@Kenosha Kid Time travel brother...

Yeah, it's a very old mod joke to decide why every historical philosopher would be banned. But as the actress said to the bishop, "You're no Marcus Aurelius.", and neither was Anand.

@unenlightened Yep. Anand was better. And so am I.
Oh,the veneration and romanticising of authority!

Ha Ha. Certainly, the veneration of authority is a banning offence!

Didn't realize the whole cult was here. Let's play poison Kool-aid, shall we?

BTW, I've nothing against an esoteric or poetic style where appropriate and if it's not used to jazz up mediocrities, hide grammatical laziness, or obscure intellectual shallowness. It's rare all those buttons get hit though.

The pinko philistines would ban Jesus fer’sher.

Sky daddy cancelled the whole of humanity bar some dude on a boat and his fam because he got offended, pretty sure he's the original woke brigade.

You do realise Shakespeare and nietzsche really fucked a lot — Mystic

Well, some say Nietzsche had syphilis, but if that was so, it doesn't necessarily mean he fucked a lot. Chances are he didn't fuck much at all, poor fellow. Not that he was probably a virgin like that even poorer fellow, Kant. I like to think Shakespeare fucked often.

As for punctuation, Nietzsche certain loved his exclamation points, but I don't think either he or Shakespeare wrote...in such a manner...perhaps way, as in path...through the desolation of existence...so studied and contrived...to evoke so pointedly...the pretence of uniqueness.

@praxis Jesus and moses would be the first to get banned for low quality posts. Forget the old and new testament we have streetlight and baden with their ranting
monologues! Class!

@Ciceronianus the White What's pretentious is your "humour" fella.

@Baden Irony? These banning threads are a glorified two minutes of hate in general.

Isn't this the same guy who was just banned?

These banning threads are a glorified two minutes of hate in general. — Mystic

We have this one banning thread to stop people from posting "Why was [loser] banned?" discussions.

@Michael I know. But look at the comments. Nothing constructive or informative in general just hate and lack of discernment.

Has anyone ever been banned for sanctimony?

Well, I suppose that's an inappropriate question here, if this thread is to address specific bannings only. Perhaps we'll find out, someday.

I'm not a fan of bannings. If you've gotta do it, guru-talk like Anand's seems fair game. Low quality (content) & poor style (form) certainly don't help. Was s/he a troll too? I stopped reading Anand's posts after the first one I'd come across. Not fair? If you want to be read and engaged, say something clearly and succinctly without burying your nuggets in piles of dung. That's what's fair. Gets and keeps the dialogue going. I'm not for banning monologues (unless by Dunning-Kruger trolls – then fuck 'em), but a forum dedicated to (something like) 'philosophical discussions' can do much better without (e.g. the latest motley gaggle of) self-fellating soliloquies. Strong, stylized, heterodox perspectives are cool and always needed. Barely Reddit-worthy regurgitated youtubery – tits on a gelded bull. Mods do your thing (if ya gotta). :up:

Seriously though, there are guru-wannabe members like skyblack who are in no danger of being banned for low quality.

@praxis Come on praxis,are you trying to get people banned?! I happen to like some of what skyblack says. He's better than most.

@180 Proof Clear and succinct? Most of your posts are contrived jargon laden regurgitated hodge podges of propoganda and cliches... Irony mister.

I might even miss you.

Good call. — Banno

Do you guys read the posts on this forum? There's a lot of mezza-mezza stuff and a reasonable amount that is interesting and worth responding to. Then there's maybe 5 or 10 percent that are really great and 30% that's pure crap. Not talking about you Banno. It's the other guys - yes, I'm referring to you. And about 15% of the members contribute that 30% crap. And that's a pretty good ratio. There's plenty to read and respond to. It's fun and interesting.

If you want to play gurus, there is a whole web-net of places to go, just not here so much. — unenlightened

Eastern philosophy is still philosophy. I consider myself as the true guru of the Philosophy Forum.

@180 Proof You need a wife old man.

I consider myself as the true guru of the Philosophy Forum. — T Clark

Well you are my guru of course, but that and our sexual relations have no place in our discussions here (outside of feedback).

You need a wife old man. — Mystic

If you highlight text and then push the "quote" button that shows up, it will show up in your post with a location tag. Then we can tell to which specific post and text you are responding to.

Alternatively, if you push the arrow "reply" button on the bottom of the post you want to respond to, it will put a tag in your response showing which post it comes from.

Either one of those will make it easier to keep track of the conversation.

@T clark Surely you can multitask brother?!

:rofl:

He exposes the bear necessities that will put our minds at ease. What’s not to like?!

Forget the old and new testament we have streetlight and baden with their ranting monologues! — Mystic

And also our resident Mystic
With thoughts so utterly twisted
It's bad grammar he likes
While philosophy's shite
And the mods want Jesus delisted!

Lol!