anyone who asks that question is an agitator.
the topic you discuss are topics of agitation.
little is ever really said except for innuendo, and it's usually designed to start fights.
thus I conclude you are probably an agency dillhole collecting dossiers.
not really.
It was obvious to me when he said it.
the internet was purposefully misdisgined to have it be 'go to the masters' post ast the masters site, and then they have censorship authority.
the model for data distribution is actually quite different than the model of 'corporate overlord'.
distributed independant networking would be a deal changer.
you must love the movie 'Life of Brian', they have no filters.
by 'gassing' do you mean farting on them?
seriously you take it over the top.
you caught your hook on someone in another boat . . .
what is up? did some major change happen is clown-space?
>>13956930
sauce on deleteing bred.
my observation was that the link was deleted in the catalog, but if you had the bread link it was still there.
just commenting that I don't like the over the top language, BV.
that's OK, right?
did I say 'send you to hell?' No.
too many trollers here today, I suppose.
it's all good. Let's be frenx or at least not frenemies, Kay . . .
BV: I noticed, as did some others, that the shill level seems low today. That somehow there is a lull in the shill-force.
did you notice anything like that too?
so it's a joint effort, not 'pipe hitters'?
it wasn't though, if you had the link yo ucould still go there. and then when they were told that it didn't matter to them.
I'm being very playful this morning.
why do you think I am not in a merry mood?
I even suggested "Life of Brian".
how much more humor should we get today?
I watched it recently and was surprised that back in 1982 it was OK to use all those words that we're not supposed to use now.
and I mention it to say 'so what that BV uses those words, he's doing it as part of his job as bouncer here.'
and it does trigger the touchy shills so . . .
I don't use those words.
but it was explained to me about some of them.
and who they were talking about, and who they were not talking about.
>>13957009
I am not for censorship.
I am for descernment.
It's OK for me to say 'gosh you're over the top'.
how does that say 'you must have your printing presses taken away, your buildings destroyed, if you don't go along with our plans.
censorship isn't the same as board moderation.
a censor is an official of the government or of the control structure necessary to participate in society who disallows content unless it gets to edit it too.
or have delete authority.
what BV does is like a bouncer.
PS: BV, I don't say don't use those words for your needs.
you know what you're doing.
I don't use them. That's OK. You use them. you think that is fine. I don't say errase them.
in fact, much that could be tersely said is prohibited from being said because of the arbitrary prohibition of various words and phrses.
by the way: if memes or words go missing becuase someone was banned it might mean that they were the only ones using those words, or posting those memes.
sad , really, that they have monies to pay these pimple faced twit people to glom over other people's shit posts and then accuse them of racism.
TY for the update.
yes, there are some robotic quality new meme forms that I'm noticing today.
pepole are banned for their behavior.
and that means what they say isn't allowed to be posted by them.
is that censorship?
not really.
censorship is someone makes a document, and part of the publishing process is that it must be reviewed, and arbitrarily someone else gets to say 'we don't like this '
what BV does is 'bouncing' a person/team.
and then their content is not showing up.
but the people and teams just IP hop and reappear.
or if they need to post something and don't make it obvious who they are, they get away with it.
It's not the same as saying 'no one can talk about such and such' topic
the ban that gets put on these popele is 'you are bannned, you, no matter what you want to say' and it only applies here.
and the people/teams still get to post anyway, and it show up at least once when they do (if BV knows it them he deletes it).
but they get that 'once'.
censorship would be 'they post to censor, and censor shows it if censor wants to show it'
not the same.
PS: if these people or entities want to produce content and publish it on their own, no one is stopping them, nor would BV or anyone here have anything to say.
Censor ship is force of governance.
this is a public forum, not a government.
so the idea is that these twits being banned for floods and CP. That is not the same. they are viloating well known rules.
and they were copiously warned. and got away with what they did for months if not years.