Regarding Sauls "Stallone" thread

[Iago]

If you click on the "home" page of this website, you will find a very  brief explanation of what each forum is supposed to do.
The "Diner" is defined in the following way;


The Diner
Discuss anything, music excepted.

It makes no mention of who may or may not start a thread and it makes no mention of the exclusion of any topic regarding "religion". In fact it says you may discussAnything.
Since Stallone's "jewishness" (or lack thereof) falls under the rubric ofAnything, it is appropriate to have such a thread appear on the "Diner". And it is equally appropriate for Saul to have started it, if he wished to do so. Nobody forces anybody to read or respond on any thread that they may find offensive or irrelevant.

[Josquin des Prez]

You forgot to add 'this forum is anti-semitist' in your thread.

[Gurn Blanston]

It is well-known to Saul, and since it is no secret, should be well-known to all of you, that Saul, due to his past behavior, is here under special conditions. One of them is that he refrain from posting what is the equivalent of religious spam. The reasons for this should be obvious: all one need do is read his latest thread and see the response it brought.

GB

[Saul]

It is well-known to Saul, and since it is no secret, should be well-known to all of you, that Saul, due to his past behavior, is here under special conditions. One of them is that he refrain from posting what is the equivalent of religious spam. The reasons for this should be obvious: all one need do is read his latest thread and see the response it brought.

GB

What Gurn is trying to say , Iago is that its not religion that is banned here, its who brings it up.

In other words if it would be our 'composer in residence' Karl, uttering a religious tandem, it wouldn't magnate a tornado effect.

But save it, my thread wasn't about "religion".... anyone knows and sees that  and yet it still turned into a small tornado...

[Gurn Blanston]

What Gurn is trying to say , Iago is that its not religion that is banned here, its who brings it up.

Another words if it would be our 'composer in residence Karl, uttering a religious tentum, it wouldn't magnate a tornado effect.

Actually, Gurn was trying to say exactly what he said.

If you are implying that you are singled out for "special moderation", then yes, you are. If you are going beyond that and saying it is religion and not you that is being moderated, then you are wrong (and you know it).

GB

[karlhenning]

Another words if it would be our 'composer in residence Karl, uttering a religious tentum, it wouldn't magnate a tornado effect.

Saul, you don't even play well at martyrdom.

(a) You mean "in other words"; "another words" is nonsense.

(b) Your hypothesis is science-fiction;  where has any post of mine drawn anywhere near "a religious [tantrum]"?

(c) If I behaved on this forum, as you do, the moderators would act.  They would try to reason with me first, as I have every expectation they have tried to reason with you.  And there, too, your hypothesis is science-fiction;  for unlike yourself, Saul, I tend to respond to reason.  It's a faculty I have . . . .

[Saul]

Actually, Gurn was trying to say exactly what he said.

If you are implying that you are singled out for "special moderation", then yes, you are. If you are going beyond that and saying it is religion and not you that is being moderated, then you are wrong (and you know it).

GB

How about letting a person sin before you accuse him?

Everyone knows that this thread wasnt a "religious" thread, yet the insults were raining down.

And Karl, I have used you only as an example and not selected because of any past threads of yours.

[Saul]

Saul, you don't even play well at martyrdom.

(a) You mean "in other words"; "another words" is nonsense.

(b) Your hypothesis is science-fiction;  where has any post of mine drawn anywhere near "a religious [tantrum]"?

(c) If I behaved on this forum, as you do, the moderators would act.  They would try to reason with me first, as I have every expectation they have tried to reason with you.  And there, too, your hypothesis is science-fiction;  for unlike yourself, Saul, I tend to respond to reason.  It's a faculty I have . . . .

It's Tandem

Tandem is a Latin adverb meaning "at length" or "finally". In English, the term was originally used for two or more draft horses harnessed one behind another as opposed to side-by-side. By extension the term now refers to any team (of machines, animals or people) working together one behind another.
A tandem is also the name of a language learning methodology, where two partners of different mother tongues help each other learn the foreign language. An association of language schools worldwide applying this method is called TANDEM International Tandem is also used as an adjective in "tandem seating", as in a two-seat aircraft where the two occupants sit one behind the other, or in "tandem bicycle", where the riders are seated similarly. By further extension the term tandem is frequently used as a noun to mean an item of equipment, such as a tandem bicycle. Tandem is also used as a term for the wheels on a semi trailer to balance the weight of a load of freight. It is used more generally to refer to any group of persons or objects working together, 'in tandem'.

[head-case]

Everyone knows that this thread wasnt a "religious" thread, yet the insults were raining down.

Insults were raining down because you are, perhaps, the most irritating person ever to frequent this site.

[Saul]

Insults were raining down because you are, perhaps, the most irritating person ever to frequent this site.

But why?

What have I said?

If you'll tell me that you just found out Tom hanks is half australian, I should consider you as the most irritating person ?

Let's imagine you say that every day on a different celebrity, should I consider you as an irritating person?

I could either read, accept, comment, or ignore your posts, but " Most Irritating Person"?

[Saul]

Please try to understand that I rarely participate in religious threads in this site, because of the vituperative nature of the attacks that I get on my views.

Remember the thread" what do you believe in"?

Did I say a word?
and there are other examples where I purposely have refrained from participating.

But Im must say that I was very surprised that this Stallone thread had sparked  such a domino effect of attacks.

And I'm still at odds and can't understand why on the planets will people get so agitated, from this.

Maybe I'm too honest, and think of people as basically good and accepting.

Next time before posting maybe I should think to myself :

"Saul, what are you doing? don't say these things, those people in GMG will swallow you...."

[Gurn Blanston]

Next time before posting maybe I should think to myself :

"Saul, what are you doing? don't say these things, those people in GMG will swallow you...."

Saul, honest to g-d, that's the best advice you've ever given yourself. No insult intended either. In fact, I wish everyone would do that before clicking the "Post" button, although I suppose that's too much to ask...

[Saul]

Saul, honest to g-d, that's the best advice you've ever given yourself. No insult intended either. In fact, I wish everyone would do that before clicking the "Post" button, although I suppose that's too much to ask...

I appreciate your humorous nature, Gurn but I don't really think that its amusing.
People say horrible things without standing back and wondering how their comments hurt other people. And I always thought that to hurt other people's feelings is not something that should be taken lightly. What's going on here? We cant talk? We cant express what we want?
Can anyone pinpoint the negativity of what I said?

The stallone thread was not a "Relgious" thread.

Did I talk about "religion"?

[Que]

Let's imagine you say that every day on a different celebrity, should I consider you as an irritating person?

Saul, that actually would be pretty irritating.

What intrigues me is that you are time and again that amazed by so and so's Jewish ancestry or identity. What is so amazing about it? For al you know, I might be Jewish - would that be amazing too? Would you start a thread about it?

I don't think you're amazed - you're pretty much obsessed by dividing people along ethnical lines (in your case: Jews & non-Jews) I don't think that's a healthy hobby - you'd better get another.

Q

[Gurn Blanston]

I appreciate your humorous nature, Gurn but I don't really think that its amusing.
People say horrible things without standing back and wondering how their comments hurt other people. And I always thought that to hurt other people's feelings is not something that should be taken lightly. What's going on here? We cant talk? We cant express what we want?
Can anyone pinpoint the negativity of what I said?

The stallone thread was not a "Relgious" thread.

Did I talk about "religion"?

Yes, amigo, but I wasn't being humorous. I'm afraid my reputation has ruined my meaning. I think it IS great advice, perhaps advice I have already given to you and many others in the past. And I am meaning it for everyone, the apple throwers in particular. So don't feel I have singled you out, in fact I am agreeing with you. But you know full well that you have earned a target on your back, in fact you have singled yourself out for abuse because of things in the past, and it is a wise man who regards the past when considering the present. Need I say more?

[Saul]

Yes, amigo, but I wasn't being humorous. I'm afraid my reputation has ruined my meaning. I think it IS great advice, perhaps advice I have already given to you and many others in the past. And I am meaning it for everyone, the apple throwers in particular. So don't feel I have singled you out, in fact I am agreeing with you. But you know full well that you have earned a target on your back, in fact you have singled yourself out for abuse because of things in the past, and it is a wise man who regards the past when considering the present. Need I say more?

Did I teach the Hebrew Aleph beth with this thread or explained Jewish Theology and Law?

Gurn... I didnt talk about religion....

[Gurn Blanston]

Did I teach the Hebrew Aleph beth with this thread or explained Jewish Theology and Law?

Gurn... I didnt talk about religion....

Well, balance it out with an occasional "Stephen Hawking is a WASP" thread and we'll all feel a sense of total freedom from religion. Fair enough?

I think we have pretty well worn this out, don't you, Saul? I need to do some other stuff, perhaps it's time to leave you to the tender mercies of our mutual friends.

[Dungeon Master]

Your post was religious.

There is no reason you would have posted it otherwise.

Please re-read the Forum Guidelines. The bit about "Position on eligious Posts" applies to you.

If you are genuainely having trouble understanding why we have singled you out, it is because in the past you posted extensively (often by large slabs of cut-and-paste) about Jewishness, and thus qualified as a Spammer. We now keep a close eye on you, and any hints of this behaviour repeating is being nipped in the bud.

Other members do not continually post about their religious/supernatural/spiritual beliefs. You do.

[BachQ]

What's really amazing:   how much time we waste on Saul and his ilk ........

[DavidW]

Saul... Saul... Saul...







TAKE A NAP!