Page 1 of 1
Guilty Sans Crime.
Posted: August 1st, 2023, 6:47 pm
by cultsmasher
I did an introduction a while back. It wasn't allowed to be posted. The reasons given accused me of all sorts of things. Which is pretty tricky to do seeing how I hadn't even said anything yet. It is a pretty interesting philosophical point of view to find somebody guilty for something they hadn't even done. If that is the kind of philosophy practiced around here, (should this even be posted) it would seem that I'm not going to run into much intellectual debate here.
Re: Guilty Sans Crime.
Posted: August 10th, 2023, 4:20 pm
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
cultsmasher wrote: ↑August 1st, 2023, 6:47 pm
I did an introduction a while back. It wasn't allowed to be posted. The reasons given accused me of all sorts of things.
Do you have a verbatim copy of the post and/or a verbatim copy of the "reasons given" to you by the moderator (
Belindi) who disapproved your post?
Re: Guilty Sans Crime.
Posted: August 25th, 2023, 7:51 pm
by cultsmasher
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes wrote: ↑August 10th, 2023, 4:20 pm
cultsmasher wrote: ↑August 1st, 2023, 6:47 pm
I did an introduction a while back. It wasn't allowed to be posted. The reasons given accused me of all sorts of things.
Do you have a verbatim copy of the post and/or a verbatim copy of the "reasons given" to you by the moderator (Belindi) who disapproved your post?
Why would it matter. You can just take my word for it. I don't practice the same philosophy as the vast majority of other people. Which is the philosophy of telling lies.
Re: Guilty Sans Crime.
Posted: September 9th, 2024, 10:23 am
by John Thiel
The name "cultsmasher" is probably what got you your reject.