sinse i cant post in red squer

Since you can't post in the Red Square, your vote doesn't count.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Since you can't post in the Red Square, your vote doesn't count.

wtf?
Not in favor of yes i bet...

Well move the message to red squere OR give him acces for a little while.

Srsly, evryone should be able to vote!

CoolKidX wrote:

wtf?
Not in favor of yes i bet...

Well move the message to red squere OR give him acces for a little while.

Srsly, evryone should be able to vote!

His reclusion to this place wasn't just because. He's a troublemaker and that's why he's been recluded. Troublemakers' votes don't count. It wouldn't matter if it's "no" or "yes", it simply doesn't count. Same goes for calinis.

Evryone should be able to vote!
That's democrasy pall!

CoolKidX wrote:

Evryone should be able to vote!
That's democrasy pall!

Troublemakers have lost their rights.

Sorry Coolkid, But I agree with zealot. A forum isn't a country. A country isn't a forum. We can't rule a forum as it was a country. Here, on a forum, the administrator has the entire right to ban on take off privileges and doesn't need to ask to the members if the agree or no. That's the way it is, dot.

(in some other decisions, there's possibility for a consensus, but not in every case, included this one)

i also agree ... its like leting black people and jews vote..... nobody whud do that.

Spoiler:

CoolKidX wrote:

Evryone should be able to vote!
That's democrasy pall!

Criminals aren't given a vote; is this any different a situation?

Black_Cross wrote:

CoolKidX wrote:

Evryone should be able to vote!
That's democrasy pall!

Criminals aren't given a vote; is this any different a situation?

lol
are you calling jews and black people crimnals ?

Black_Cross wrote:

CoolKidX wrote:

Evryone should be able to vote!
That's democrasy pall!

Criminals aren't given a vote; is this any different a situation?

These "crimanals" are the victims of the society, give them a change!
nah kidding i understand

I dont think this is any similar to criminals not being able to vote becausenobody has done anything criminal on the site.

I would like to add that I want a 3rd admin anyways. 1 admin is similar to a dictatorship, also kenzu is never on anyways.

calinis wrote:

I dont think this is any similar to criminals not being able to vote becausenobody has done anything criminal on the site.

Each community has its definition of crimes. To this community you're a criminal.

calinis wrote:

I would like to add that I want a 3rd admin anyways.

Good for you.

calinis wrote:

1 admin is similar to a dictatorship,

In which sense?

calinis wrote:

also kenzu is never on anyways.

Also false, even if he came once each three months it wouldn't qualify as "never".

Even just on this site, all I said was my opinion, which is not criminal.

Kenzu rarely comes on and hardly does anything. So this site is based on what you want. I think it would be fairer if there was another admin because of that, it might slightly eliminate bias.

calinis wrote:

Even just on this site, all I said was my opinion, which is not criminal.

You engaged in slander, direct personal offenses, phallacies, spam and trolling.

calinis wrote:

Kenzu rarely comes on and hardly does anything. So this site is based on what you want.

Total phallacy. Proof can be found elsewhere.

calinis wrote:

I think it would be fairer if there was another admin because of that, it might slightly eliminate bias.

False too. What if it's another left-wing administrator?

Quote :

You engaged in slander, direct personal offenses, phallacies, spam and trolling.

Yet everyone else does too.

Quote :

False too. What if it's another left-wing administrator?

likely will be, but i said it would be a little less biased because you have to come to a mutual understanding, rather than you absuing your powers.

calinis wrote:

Yet everyone else does too.

1. Not true.
2. The ones who do do it in a much slighter way than you and with much less frequency.
3. Just a couple of people engage in slander here and its rare when tehy do.

calinis wrote:

likely will be, but i said it would be a little less biased because you have to come to a mutual understanding, rather than you absuing your powers.

I'm not abusing my powers. Everything is done here taking into account the members of the site.

Kenzu hasn't came on because he has been too busy in China.. with his lady freind

Diogritor wrote:

Kenzu hasn't came on because he has been too busy in China.. with his lady freind

He already is back.

CoolKidX wrote:

Diogritor wrote:

Kenzu hasn't came on because he has been too busy in China.. with his lady freind

He already is back.

gotta rest after all those poundins *wink

Hoxhaist wrote:

your name is fuckin black cross, that wants to free prisoners!!!

no one deserve to be in jail!!!!!!!!!

Haha, i know what my name means, thank you. I wasn't saying that was my position, but that he, being someone who i assumed was a proponent of a criminal justice system in a society, shouldn't be arguing for a "criminal's" right to vote.

Quote :

I dont think this is any similar to criminals not being able to vote becausenobody has done anything criminal on the site.

It doesn't surprise me that you wouldn't get the analogy, being that you're simple-minded and all.

Seeing as I did nothing wrong, the anology doesn't apply here.

Criminals in society generally harm people, thus they should have no say in political matters (well, they should actually die). I have not harmed this "society" thus this isnt accurate to compare people on this site that you dislike to criminals not getting the right to vote because liking me or not is completely subjective.

calinis wrote:

Seeing as I did nothing wrong, the anology doesn't apply here.

Criminals in society generally harm people, thus they should have no say in political matters (well, they should actually die). I have not harmed this "society" thus this isnt accurate to compare people on this site that you dislike to criminals not getting the right to vote because liking me or not is completely subjective.

I never compared it to not liking you. I compared it to your disregard for the rules of this site. My not liking you has nothing to do with this conversation. And for me to admit you haven't harmed this site, you'd have to define harmed. Cos you've surely stunted many a debate with your childish rantings.

No I do not disregard rules. It's obvious why I'm here and it has nothing to do with me "breaking" the rules. How have I harmed this site with my opinion? Is my opinion "bad" or something?

calinis wrote:

No I do not disregard rules. It's obvious why I'm here and it has nothing to do with me "breaking" the rules. How have I harmed this site with my opinion? Is my opinion "bad" or something?

well you called my opinon bad. you even said to ban me for my opinion.
and you dont even know my opinion

I cant tolerate people who advocate killing innocent people and who adhere to ideals of the cruelest man who ever lived.

Some people dont deserve to speak their opinions, aka those who want to take away the freedoms of the great majority.

btw you still haven't answered my question about what should be done about the Jews? What's the best way to kill them? It's got to be more extreme than the holocaust right? because that didnt eliminate them all! There's still more!!! What ever should we do with these scum?????