So you claim to be the registered user bhull242, who hasn't been blocked?
Or are you butthurt because Comcast is still an ISP?
You aren't making any sense, AC.
To "Prove" you are being blocked - you need to be blocked. And you aren't.
To "Prove" you have made such a super awesome statement that got you in trouble, you may want to actually point to the post in question and explain.
But you can't, as far as I've seen. Just a bunch of disconnected posts going, "It's so obvious YOU FOOLS" and, "AH! So much proof!"
Amusing. Do you claim to have a registered account here that TD has shut down?
All we need is fewer annoying government regulations to fix this right up.
Starting with the burdensome "Copyright" censorship regime, of course. Without an artificial government lock down on sharing it would be impossible to maintain "exclusives."
They have the right to pick their own fights.
If leaving up the gay content in the Sadui dictatorship just barely passes muster, attacking the royals may cross a line they don't want to cross.
The Saudi family is a bunch of mass murdering psychos - the safety of local employees is a real concern.
Why would Mike and TD have access tot hat information if the Times didn't put in in the original article? Have you considered logging into the Times to present your displeasure at the author instead of whining about it here?
Just saying, seems like you just wanted to gripe for the sake of it.
Depends on if you get SWATted, or the Very Fine People who support El Cheetos start burning crosses on your lawn. Generally doxing is considered a threat. "I know where you live and so does everyone else."
How exactly do you think people get the right to democracy?
Clearly the red AC feels that Hong Kong shouldn't have democracy, independence or freedom.
His is arguing from the point of mainland China and hold that the state has the right to do whatever the hell it wants. Therefore any murder, torture and retaliation is not just justified, but a necessary consequence of disobedience.
And point out that is wrong to "Murder, torture and oppress" is a feeble distraction form the point he is trying to make.
Yes you are correct - it is most proper for the people of Hong Kong to be murdered, tortured and beaten by their government. Thanks for reminding us that is always wrong to protest against your government.
Mike is trying to ban me, right after I disagreed with Stephen about public and private.
'Sup Liar. As pointed out multiple times you are making this shit up. GG.
The comments on private vs public weren't "dissent" they were nonsense - I wouldn't be so eager to take ownership of them AC.
How about this - create an account and join in with your own voice. See how that works. And see if you get downvoted multi-posts and OT comments like you are now. Or will you just complain that you are being persecuted when clearly you are using the AC status to avoid accountability.
Also "The Law is the Law" excuse.
But the law is supposed to have a good reason. To protect us.
If we don't need protection from people who aren't causing us harm, maybe it shouldn't even be a misdemeanor at all. And it's certainly a waste of resources to make an elevated response.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Spin. Rinse. Repeat.
LOL, so nothing to say.
Just keep tossing out unfounded accusations. It's what the rest of us call "Lies."
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So you claim to be the registered user bhull242, who hasn't been blocked?
Or are you butthurt because Comcast is still an ISP?
You aren't making any sense, AC.
To "Prove" you are being blocked - you need to be blocked. And you aren't.
To "Prove" you have made such a super awesome statement that got you in trouble, you may want to actually point to the post in question and explain.
But you can't, as far as I've seen. Just a bunch of disconnected posts going, "It's so obvious YOU FOOLS" and, "AH! So much proof!"
Amusing. Do you claim to have a registered account here that TD has shut down?
Apologies
Fake apologies are fake.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
<Citation Needed>
'Sup Liar! Put up or shutup.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How has that different in the slightest from the narrative of Stone, TD or myself?
FB does not need to host content it disagrees with.
Deregulation
All we need is fewer annoying government regulations to fix this right up.
Starting with the burdensome "Copyright" censorship regime, of course. Without an artificial government lock down on sharing it would be impossible to maintain "exclusives."
Re: Re: Stylish
I really do wonder how they handle the spam on Blue's perfect Free Peach site that has absolutely no censorship or moderation.
Re: Re: Re: The Reason
... The lair is pretty much correct. Verizon and Comcast have used that to hijack searches and inject content into streams.
Re: Re:
They have the right to pick their own fights.
If leaving up the gay content in the Sadui dictatorship just barely passes muster, attacking the royals may cross a line they don't want to cross.
The Saudi family is a bunch of mass murdering psychos - the safety of local employees is a real concern.
Re: Re:
Ergo, I can only interpret their statement to mean they are sorry for nothing significant.
They are sorry they got caught! :)
(untitled comment)
The missing bit of this story
Why would Mike and TD have access tot hat information if the Times didn't put in in the original article? Have you considered logging into the Times to present your displeasure at the author instead of whining about it here?
Just saying, seems like you just wanted to gripe for the sake of it.
Re: Is embarrasment "harm"?
Depends on if you get SWATted, or the Very Fine People who support El Cheetos start burning crosses on your lawn. Generally doxing is considered a threat. "I know where you live and so does everyone else."
Re: Re: Re:
Abuse and oppression are never proper. At the same time, however, I have a very hard time mustering much sympathy for the self-destructively stupid.
So... They got was was comin' to them?
And so it's wrong for anyone outside of China to express their support for them? Because they are stupid for wanting a better deal.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
How exactly do you think people get the right to democracy?
Clearly the red AC feels that Hong Kong shouldn't have democracy, independence or freedom.
His is arguing from the point of mainland China and hold that the state has the right to do whatever the hell it wants. Therefore any murder, torture and retaliation is not just justified, but a necessary consequence of disobedience.
And point out that is wrong to "Murder, torture and oppress" is a feeble distraction form the point he is trying to make.
Did I get that right, "Red AC"?
Re:
Yes you are correct - it is most proper for the people of Hong Kong to be murdered, tortured and beaten by their government. Thanks for reminding us that is always wrong to protest against your government.
Re:
Mike is trying to ban me, right after I disagreed with Stephen about public and private.
'Sup Liar. As pointed out multiple times you are making this shit up. GG.
The comments on private vs public weren't "dissent" they were nonsense - I wouldn't be so eager to take ownership of them AC.
How about this - create an account and join in with your own voice. See how that works. And see if you get downvoted multi-posts and OT comments like you are now. Or will you just complain that you are being persecuted when clearly you are using the AC status to avoid accountability.
Re:
Uber driver and exec's found a way to get away with manslaugher.
Or managed to frame their underpaid observer for manslaughter. No freakin way someone could maintain 100% attention in that role.
Re: What should or shouldn't be enforced
same degree of wrongdoing as crossing the national border
Only when Mexicans cross the border, not Canadians!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't care how they got here
Build that Wall! Shut down the Canadian Border!! Lock up all the lawbreakers!
Especially the ones breaking the Emoluments clause...
Re: Lost me already at "Illegal entry is a crime"
Also "The Law is the Law" excuse.
But the law is supposed to have a good reason. To protect us.
If we don't need protection from people who aren't causing us harm, maybe it shouldn't even be a misdemeanor at all. And it's certainly a waste of resources to make an elevated response.
More comments from Gary >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Gary.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt