plenty of people totally lose their reputations for doing exactly what you did and condemned others for, but you get the special rules because you fondle all the right balls. Nothing is ever a rule here, that is part of the problem. It is only a rule when people want it to be a rule, and when they don't want it to be a rule there is always some excuse why it doesn't apply to their buddy or some one who agrees with you. Again, this kind of system is what breeds chaos, conflict, and lack of respect for authority. |
|
|
|
We have already established you don't care about due process, the rule of law, or precedent. You can call being able to present a defense "muddying the waters" all you want, that doesn't wave a magic wand over totalitarianism and make it right. Rather convenient you can just unilaterally declare a defense not necessary, because after all nothing should get in the way of this extrajudicial railroading right? Your proclamation that if the roles were reverse they would act the same is nothing but you justifying democrat totalitarianism with assumptions based on absolutely noting. The House has oversight authority, not just one half of The House. Nothing about this process is within the law. So again, those non-subpoena subpoenas? Still pretty quiet... No matter, just keep shifting to new accusations as you fail to justify the last, people have short memories and you can perpetually justify this insanity by simply sliding the topic.
I'm simply pointing out the massive amount of hypocrisy that goes on in US politics from both sides. I think that most peoples views on this whole impeachment thing is mainly driven by a drive for whatever side they agree more with policy wise to win. That's fucked up. Your views on immigration or healthcare or taxes shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not it's ok to blatantly lie to the country. Yet whenever a politician lies, only the opposition calls them out. And I'm not just talking about Trump. This is just a general example. It's become perfectly normal to respond to someone you disagree with by insulting them and trying to make them look or feel stupid which just creates a vicious cycle of non-productive 'debate'. (if you can even call it that). Without productive debate, we aren't really a democracy. The best ideas won't be considered. We'll just use the ideas of whoever is best at making the other politicians look the most stupid. What you are doing is simply creating a false equivalency. We aren't talking about immigration, healthcare, or taxes, we are talking about negating the vote of the people completely outside of the law and due process. It has been failed attempt after failed attempt at this since election day, and people like you just keep on making excuses for why it is ok and we should just ignore all the previous failed illegal attempts to overthrow the president and negate literally anything and everything he does at all costs. But we are talking about Trump, not general examples no matter how much you want to topic slide. Your little anecdote about debate is nice, but it doesn't excuse ignoring the rule of law, due process, or precedent. You aren't even making an argument for why it is just fine for the Democrats in the house to ignore the rule of law, due process, and precedent, you are just listing a bunch of non-sequitur excuses with some fallacious "fog of war" type argument. I also noticed you still refuse to comment on the non-subpoena subpoenas they issued. No matter, excuses make the need for due process go away, because it is all the same to you anyway, because if you can't have your people be in control, fuck the whole system right? Burn it all down! Sounds like rule of law to me. Just point at the other side and screech... and poof, magically all arguments are equal, therefore everything is excused under the rubric of false equivalence. Facts are for chumps, and emotion is equal to logic am I right? |
|
|
|
Seeing as how the entire topic was a joke to begin with, perhaps you should ease up and try not caring as much about who posts what in there. There's so much idiotic banter being bandied about in that section, to single out posts that paint you in an unfavorable light for censorship is a pretty cowardly maneuver.
Whatever point it is you think you are proving... you aren't. Now man up. Stop crying and move on with your day. You very clearly took the topic seriously previously, Here's part of my opening post, just to get a glimpse of how "serious" I was being. Everyone gets two votes, as it may very well be a combination of factors. For example, I think that George Soros teamed up with the Lizard People to punish Trump for not bending to their One Government / New World Order agenda. I added "Donald Trump" as a joke option at the end, because as we all know, he's probably the most perfect president America has ever had. And definitely the best.
I understand part of your mental condition is your inability to grasp sarcasm. Sorry for not adding a "/s" at the end of my post. As usual, rules don't count for you, just for when you can use them as a cudgel against others.
 Care to elaborate? Regardless of how much you want to pretend the whole thread was a joke, your personally directed circle jerk is still not on topic. Also if you are saying it was all a joke, it belongs in Off Topic, not Politics and Society. Either way you are off topic. Sure I can elaborate with an example. http://web.archive.org/web/20190704162438/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.0
Fixed. I've still yet to see any proof of accounts being sold to be used for 'mass propganda'.
Who cares what the person is gonna do with the account? Whatever it is, it is BULLSHIT because they are pretending to be a different person. This makes them a liar, an impostor, a bullshitter. And here you are a staff member defending this behavior. You guys are greedy beyond belief. What would Satoshi say if he read about this? I can't help but think he would say you destroyed the original intention of his forum and turned it into a breeding ground for scum and villainy.
I think the main rationale and reasoning for allowing accounts to be sold is because allowing them lets others know that the practice can and does go on and banning them may give people a false sense of security, not to mention banning their sale will not stop the behaviour from happening and only push it further underground and into obscurity.
This forum also doesn't moderate or ban scammers, but that doesn't mean we allow or encourage them nor do we profit from it in any way from it.
Still, you are impersonating somebody unless you disclaim that you bought their account, which never happens. So buying accounts is a 100% dishonest manuver. Its never been used for an honest purpose because pretending to be somebody you are not is lying. I dunno, while I appreciate your explanation, it still just seems that you are sticking up for criminals at the end of the day. I really don't understand how you guys can live with yourselves knowing how many crimes are committed here on a daily basis. I certainly hope you don't actually believe you are contributing to some benevolent force in the world because you are not. You're just telling thieves and scammers its OK to be a thief and scammer here. In the end it will decrease your revenue, not mine. Rules are only a tool for you to apply to every one else, not for you to follow. |
|
|
|
You are here now, and still quite silent on the non-subpoena subpoena issue. Not like facts matter, just shift the topic to the next accusation and pretend like this total disregard for the rule of law, due process, and precedent is just always how it has been done. All you have to do is believe and magically it becomes true!
