|
Post by Faran on May 16, 2016 18:40:40 GMT -6
Given the recent suppressing of Connors spam, Do you believe spam should be allowed?
This is just a fun debate I would like to bring up.
|
|
|
Post by Faran on May 16, 2016 18:51:45 GMT -6
I say if it ain't hurting anybody then go right ahead, but if it is really annoying and they are say "Oh shit bio waddup!" every time someone posts something then no that's not right.
|
|
|
Post by Freedom on May 16, 2016 18:58:39 GMT -6
I say if it ain't hurting anybody then go right ahead, but if it is really annoying and they are say "Oh shit bio waddup!" every time someone posts something then no that's not right. I was just about to say the same thing. I completely agree. I think it should be illegal to suppress posts unless the post is repeated by the same person many times after they have been warned.
|
|
|
Post by David G. on May 17, 2016 8:11:02 GMT -6
I say if it ain't hurting anybody then go right ahead, but if it is really annoying and they are say "Oh shit bio waddup!" every time someone posts something then no that's not right. I was just about to say the same thing. I completely agree. I think it should be illegal to suppress posts unless the post is repeated by the same person many times after they have been warned. I made a mistake, but you guys were just wasting space on the board, where meaningful posts could have been made in the midst.
|
|
|
Post by David G. on May 17, 2016 8:13:48 GMT -6
Also, by the logic given by Conner above, every time one suppresses a post, even by accident, it is a violation of freedom of speech. Sam, you have done it, and I'm sure others have too.
|
|
|
Post by Faran on May 17, 2016 8:14:47 GMT -6
I was just about to say the same thing. I completely agree. I think it should be illegal to suppress posts unless the post is repeated by the same person many times after they have been warned. I made a mistake, but you guys were just wasting space on the board, where meaningful posts could have been made in the midst. David again, this is for fun. You do not need to state your opinion, I'm not making you
|
|
|
Post by Faran on May 17, 2016 8:15:32 GMT -6
Also, by the logic given by Conner above, every time one suppresses a post, even by accident, it is a violation of freedom of speech. Sam, you have done it, and I'm sure others have too. David you did it on purpose. That is completely different.
|
|
|
Post by David G. on May 17, 2016 8:18:01 GMT -6
Also, by the logic given by Conner above, every time one suppresses a post, even by accident, it is a violation of freedom of speech. Sam, you have done it, and I'm sure others have too. David you did it on purpose. That is completely different. Not really. If I kill somebody by accident, it can still be considered murder. Same logic here. If one suppresses a post by accident,it is still a violation of the freedom of speech.
|
|
|
Post by Faran on May 17, 2016 8:38:52 GMT -6
David you did it on purpose. That is completely different. Not really. If I kill somebody by accident, it can still be considered murder. Same logic here. If one suppresses a post by accident,it is still a violation of the freedom of speech. But if you kill somebody on accident it would be completely different then doing it on purpose. And David, that is completely different. A better example would be breaking a vase on accident vs. breaking it on purpose. If you break it on accident you could pay for a new one or unsupress the message.
|
|
|
Post by David G. on May 17, 2016 8:42:58 GMT -6
Not really. If I kill somebody by accident, it can still be considered murder. Same logic here. If one suppresses a post by accident,it is still a violation of the freedom of speech. But if you kill somebody on accident it would be completely different then doing it on purpose. And David, that is completely different. A better example would be breaking a vase on accident vs. breaking it on purpose. If you break it on accident you could pay for a new one or unsupress the message. If one broke somebody else's vase, they would ask said person to pay for a new one. Nobody asked me to unsupress the posts,and the topic wasn't even brought up until after Connor swooped in and unsupressed the posts.
|
|
|
Post by Faran on May 17, 2016 8:44:27 GMT -6
But if you kill somebody on accident it would be completely different then doing it on purpose. And David, that is completely different. A better example would be breaking a vase on accident vs. breaking it on purpose. If you break it on accident you could pay for a new one or unsupress the message. If one broke somebody else's vase, they would ask said person to pay for a new one. Nobody asked me to unsupress the posts,and the topic wasn't even brought up until after Connor swooped in and unsupressed the posts. Exactly my point. You did it on purpose therefore you wouldn't unsupress it
|
|
|
Post by David G. on May 17, 2016 8:45:59 GMT -6
If one broke somebody else's vase, they would ask said person to pay for a new one. Nobody asked me to unsupress the posts,and the topic wasn't even brought up until after Connor swooped in and unsupressed the posts. Exactly my point. You did it on purpose therefore you wouldn't unsupress it No. I would have unsupressed it, but nobody brought up the issue until after Connor unsupressed them already.
|
|
|
Post by Faran on May 17, 2016 8:49:20 GMT -6
Exactly my point. You did it on purpose therefore you wouldn't unsupress it No. I would have unsupressed it, but nobody brought up the issue until after Connor unsupressed them already. But how do we know that? You could have just said that earlier.
|
|
|
Post by David G. on May 17, 2016 8:50:32 GMT -6
I did not see this post. After making this post, Connor unsupressed them. I did not comment for at least four hours after that post was made.
|
|
|
Post by Le Libertia on May 17, 2016 10:37:15 GMT -6
This should be moved to proposals, not here. And even though I hate spam (it's very misleading on the activity of the regional message board), I think that the entire region should vote on this issue.
|
|