trex

By the way Charles, I have already reported you to the Forum Administrator, just in case you ban me. So you know I will not go away quietly.

After being bullied by Charles Anthony during a thread I started called, "Cyber-Bullying", the thread was suddenly deleted. Evidently it exposed him as a rude and condescending bully himself. Since no explanantion was given to me, that could be the only reason the thread, which this forum really needs to talk about was deleted. Or do you have another explanation. Any comments Charles? That are not rude, please. EDIT: This was the Opening Post of a redundant thread entitled: "Cyber-Bullying- deleted" It and all of its posts have been merged into this previous thread.

His condescending reply is in itself cyber-bullying. This attitude is a reflection of the tone and style of many posters here in thses forums. The implication is, that I'm too dumb to understand something simple. It's difficult to respond to comments like this, without becoming offensive yourself. A taunting comment. None of this was provoked by me, I assure you. Hey Charles, if the problem is that I didn't add my own comment at the end (no matter how banal), then why was the material removed? It was not a direct copy. And please explain why this warrants a threat for banning, when far worse transgression go on un-punished. I hope you can reply without being too condescending this time?

I did not copy the entire article, I removed whole paragraphs of some sections, and a few sentences here and there. If you compare with the link you will see this. I fail to see why you need to threaten with banning me over this, if I am not welcome here let me know. The intent of the article was to try and help this forum with its problem, that of users being highly insulting to others. I would appreciate a reply from you regarding this. ---- This is a PM I received and my reply. Certainly this response to me is unfair. Since coming here for a second try at this forum I have been attacked and insulted in some threads, which I reported, received no response back from admin and the offending posts still remain. Although I've tried to contribute to this forum in a positive way, without flaming, it appears I am not welcomed by the admins and given threats like this, for relatively minor infractions. It was not a copied post, several paragrpahs and sentences were omitted and yet it was removed, wothout even a chance from me. Guess I cannot do much good around here.

"Jerks of the Web" re-copied article DELETED by moderator http://tech.msn.com/news/articlepcw.aspx?c...1895>1=40000

Some people come to forums with the sole purpose of being antagonists. You can tell who they are because they consistently use rudeness, condescending and veiled insults. That's how they get their "jollies". I don't know why... there is a need to "prove" things, in a sense like winning points... this is "winning" somehow, for some people. Some will eventually grow out of it, the young ones might. The older ones are what they are. If any of you come here to score some kind of "victory", well, I pity you. I do not come here for that

??? Waiting for what?

Margrace please, don't bruise his sensitive ego. The poor man...

yes we know you are a big man. You can give it a rest now.

I wouldn't know, have never read it.

Or maybe they just want to have a useless argument. I don't come here for that, but to exchange ideas with other people who have some.

A high percentage of convicts are not in jail for violent crimes. Mandatory minimums means the judge can't decide what the sentence should be even if in the particular case, it would be worse for society if the offender was put in jail. For example if the offender was a person who otherwise made positive contributions to society, a volunteer, charity worker or someone whom people need, parent, etc. Some fine people, distinguished physicists and doctors, are drug addicted to opiates. But their work is not impaired by a private problem they have, addiction. If they are arrested for it, under mandatory minimums they must go to jail, carte blanche. Could be the greatest person in the world in every other way. Can someone explain Why they should go to jail, in any case? Second the privatized prison industry commands billions of dollars, and jobs in support industries around it. There is a possible conflict of interest when it is a "growth" industry, just as shareholders demand increasing growth in any business, to make profit.

I bet your grandma would know what to do if the power went out, how to survive. But not you, and not the millions of dumbfounded dipshits who would die if there was a collapse of technology, like if the trucks stopped delivering frozen pizzas to your grocer. So maybe you need to rethink who is more superior, and why. And yes, we have more luxuries than ever before. We also have more pollution, more loss of species every day, more loss of green habitat... than ever before. So maybe there is something to be learned about being a conservative, taking only what you need and leaving some for someone else. Real conservatives would agree. Pseudo-conservatives who are actually corporatists in disguise will have a problem with it

Thanks buffycat, guyser and others for the thumbs up. The rest of you, stay calm. No one's threatening to take your toys away...