User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 5:42:11 PM EDT
[#1]
Subnet needs to get perma banned for outing information from the secret BO forum a few months back.
  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 5:42:44 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was only a matter of time. Habitual line stepping is hard to keep up indefinitely. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Add carljung to the spreadsheet. That was only a matter of time. Habitual line stepping is hard to keep up indefinitely. Charlie Murphy approves this message. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 5:44:42 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Y'all need to let Signal back for everything to be fair and square. THIS FREE SIGNAL |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 5:45:44 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Subnet needs to get perma banned for outing information from the secret BO forum a few months back.
BO forum? Sounds stinky and gross, like a place for safety violators. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 5:48:46 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's just a discussion. A secret known enemies discussion. Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? Send Striker your DD214 and come join us, so you can find out for yourself. I'm confident you'll feel at home in there. It's like a unit day room, except the vending machines don't sell beer and the medics are just as likely to have given the strippers the clap as they are to have cured them of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 5:55:03 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A few points. 1. I thought there was no list, that it was just a discussion? 
2. I dispute that Signal "brought it to light" as he never mentioned the LEO forum, he merely said he was going to be put on a list. If he hadn't been banned then I very much doubt if the existence of such a list would have ever come to light. 3. The .mil and LEO forums are apples and oranges as .mil do not have official capacity to harm US citizens (outside of other .mil members) while LEO do. 4. I support confidentiality, I also support whistleblowing. RebelGrey selling secrets to terrorists because he wanted money or hated America or whatever was an act of treason, and I support harsh punishment for that. The various folks who have leaked documents about the illegal activity of the fed.gov re things like Fast and Furious or the NSA or the IRS etc were breaking secrecy in order to expose crimes or morally objectionable actions and as such are in a different category. I don't know what was on the list. Based on the reaction to it and who was keeping it I tend to think that what he did was justified whistleblowing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." A few points. 1. I thought there was no list, that it was just a discussion?
2. I dispute that Signal "brought it to light" as he never mentioned the LEO forum, he merely said he was going to be put on a list. If he hadn't been banned then I very much doubt if the existence of such a list would have ever come to light. 3. The .mil and LEO forums are apples and oranges as .mil do not have official capacity to harm US citizens (outside of other .mil members) while LEO do. 4. I support confidentiality, I also support whistleblowing. RebelGrey selling secrets to terrorists because he wanted money or hated America or whatever was an act of treason, and I support harsh punishment for that. The various folks who have leaked documents about the illegal activity of the fed.gov re things like Fast and Furious or the NSA or the IRS etc were breaking secrecy in order to expose crimes or morally objectionable actions and as such are in a different category. I don't know what was on the list. Based on the reaction to it and who was keeping it I tend to think that what he did was justified whistleblowing. Roger that. So consider for a minute that one of your very own military members said in an earlier thread about this whole debacle that anyone with a tank icon who is whining about the list is a hypocrite. What does that say both about the military list and the LEO thread to you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 5:55:59 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Send Striker your DD214 and come join us, so you can find out for yourself. I'm confident you'll feel at home in there. It's like a unit day room, except the vending machines don't sell beer and the medics are just as likely to have given the strippers the clap as they are to have cured them of it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's just a discussion. A secret known enemies discussion. Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? Send Striker your DD214 and come join us, so you can find out for yourself. I'm confident you'll feel at home in there. It's like a unit day room, except the vending machines don't sell beer and the medics are just as likely to have given the strippers the clap as they are to have cured them of it. I've considered it but frankly the attitude of military members on this site toward police members of this site has really turned me off to it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:03:25 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've considered it but frankly the attitude of military members on this site toward police members of this site has really turned me off to it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's just a discussion. A secret known enemies discussion. Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? Send Striker your DD214 and come join us, so you can find out for yourself. I'm confident you'll feel at home in there. It's like a unit day room, except the vending machines don't sell beer and the medics are just as likely to have given the strippers the clap as they are to have cured them of it. I've considered it but frankly the attitude of military members on this site toward police members of this site has really turned me off to it. FYI, there are a number of members who are members of both communities (mil and LE). Don't let the typical GD poster sour you on experiences you're missing from another part of the site. Like I tell my kids with new food, you don't know if you're going to like it until you try it. If they try it and decide they don't like it, I don't make them eat it. If you get access and find you don't like the .mil forum, nobody is going to force you to participate in there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:04:13 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Roger that. So consider for a minute that one of your very own military members said in an earlier thread about this whole debacle that anyone with a tank icon who is whining about the list is a hypocrite. What does that say both about the military list and the LEO thread to you? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." A few points. 1. I thought there was no list, that it was just a discussion?