I'm totally fine with not allowing the GOP to have the power to subpoena whoever they want. It would be foolish to give them the power. They'd use it to delay, muddy the waters, and whatever other political moves they come up with. And I wouldn't fault them for doing that. There's also no chance in hell they'd give the democrats the same power if the roles were reversed. Remember, this is not the trial. We're just deciding whether or not there should be a trial. We don't do special prosecutors anymore. The house will lay out the prosecution and then send it to the senate where a few of them will serve as the actual prosecutors, and the president will have every chance to defend himself. We have already established you don't care about due process, the rule of law, or precedent. You can call being able to present a defense "muddying the waters" all you want, that doesn't wave a magic wand over totalitarianism and make it right. Rather convenient you can just unilaterally declare a defense not necessary, because after all nothing should get in the way of this extrajudicial railroading right? Your proclamation that if the roles were reverse they would act the same is nothing but you justifying democrat totalitarianism with assumptions based on absolutely nothing. The House has oversight authority, not just one half of The House. Nothing about this process is within the law. So again, those non-subpoena subpoenas? Still pretty quiet... No matter, just keep shifting to new accusations as you fail to justify the last, people have short memories and you can perpetually justify this insanity by simply sliding the topic. |
|
|
|
The reason it took almost 10 months for them to have these impeachment hearings is because not enough democrats supported it.
I'm one of those people that think Trump has at least 'deserved' to be impeached since not too far into his presidency. Like most people who agreed with me at the time, I believed my reasons were valid. Just because you believe they are not valid, does not mean I don't care whether or not they are valid. It just means have a different opinion on what valid is. Opinions are great. Where are the facts? |
|
|
|
Seeing as how the entire topic was a joke to begin with, perhaps you should ease up and try not caring as much about who posts what in there. There's so much idiotic banter being bandied about in that section, to single out posts that paint you in an unfavorable light for censorship is a pretty cowardly maneuver.
Whatever point it is you think you are proving... you aren't. Now man up. Stop crying and move on with your day. You very clearly took the topic seriously previously, but then when you ran out of arguments want to pretend it is all a joke to justify being totally off topic. As usual, rules don't count for you, just for when you can use them as a cudgel against others. You and your pal beating each other off is not on topic. |
|
|
|
I mean, refusing to even hold a hearing for the guy the president nominated for the Supreme Court isn't just "something" either. Some would argue it would have a greater affect on the Country than any president.
One party does everything they can to make something happen, and the other does everything they can to stop them. Both sides are going to do whatever they can to make the other side look as bad as possible.
If Clinton won and the GOP were trying to impeach her using the same plays that Pelosi is using, would you really be like "wait a minute, that's not fair! The Dems should be able to subpoena whoever they want, even if they don't have control of the House!" Of course not.
It would be foolish to allow the Republicans to subpoena whoever they want. They'd use it to keep the Dems from controlling the pace of the hearings, which is a huge advantage for them.
You aren't really surprised the Democrats are keeping them on such a short leash, are you?
Had a big project to finish past couple weeks, that's why I haven't been active.
Kavanaugh was already vetted. Second of all I am amazed you think bringing that up is supporting your argument when the whole thing ended up having ZERO substantiation behind it whatsoever. You keep pretending like the democrats subverting the law and due process is just how its done and is a virtue. All they are doing is splitting the nation in half with their lawless efforts to subvert the vote of the people to try to take back power at any cost. When Clinton was impeached he was allowed to defend himself including being able to call his own witnesses, make his own subpoenas, and introduce their own evidence. This isn't due process, this is a fraud, and the fact that you try to justify it shows me you would rather this country be ruled by lawless totalitarianism than by rule of law. Who ever heard of the accused being able to introduce evidence to defend themselves right? What is justice is the accusers totally defining everything and anything introduced. Now THAT is due process! Who gives a fuck if it leads to civil war right? What counts is Trump is removed. Fuck the will of the people, you need to win at all costs. You are here now, and still quite silent on the non-subpoena subpoena issue. Not like facts matter, just shift the topic to the next accusation and pretend like this total disregard for the rule of law, due process, and precedent is just always how it has been done. All you have to do is believe and magically it becomes true! |
|
|
|
You know how the Democrats bitch and whine when the Rupublicans do something with a Majority without giving a shit about what the Democrats think? (Merrick Garland for example.)
That's what you guys sound like right now.
Don't worry, you'll get to hear them bitching again as soon as the impeachment ball is in the Senates court. This isn't just "something", this is an attempt to unseat a sitting duly elected president. I believe you understand the gravity of this and are simply being disingenuous at this point. Speaking of being disingenuous... you seem oddly silent on the issue of the non-subpoena subpoena issue you insisted was legitimate so vociferously earlier. Funny how quickly such things become a non-topic for people trying so hard to topic slide when they run out of arguments. |
|
|
|
Well now that's a crock of shit. Your side can call witnesses in its defense, but they must be approved by your adversary. Stalinist methods. It matters not how much they undermine the rule of law and due process, control must be taken at all costs. |
|
|
|
Any special issue or First Day releases?
I can't say for sure because I am not an expert in this area, but I do believe there are quite a few special issue types. As far as first day, I don't think so but I haven't done tons of research on them either. They are clearly part of a collection, but none of them seem exceptionally rare but more what you would see in a mid grade collection spanning those years. Based on my estimation I would say they would have the most value being resold individually. Some types have quite a few repeats. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
