Your post is nonsensical and I find it hard to determine whether you were being serious or not. Nevertheless, I will dissect your post and explain to you the point of my actions for it is important that my logic not be unfathomable to you.
You claim that you're not a racist. First of all, I merely withheld a post of yours which did, indeed, infer racism. This doesn't straightforwardly make you a racist, but at least that specific post was. Calling a person or a group of individuals "things" shows hardly anything but disdain. The word "things" is used to designate objects and animals and in calling black people "things", you're simply placing them on the same level as animals and objects. Human beings are not "things", and anybody who has a bit of wisdom will agree on the opinion that referring to black people as "things" is racist. There's a significant difference from saying "those are black people" and "those things are black people". How would you feel if I called you a "thing" and stated that you are -- just like a car or a computer or a cat -- disposable if necessary? If this part of my logic is still obscure to you, I can post a thread asking the community what they feel in this respect but I guarantee that you'll get the same answer I'm giving you right now.
Then you claim that you are for the people. May you be more accurate? In which way are you for the people? In which way spamming "skank for her" contributes to the community? In which way posting what you posted helped the author of that serious thread? In which way -- most importantly -- does it conform to the rules? To me, you're not for the people, not at all. You think you're doing good by spamming -- yes, let's settle this matter down now. You were spamming, posting the same statement over and over is spam -- but in fact, you're doing more harm than you think. Worse, since you inadvertently inculcate inappropriate behavior on new members. Also should you really be for the people, where is your people now? Only one person has complained about my decision and that was you. All the others who posted on my thread approved of my resolution. So who are the people you are speaking of? A group of two or three people? Since when the community -- when you say that you are for the people, you are citing the entire community -- is restricted to you and two or three people?
Contrary to your belief, I did spend time trying to understand what "skank for her" meant and how it could possibly be related to the topic of the threads. To be truthful, there was no connection with that statement and any of the topics of the threads on which it was posted. I fail to understand how the statement "skank for her" was relevant to the threads in question and -- even more to the point -- how that sentence has universal relevancy, since you posted it on many threads, not just a single one. Therefore I didn't withhold and trash those posts without explanation and I had more reasons than you think to do what I did. For one thing, your posts contravened the site rules. This very fact gives me enough authority to withhold/trash them and, eventually, gag you. For another thing, those posts promote incongruous behavior.
It matters to me in the least whether many of you have a need, apparently, for spamming the forum with the "skank for her" statement -- this site has rules and you are bound to them as long as you post here. Your so called "skanksters" are but a group of individuals whose intent is aberrant. Please comply with rules and stop posting that "skank for her" sentence. You perfectly know that doing otherwise is wrong and that it does nothing but infest our forum with garbage.
-Xero
SUBSCRIBE
You must login or register to access this module!
ID: 142413