2. I dispute that Signal "brought it to light" as he never mentioned the LEO forum, he merely said he was going to be put on a list. If he hadn't been banned then I very much doubt if the existence of such a list would have ever come to light. 3. The .mil and LEO forums are apples and oranges as .mil do not have official capacity to harm US citizens (outside of other .mil members) while LEO do. 4. I support confidentiality, I also support whistleblowing. RebelGrey selling secrets to terrorists because he wanted money or hated America or whatever was an act of treason, and I support harsh punishment for that. The various folks who have leaked documents about the illegal activity of the fed.gov re things like Fast and Furious or the NSA or the IRS etc were breaking secrecy in order to expose crimes or morally objectionable actions and as such are in a different category. I don't know what was on the list. Based on the reaction to it and who was keeping it I tend to think that what he did was justified whistleblowing. Roger that. So consider for a minute that one of your very own military members said in an earlier thread about this whole debacle that anyone with a tank icon who is whining about the list is a hypocrite. What does that say both about the military list and the LEO thread to you? Who said anything about a .mil list? I haven't seen anyone posting about the existence of such a list. And, again, .mil have no more power over US citizens than anyone else, while cops do so it's apples to oranges. Some folks have tanks but their allegiance is to the hidden badge. Without knowing the person who is laughing off the LEO list I can't comment on whether or not I trust their judgement. Maybe that tanker was one of the "It's just a discussion!" types. Who knows? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:10:30 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who said anything about a .mil list? I haven't seen anyone posting about the existence of such a list. And, again, .mil have no more power over US citizens than anyone else, while cops do so it's apples to oranges. Some folks have tanks but their allegiance is to the hidden badge. Without knowing the person who is laughing off the LEO list I can't comment on whether or not I trust their judgement. Maybe that tanker was one of the "It's just a discussion!" types. Who knows? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." A few points. 1. I thought there was no list, that it was just a discussion?
2. I dispute that Signal "brought it to light" as he never mentioned the LEO forum, he merely said he was going to be put on a list. If he hadn't been banned then I very much doubt if the existence of such a list would have ever come to light. 3. The .mil and LEO forums are apples and oranges as .mil do not have official capacity to harm US citizens (outside of other .mil members) while LEO do. 4. I support confidentiality, I also support whistleblowing. RebelGrey selling secrets to terrorists because he wanted money or hated America or whatever was an act of treason, and I support harsh punishment for that. The various folks who have leaked documents about the illegal activity of the fed.gov re things like Fast and Furious or the NSA or the IRS etc were breaking secrecy in order to expose crimes or morally objectionable actions and as such are in a different category. I don't know what was on the list. Based on the reaction to it and who was keeping it I tend to think that what he did was justified whistleblowing. Roger that. So consider for a minute that one of your very own military members said in an earlier thread about this whole debacle that anyone with a tank icon who is whining about the list is a hypocrite. What does that say both about the military list and the LEO thread to you? Who said anything about a .mil list? I haven't seen anyone posting about the existence of such a list. And, again, .mil have no more power over US citizens than anyone else, while cops do so it's apples to oranges. Some folks have tanks but their allegiance is to the hidden badge. Without knowing the person who is laughing off the LEO list I can't comment on whether or not I trust their judgement. Maybe that tanker was one of the "It's just a discussion!" types. Who knows? The mil discussion of the same type as the LEO discussion has been mentioned a couple times in these threads over the past days. Should whoever mentioned it be banned? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:25:20 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The mil discussion of the same type as the LEO discussion has been mentioned a couple times in these threads over the past days. Should whoever mentioned it be banned? I haven't seen any mentions of that nature, although I have seen some sort of general equivocation about how the LEO list wasn't really a list and so if anyone in the .mil forum ever made mention of anyone outside of the .mil forum it must have been exactly the same. I don't support bans for people being stupid or advocating moral relativism. If you saw anyone posting .mil forum stuff on the public side by all means report them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:27:17 PM EDT
[#12]
What thread am I in again?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:28:37 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What thread am I in again? the one with the list |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:29:10 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What thread am I in again? A thread that is probably bound for a lock if this side bar continues. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:31:07 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A thread that is probably bound for a lock if this side bar continues. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What thread am I in again? A thread that is probably bound for a lock if this side bar continues. Fair enough. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:32:50 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was told to get rid of my old avatar or be banned. It was the dude riding on the back of the big chick and I had Pistol animate it so she was bucking. Ha! I know that picture... someone started one of those "Pick your weapon for _____" threads and I photoshopped a picture of an M2 mounted to her. I'm surprised I didn't catch a lock for that
