@praxis

No. He was making new threads and people like myself and some others thought 180 scuttled that debate.

Some people ignore mod warnings because they don't take kindly to threats which don't make sense and are inconsistent.

@T Clark

It's just a.....
Principles and integrity man.

The courage to stand up to arthritic old dogs!

@Baden

Transparency! You brook no debate.

How many decisions have you changed over the years?

One.

Speaks for itself.

This thread is a show event,where idiots get to throw tomatoes like cowards.

You don't understand do you?

It takes courage to stand up for what is right.

Your flippancy and excuses express your character.

@T Clark

As I said before,those who don't stand up for right and wrong are just expressing their ethical hypocrisy.

You know 3017amen was here for two years. Me and @Corvus can both testify that he is a calm poster.

If others feel the same way,say it by post here.

The irony of a forum full of people debating and talking about ethics, empathy and human rights,and then only two people showing any courage to say," hey this is not right. We can see he wasn't an emotional poster".

Or are all your ethics abstract?
It's how you treat issues like this that expresses your character. Otherwise you are just talkers and echo chamber partisans.

@Benkei
You wouldn't change your current stance no matter how a person approached you.

And that's the point. Think about it.
Moderator random.

@Benkei
Yes,low courage.

@Benkei

There is. I wouldn't expect you to have the balls to be consistent anyway.

@Baden
Come on. There is extensive history between 3017 amen and 180 and you know it.

This is just excuses. I've seen much worse calling of names.

You guys really can't be this biased?

@Baden
OK. But there are posters whose modus operandi is a lot of ad hom and emotionality.

3017 wasn't like that.
Bottom line,that's inconsistent.

It seems to me being a confident theist puts one on the radar.

And do you not take account of defending oneself against the invective of others?

@Benkei
Still inconsistent. And double standards.
Two years!

Two years on the radar!!what does that Mean?

@Banno
Yep. Your own bullshit.

180,Mr overemotional!

He needs all his energy,he's on the verge of tanking his second debate!

@Benkei
With respect,that doesn't make sense. How can someone be on the radar for two years?

And what was the ban,for post quality or ad hom?
A consistent decent explanation would be nice.

@Banno

The boot fits. Nice wriggle.

@Banno

Not really a conversation.

Your attempt at a monologue really.

And 180 proves the point publicly.

Well done!

All you who say nothing on the above vitriol are what?

@Banno
Link!!!! It's your short post 23 mins up to baker.
Just scroll up.

@Baden

I wouldn't report posters for ad hom or spicy language. That's not the way I am. I have never called for anyone's banning.

The point is you would have kept amen if he had just swore?

And there are many on this forum engaged in spicy and sustained emotional back and forth. 3017 not really so. Defense is a natural instinct,no?

@Banno
Your explanation about theists being poor because of their beliefs.

Do keep up old boy.

@Banno
No.

@Banno
The old play dumb card. Predictable.

@Banno
Just said so.

@Baden
Fuck off.
There,respect that!

@Banno
Both are truths to me.

@Banno

Reminds me of when the caste system would justify poor people through ideology.

Maybe the Palestinians should be shamed for being theists,and not up to bannos secular religion and caste system.

@Banno
That's just the way you like to parse things.

Who says knowledge must be always justified. My pain is certain.

This is just hypocrisy and double standards.
I'm not in favour of bannings in general.

Tim wood and 180 proof have both thrown plenty of sustained vitriol at 3017.

In general 3017 was pretty calm. And defending yourself from vitriol Is fair game. Context is very important.

If your reading 3017 amen,your better than the mods and those two I mentioned. Keep up your good work.

@Banno

Your very fond of using pain as an example.

You intuitively know your tooth is in pain.

@Banno
Shown and stated. That's the rub and crux.

Supra logical speech is that which is intuitively true and expressed.

@Banno

You may regard the poetry I am talking about as axiomatic or desire-expressive. Ditto supra-logical speech.

To think that truth is only propositional is the entire blunder of academic philosophy and science.

Intuitive,non discursive truth is expressed.

Beyond Wittgensteins silence,to expressing the contents of what he dared not speak.

@Banno
So what was your original objection before we proceed?

@Banno
Your post seems to be agreeing and disagreeing with me.

You misunderstood the implication of my post.

I didn't say truth cannot be expressed by normal speech.

So I don't see what your post really refers to?

@khaled
It's only yours I called a shit post. Because it was.

As I said before,snowflakes be dishing out but can't handle some heat.

@Olivier5

A very teenage response!

@Olivier5

Honestly I don't care for your opinion on this.
Nor your amateur reading into my motivations.

And maybe you should look at the insecurity of yourself in not being able to handle counter opinions with Grace.

@Olivier5

Well,if people are that double standardish that they can dish out strawman criticism and not take it back then so be it.
Cheers for the concern though.

@Banno

You should see your error of comprehension.