Re: Advertised services and participants in a paid sig campaign
⭐ Merited by 1miau (1)
Not sure why he decided to bring up this old debate from a while back, but its cool we can talk about this stuff again without his censorship.
Yeah, seemed to be quite clear that his self-moderated rules were only in place to get applied completely arbitrarily: This thread is self moderated as it is for opinions on this topic only and I'd like to keep it that way. I don't want to censor people though, so I posts that are not providing an opinion or providing relevant value to the conversation will be removed and quoted in the second post.
(Obviously, I've not provided relevant value 
)Funny how he ends up being the "relevance referee" in open discussions! Maybe he needs a dictionary to define the term "censorship."
But, thats not exactly shocking coming from him.
Well, happy to have a healthy discussion about the issue here, without posts getting deleted arbitrarily. There are so many opportunties where we can join a signature campaign from a service, where we can get behind...
Or at least, where we don't fundamentally oppose what's advertised in our signature.
Or at least, where we don't fundamentally oppose what's advertised in our signature.
And just to show how his arguments tend to distort reality:
~
Gambling is not good for health and mixers have a high rate of eventually becoming a scam, both of these are factual.
Gambling is not good for health and mixers have a high rate of eventually becoming a scam, both of these are factual.
No Dr. Phil! These are not universally accepted facts; they are your opinions. And, as we know, opinions can often be misguided. Gambling, by itself, does not pose a health risk. Im not sure where you got that idea from. In fact, it is a source of entertainment for millions of people around the world, and the WHO still has not declared a gambling pandemic.