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:34:23 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's just a discussion. A secret known enemies discussion. Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? I'd say..... Yes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:38:57 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I haven't seen any mentions of that nature, although I have seen some sort of general equivocation about how the LEO list wasn't really a list and so if anyone in the .mil forum ever made mention of anyone outside of the .mil forum it must have been exactly the same. I don't support bans for people being stupid or advocating moral relativism. If you saw anyone posting .mil forum stuff on the public side by all means report them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The mil discussion of the same type as the LEO discussion has been mentioned a couple times in these threads over the past days. Should whoever mentioned it be banned? I haven't seen any mentions of that nature, although I have seen some sort of general equivocation about how the LEO list wasn't really a list and so if anyone in the .mil forum ever made mention of anyone outside of the .mil forum it must have been exactly the same. I don't support bans for people being stupid or advocating moral relativism. If you saw anyone posting .mil forum stuff on the public side by all means report them. So you support a ban for someone violating the sanctity of the mil thread, but you oppose a ban for someone violating the sanctity of the LEO forum. Interdasting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:41:56 PM EDT
[#19]
Please keep this thread on topic--GoatBoy made a specific request, and you are going to be upset if it is locked (though he specifically ordered all threads on the topic of "the list" to be locked).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:43:42 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please keep this thread on topic--GoatBoy made a specific request, and you are going to be upset if it is locked (though he specifically ordered all threads on the topic of "the list" to be locked). Roger. We will aid you in making it like this whole cluster fuck never happened. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:44:55 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd say..... Yes. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's just a discussion. A secret known enemies discussion. Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? I'd say..... Yes. Submit your DD214 and find out for yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:45:06 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Subnet needs to get perma banned for outing information from the secret BO forum a few months back.
Yeah, I sent in the boxtops and never got my decoder ring! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:45:13 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Please keep this thread on topic--GoatBoy made a specific request, and you are going to be upset if it is locked (though he specifically ordered all threads on the topic of "the list" to be locked). As long as I can make a new thread from the locked ashes it's ok |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:45:57 PM EDT
[#24]
Nm.
Saw TBK1s post. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:51:03 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please keep this thread on topic--GoatBoy made a specific request, and you are going to be upset if it is locked (though he specifically ordered all threads on the topic of "the list" to be locked). Roger that. I'll add your request to the LIST of things not to do on Arfcom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:52:03 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So you support a ban for someone violating the sanctity of the mil thread, but you oppose a ban for someone violating the sanctity of the LEO forum. Interdasting. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The mil discussion of the same type as the LEO discussion has been mentioned a couple times in these threads over the past days. Should whoever mentioned it be banned? I haven't seen any mentions of that nature, although I have seen some sort of general equivocation about how the LEO list wasn't really a list and so if anyone in the .mil forum ever made mention of anyone outside of the .mil forum it must have been exactly the same. I don't support bans for people being stupid or advocating moral relativism. If you saw anyone posting .mil forum stuff on the public side by all means report them. So you support a ban for someone violating the sanctity of the mil thread, but you oppose a ban for someone violating the sanctity of the LEO forum. Interdasting. Keeping it on topic, the banned member, Signal25, didn't actually say he'd make a cop hater list within the LEO forum. He simply said he'd make the cop hater list. It wasn't until sanctions were handed out against him that the LEO forum was mentioned. For all I would have known, he could have been talking about a list maintained by one of the many members of the thin blue line (before anybody gets upset, I'd like to point out that both I and my Dad are former members of the TBL) who will habitually point out other members' habits of posting anti-LEO comments. (There are, after all, some folks here with VERY good memories and ability to recall posts from years ago.) Or, some might have thought he was referring the idea that the NSA and DOJ, through their habit of data mining, might have some form of anti-cop list. (Let's face it, there are a LOT of members here who have their tin foil hats on far too tightly and believe that such lists are maintained by the government.) In short, Signal25 didn't say he was referring to an anti-cop list maintained anywhere on ARFCOM. It was others who made it seem plausible that such a list/discussion/thread existed somewhere on the forum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:55:39 PM EDT
[#27]
He isn't coming back.
