Wilheim

[Willie99]

Everybody who has met the man says he's great, and I believe that has to be the case given all the witnesses.

But I'm not sure he has the temperament to deal with the rift raft in this forum. It looks like we really piss him off.

Wil, trying to control the name calling around here is almost a lost cause. Don't worry about it too much, unless you really have to. We'll let you know if it gets really bad.

There are some occasions that the name calling becomes counter productive, but it then settles down again.

Sorry for my contribution to your tumor.

 

[steaktartar]

i agree with this willie.....but if i hear the term moonbat one more time...........

 

[Willie99]

i agree with this willie.....but if i hear the term moonbat one more time...........

do you prefer "looney leftie loser"

:thumbsup:

 

[JoeContrarian]

Everybody who has met the man says he's great...

:hahahahah

 

[festeringZit]

:hahahahah

Although Wilheim and I seem to have vastly different
political ideologies, he does seem to be a real class act.

I don't know why people give him a hard time.

 

[JoeContrarian]

Although Wilheim and I seem to have vastly different
political ideologies, he does seem to be a real class act.

I don't know why people give him a hard time.

You're got to be kidding, right?

If you knew what I had to go through to prevent this left wing fascist from permanently banning me you'd understand why I couldn't summon a positive thing to say about him if you paid me.

It is INEXCUSABLE for ANY moderator on ANY forum to abuse their power the way this mod has. I don't give a rat's ass that he's been entrusted with the top job. He is by far the WORST of the lot -- and I've told him so privately and publicly on MANY occasions.

"I'm so sorry I banned Doc Mercer and not Joe C. I've never regretted anything more in life."

And it's ok for a mod to disclose IP addresses to other posters?

Why, Wil? Because of my politics?

ucking:

I'd NEVER ban someone because of their politics -- NEVER I'd NEVER implement a snitch policy or anti-name calling policy in a forum with the subheading "spirited debate." Wtf is this? Romper room? The pig who squeals the loudest gets to decide who gets banned and who doesn't?

Wil's one of the very few people in here I actually would NOT shake hands with if I ever met in person. The other one of course is our resident troll 'barnman' who I would ban for the simple reason his vicious ad hominem attacks do NOTHING to elevate the debate.

Folks, I'll be completely transparent with you -- right now, I'm holding back. If the owners of the Rx will permit me to so do, I'll be happy to emote and share my unfiltered feelings about Wilheim.

 

[billhill999]

Wil is a class act, however his wears his affilitiations on his sleeve, (Red Sox, etc.etc.)

 

[gtc08]

joe c you also have a history of causing problems with the forum. you arnt chosen out of the lot because of your politics, you're chosen out of the group because you say things that shouldnt be said on a forum that are incorrect. you also have a history with other posters.

 

[festeringZit]

You're got to be kidding, right?

If you knew what I had to go through to prevent this left wing fascist from permanently banning me you'd understand why I couldn't summon a positive thing to say about him if you paid me.

It is INEXCUSABLE for ANY moderator on ANY forum to abuse their power the way this mod has. I don't give a rat's ass that he's been entrusted with the top job. He is by far the WORST of the lot -- and I've told him so privately and publicly on MANY occasions.

"I'm so sorry I banned Doc Mercer and not Joe C. I've never regretted anything more in life."

And it's ok for a mod to disclose IP addresses to other posters?

Why, Wil? Because of my politics?

ucking:

I'd NEVER ban someone because of their politics -- NEVER I'd NEVER implement a snitch policy or anti-name calling policy in a forum with the subheading "spirited debate." Wtf is this? Romper room? The pig who squeals the loudest gets to decide who gets banned and who doesn't?

Wil's one of the very few people in here I actually would NOT shake hands with if I ever met in person. The other one of course is our resident troll 'barnman' who I would ban for the simple reason his vicious ad hominem attacks do NOTHING to elevate the debate.

Folks, I'll be completely transparent with you -- right now, I'm holding back. If the owners of the Rx will permit me to so do, I'll be happy to emote and share my unfiltered feelings about Wilheim.

You raise some valid points Joe.

- Giving out IP addresses to other posters should be a serious breach
of security.

- I'm not familiar with the history between you and Wil. maybe Wil. will
address it here. I know Wil. has treated me fairly. If Wil. has
treated you unfairly because of your political views then (obviously)
I think Wil. is in the wrong.

 

[festeringZit]

joe c you also have a history of causing problems with the forum. you arnt chosen out of the lot because of your politics, you're chosen out of the group because you say things that shouldnt be said on a forum that are incorrect. you also have a history with other posters.

Coming from the guy who just posted that Evangelicals are worse than
terrorists?

GTC, you have no credibility on here, absolutely none.

 

[JoeContrarian]

joe c you also have a history of causing problems with the forum. you arnt chosen out of the lot because of your politics, you're chosen out of the group because you say things that shouldnt be said on a forum that are incorrect. you also have a history with other posters.

Blow me -- every one of those "other posters" are profane illiterate scum.

I wish there were a way to make cyber punks as accountable for their words on the internet as much as they are face to face.

That's a good rule of thumb, btw -- never say anything in cyberspace you wouldn't be prepared to proudly and loudly say in person.

Mr. "Mark L is a bipolar manic depressive here in our FriendlyRxPolitoPub" are you listening?

:youmad:

 

[gtc08]

Coming from the guy who just posted that Evangelicals are worse than
terrorists?