Get over it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 6:58:28 PM EDT
[#28]
I don't want Smiley's thread locked.
But I will say Balog and SiVis, if y'all are ever in Chicago I'm buying. Sig is a friend of mine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:03:47 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A few points. 1. I thought there was no list, that it was just a discussion?
2. I dispute that Signal "brought it to light" as he never mentioned the LEO forum, he merely said he was going to be put on a list. If he hadn't been banned then I very much doubt if the existence of such a list would have ever come to light. 3. The .mil and LEO forums are apples and oranges as .mil do not have official capacity to harm US citizens (outside of other .mil members) while LEO do. 4. I support confidentiality, I also support whistleblowing. RebelGrey selling secrets to terrorists because he wanted money or hated America or whatever was an act of treason, and I support harsh punishment for that. The various folks who have leaked documents about the illegal activity of the fed.gov re things like Fast and Furious or the NSA or the IRS etc were breaking secrecy in order to expose crimes or morally objectionable actions and as such are in a different category. I don't know what was on the list. Based on the reaction to it and who was keeping it I tend to think that what he did was justified whistleblowing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." A few points. 1. I thought there was no list, that it was just a discussion?
2. I dispute that Signal "brought it to light" as he never mentioned the LEO forum, he merely said he was going to be put on a list. If he hadn't been banned then I very much doubt if the existence of such a list would have ever come to light. 3. The .mil and LEO forums are apples and oranges as .mil do not have official capacity to harm US citizens (outside of other .mil members) while LEO do. 4. I support confidentiality, I also support whistleblowing. RebelGrey selling secrets to terrorists because he wanted money or hated America or whatever was an act of treason, and I support harsh punishment for that. The various folks who have leaked documents about the illegal activity of the fed.gov re things like Fast and Furious or the NSA or the IRS etc were breaking secrecy in order to expose crimes or morally objectionable actions and as such are in a different category. I don't know what was on the list. Based on the reaction to it and who was keeping it I tend to think that what he did was justified whistleblowing. I think your trolling and trying to get others a lock or a ban. We have had GoatBoy, DK Prof, Aimless and Ed Sr. amongst others address the issue. You (and some others) keep bringing it up or continue to use references to "list" in threads throughout GD, regardless of what I would call some heavy hitters from the site staff telling members here that it was not what you all want to make it out to be. It appears to me as poking, baiting and or trolling. The LEO members appear to be honoring an agreement to not discuss any particulars of that forum outside of that forum. Yet, despite assurances from Site Staff that it's was not what you want to make it out to be, you continue to post and prod about it in an what appears to be an effort to entice an LEO member to refute your claims and violate the agreement they made in another forum on this site. As for our official capacity to harm citizens, would you prefer that all LEO's simply not be allowed to be members of this site? It sounds like we are being branded as dangerous because of what we could do, not anything that we have done. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:07:34 PM EDT
[#30]
This whole list escapade has a sort of "stalinesque" feel to it. First people are banned merely for mentioning it, then all thread are locked and/or deleted to try to cover up their existence. Now future threads and mentions face sanction for violating the purge order.
To the ARFCOM gulags with you all, peasants. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:09:43 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This whole list escapade has a sort of "stalinesque" feel to it. First people are banned merely for mentioning it, then all thread are locked and/or deleted to try to cover up their existence. Now future threads and mentions face sanction for violating the purge order. To the ARFCOM gulags with you all, peasants. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:11:49 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think your trolling and trying to get others a lock or a ban. We have had GoatBoy, DK Prof, Aimless and Ed Sr. amongst others address the issue. You (and some others) keep bringing it up or continue to use references to "list" in threads throughout GD, regardless of what I would call some heavy hitters from the site staff telling members here that it was not what you all want to make it out to be. It appears to me as poking, baiting and or trolling. The LEO members appear to be honoring an agreement to not discuss any particulars of that forum outside of that forum. Yet, despite assurances from Site Staff that it's was not what you want to make it out to be, you continue to post and prod about it in an what appears to be an effort to entice an LEO member to refute your claims and violate the agreement they made in another forum on this site. As for our official capacity to harm citizens, would you prefer that all LEO's simply not be allowed to be members of this site? It sounds like we are being branded as dangerous because of what we could do, not anything that we have done. Play the victim much? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:12:04 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This whole list escapade has a sort of "stalinesque" feel to it. First people are banned merely for mentioning it, then all thread are locked and/or deleted to try to cover up their existence. Now future threads and mentions face sanction for violating the purge order. To the ARFCOM gulags with you all, peasants. https://media.giphy.com/media/jLK74MUW07RaU/giphy.gif You're going on the cowering peasants list, I'm a Colonel you know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:12:46 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This whole list escapade has a sort of "stalinesque" feel to it. First people are banned merely for mentioning it, then all thread are locked and/or deleted to try to cover up their existence. Now future threads and mentions face sanction for violating the purge order. To the ARFCOM gulags with you all, peasants. How about we drop the list nonsense in this thread so it doesn't get locked. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:15:05 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about we drop the list nonsense in this thread so it doesn't get locked. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This whole list escapade has a sort of "stalinesque" feel to it. First people are banned merely for mentioning it, then all thread are locked and/or deleted to try to cover up their existence. Now future threads and mentions face sanction for violating the purge order. To the ARFCOM gulags with you all, peasants. How about we drop the list nonsense in this thread so it doesn't get locked. Da, Comrade Commissar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:26:14 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? You must really have a low opinion of my intelligence to think that you can trick me into violating the confidentiality of the .mil forum and getting banned so easily. I'll just refer you to GoatBoy's statement that such threads are universally banned for all sections. Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." Let me try to make this easy for you. Who? What? Where? Easy. Quoted: "how about an opology for the Douchebag comment in the .mil forum? Maybe nick will apologise for the Choade remark?" Who?- A direct reference to a poster called "Nick." What?- We apparently have two direct references, "the douchbag comment" and "the Choade remark." Where?- A direct reference, "in the .mil forum." Now let's look at the other post in the exact same manner. Quoted: "I guess I'll make the known cop hater thread now." Who?- Nothing. What?- "the known cop hater thread." Where?-Nothing. A fellow cop blew ya'll outta the water and brought your fucked-up "thread" to light when he lost his cool & banned Signal25 unjustly. To bad, so sad, but don't blame Signal25 for it. "Oh, well." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:27:52 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let me try to make this easy for you. Who? What? Where? Easy. Quoted: "how about an opology for the Douchebag comment in the .mil forum? Maybe nick will apologise for the Choade remark?" Who?- A direct reference to a poster called "Nick." What?- We apparently have two direct references, "the douchbag comment" and "the Choade remark." Where?- A direct reference, "in the .mil forum." Now let's look at the other post in the exact same manner. Quoted: "I guess I'll make the known cop hater thread now." Who?- Nothing. What?- "the known cop hater thread." Where?-Nothing. A fellow cop blew ya'll outta the water and brought your fucked-up "thread" to light when he lost his cool & banned Signal25 unjustly. To bad, so sad, but don't blame Signal25 for it. "Oh, well."
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? You must really have a low opinion of my intelligence to think that you can trick me into violating the confidentiality of the .mil forum and getting banned so easily. I'll just refer you to GoatBoy's statement that such threads are universally banned for all sections. Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." Let me try to make this easy for you. Who? What? Where? Easy. Quoted: "how about an opology for the Douchebag comment in the .mil forum? Maybe nick will apologise for the Choade remark?" Who?- A direct reference to a poster called "Nick." What?- We apparently have two direct references, "the douchbag comment" and "the Choade remark." Where?- A direct reference, "in the .mil forum." Now let's look at the other post in the exact same manner. Quoted: "I guess I'll make the known cop hater thread now." Who?- Nothing. What?- "the known cop hater thread." Where?-Nothing. A fellow cop blew ya'll outta the water and brought your fucked-up "thread" to light when he lost his cool & banned Signal25 unjustly. To bad, so sad, but don't blame Signal25 for it. "Oh, well."
Comrade, we must be silent or we will be disappeared to the gulags with disgraced comrade Signal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:28:18 PM EDT
[#38]
is there even an 'a' in chode?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:28:35 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Da, Comrade Commissar. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This whole list escapade has a sort of "stalinesque" feel to it. First people are banned merely for mentioning it, then all thread are locked and/or deleted to try to cover up their existence. Now future threads and mentions face sanction for violating the purge order. To the ARFCOM gulags with you all, peasants. How about we drop the list nonsense in this thread so it doesn't get locked. Da, Comrade Commissar. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:29:57 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You must really have a low opinion of my intelligence to think that you can trick me into violating the confidentiality of the .mil forum and getting banned so easily. I'll just refer you to GoatBoy's statement that such threads are universally banned for all sections. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's just a discussion. A secret known enemies discussion. Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? You must really have a low opinion of my intelligence to think that you can trick me into violating the confidentiality of the .mil forum and getting banned so easily. I'll just refer you to GoatBoy's statement that such threads are universally banned for all sections. GB also said something about zero tolerance for "trolling" and "baiting" if I recall correctly. ZMV migh want to tread lightly. We don't need any more bans for a while. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:33:59 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Snip Comrade, we must be silent or we will be disappeared to the gulags with disgraced comrade Signal. Damn, I hadn't read up to that far. 
Sorry.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:35:23 PM EDT
[#42]
IBTL.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:36:13 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let me try to make this easy for you. Who? What? Where? Easy. Quoted: "how about an opology for the Douchebag comment in the .mil forum? Maybe nick will apologise for the Choade remark?" Who?- A direct reference to a poster called "Nick." What?- We apparently have two direct references, "the douchbag comment" and "the Choade remark." Where?- A direct reference, "in the .mil forum." Now let's look at the other post in the exact same manner. Quoted: "I guess I'll make the known cop hater thread now." Who?- Nothing. What?- "the known cop hater thread." Where?-Nothing. A fellow cop blew ya'll outta the water and brought your fucked-up "thread" to light when he lost his cool & banned Signal25 unjustly. To bad, so sad, but don't blame Signal25 for it. "Oh, well."
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you have a discussion in the mil forum about civvies that talk shit about the military? You must really have a low opinion of my intelligence to think that you can trick me into violating the confidentiality of the .mil forum and getting banned so easily. I'll just refer you to GoatBoy's statement that such threads are universally banned for all sections. Do you believe Signal25 was morally and ethically correct by bringing the LEO list to light? As a reminder, Goatboy said just as much in his post, that Signal25 was, I believe the term used, "justified." Let me try to make this easy for you. Who? What? Where? Easy. Quoted: "how about an opology for the Douchebag comment in the .mil forum? Maybe nick will apologise for the Choade remark?" Who?- A direct reference to a poster called "Nick." What?- We apparently have two direct references, "the douchbag comment" and "the Choade remark." Where?- A direct reference, "in the .mil forum." Now let's look at the other post in the exact same manner. Quoted: "I guess I'll make the known cop hater thread now." Who?- Nothing. What?- "the known cop hater thread." Where?-Nothing. A fellow cop blew ya'll outta the water and brought your fucked-up "thread" to light when he lost his cool & banned Signal25 unjustly. To bad, so sad, but don't blame Signal25 for it. "Oh, well."
JIA served his time. It's over. Let's move on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:39:57 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IBTL. Basically. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:44:08 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Basically. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
IBTL. Basically. Almost made 100 pages.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:44:22 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
herpderp You might want to look at who started this by asking me a question in an effort to get me to violate the .mil forum and get banned. I guess answering a cop's questions is trolling now? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:45:09 PM EDT
[#47]
Now, can everyone just drop this shit so they can memory hole this and Smiley doesn't get his thread locked?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:47:34 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You might want to look at who started this by asking me a question in an effort to get me to violate the .mil forum and get banned. I guess answering a cop's questions is trolling now? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
herpderp You might want to look at who started this by asking me a question in an effort to get me to violate the .mil forum and get banned. I guess answering a cop's questions is trolling now? It is when they use Dave_A tactics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:56:47 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You might want to look at who started this by asking me a question in an effort to get me to violate the .mil forum and get banned. I guess answering a cop's questions is trolling now? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
herpderp You might want to look at who started this by asking me a question in an effort to get me to violate the .mil forum and get banned. I guess answering a cop's questions is trolling now? To be honest, it was a rhetorical question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 8:01:33 PM EDT
[#50]
What part of "Shut the fuck up!" is so hard for everyone to comprehend?
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