GTC, you have no credibility on here, absolutely none.

theres no such thing as credibility on a forum. nobody is trying to prove anything.

 

[gtc08]

Blow me -- every one of those "other posters" are profane illiterate scum.

I wish there were a way to make cyber punks as accountable for their words on the internet as much as they are face to face.

That's a good rule of thumb, btw, never say anything in cyberspace you wouldn't be prepared to proudly and loudly say in person.

you still went too far. took it to serious. you spam the forums with your threads like mercer which slows down load times. you try to hard to feel accepted here which is stupid because its a internet forum, who cares. you go to overboard and are constantly changing your mind regarding almost everything. you went to saying you'll never vote for mccain to i love mccain. that type of stuff doesnt fly.

thatd be like me saying i like america even though ive always said america is heading to the toilet because of the way its run and the countries attitude. you dont see me going around saying i love america just to please a couple people.

 

[JoeContrarian]

you still went too far. took it to serious. you spam the forums with your threads like mercer which slows down load times. you try to hard to feel accepted here which is stupid because its a internet forum, who cares. you go to overboard and are constantly changing your mind regarding almost everything. you went to saying you'll never vote for mccain to i love mccain. that type of stuff doesnt fly.

thatd be like me saying i like america even though ive always said america is heading to the toilet because of the way its run and the countries attitude. you dont see me going around saying i love america just to please a couple people.

I spam the forum????? Are you mad????

Currently, there are 2 -- COUNT'EM TWO -- threads I've started on the first page. Define spam, please.

With doc, 3/4 of the forum would be filled with his "Scott McCleland is a pedophile" crap nobody ever read.

WTF are you talking about??? hno:

The rest of your drivel isn't even worth addressing.

I'm entitled to my opinion, just as you are entitled to yours.

I NEVER attack a poster personally unless I am repeatedly provoked. I attack ISSUES and POLICY MAKERS, not posters. I don't blame my fellow posters personally for the idiocy brought forward by the leadership of the party(s) they support.

 

[festeringZit]

theres no such thing as credibility on a forum. nobody is trying to prove anything.

"theres no such thing as credibility on a forum."

Not for you there isn't, but for some of the rest of us there is.

nobody is trying to prove anything."

You are 100% wrong on this one too. I'm here to engage in
reasoned discussion and debate, using logic and rhetoric,
to prove my points.

And, in case you misunderstand my usage of the above terms:

Rhetoric - <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">3.</td><td valign="top">the study of the effective use of language. </td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">4.</td><td valign="top">the ability to use language effectively. </td></tr></tbody></table>
Prove -
1.to establish the truth or genuineness of, as by evidence or argument

 

[gtc08]

I spam the forum????? Are you mad????

Currently, there are 2 -- COUNT'EM TWO -- threads I've started on the first page. Define spam, please.

With doc, 3/4 of the forum would be filled with his "Scott McCleland is a pedophile" crap nobody ever read.

WTF are you talking about??? hno:

The rest of your drivel isn't even worth addressing.

I'm entitled to my opinion, just as you are entitled to yours.

I NEVER attack a poster personally unless I am repeatedly provoked. I attack ISSUES and POLICY MAKERS, not posters. I don't blame posters personally for the idiocy brought forward by the leadership of the party(s) they support.

you just dont go from i hate mccain to i love mccain. you did it to "shake up" the forum because you need the attention.

 

[festeringZit]

you just dont go from i hate mccain to i love mccain. you did it to "shake up" the forum because you need the attention.

GTC = No credibility

 

[JoeContrarian]

you just dont go from i hate mccain to i love mccain. you did it to "shake up" the forum because you need the attention.

No, I'm a party guy -- I respect the primary process and the fact that John McCain won fair and square. What other choice do I have? Stay home and turn the keys over to a Marxist? hno:

I'd support Ron Paul if he had won the nomination because I trust the judgment of my fellow Republicans. I wanted Hunter and Thompson -- but they didn't make the cut. Life goes on.

And besides, if "shaking up" the debate elevates the debate and spurs lots of give and take information between other posters, there's nothing wrong with it.

I admit I enjoy using soaring rhetoric to make my points, but at least I'm tactful, courteous and don't make a habit of personally attacking posters because I am unable to keep up with their arguments.

 

[AlwayzRight]

No, I'm a party guy -- I respect the primary process and the fact that John McCain won fair and square. What other choice do I have? Stay home and turn the keys over to a Marxist? hno:

I'd support Ron Paul if he had won the nomination because I trust the judgment of my fellow Republicans. I wanted Hunter and Thompson -- but they didn't make the cut. Life goes on.

And besides, if "shaking up" the debate elevates the debate and spurs lots of give and take information between other posters, there's nothing wrong with it.

I admit I enjoy using soaring rhetoric to make my points, but at least I'm tactful, courteous and don't make a habit of personally attacking posters because I am unable to keep up with their arguments.

You would have supported Ron Paul? LOL....all you did was bash him and his supporters for the past 9 months.

 

[JoeContrarian]

You would have supported Ron Paul? LOL....all you did was bash him and his supporters for the past 9 months.

Yes, I would have ENTHUSIASTICALLY supported Ron Paul as the Republican nominee.

Why does this surprise you?

Politics is about choosing the lesser evil not about perfection. If people want perfection -- a candidate they agree with 100% -- they should run for office because there's no such animal exists.

Standing next to Obama, ANY Republican is a garden of roses.

That's politics -- that's life.

To paraphrase Don Rumsfeld, you win elections with the leader you have. :lol: