sciforums has corrupted ethics. they are controlled by someone obviouslty because they close all threads that are controversial.
dont u think so?
dont u think so?
sciforums corrupted ethics
- Thread starter antisipatience
- Start date
- Status
no.
Every once in a while the guy who runs sciforums will close threads about the ethics of p2p file sharing aps, mainly because he created one himself and supports sciforums with his income from it. Other than that, the only times I’ve ever seen a thread closed was when someone was spamming, cross-posting, or posted something worthless (like a post consisting of nothing but a long string of profanity, or a post of nothing but empty space). There are always many controversial discussions going on here.
Don't forget you can't say ********.
Hmm. Perhaps you're being sarcastic? My word was really censored. I typed in a real word. Yours are all different lengths suggesting multiple words. As far as I know there is only one word that is censored here. p.o.i.s.o.n.e.d.
Try it.
********.
Try it.
********.
Mod Hat - No littering!
This propaganda topic is based on a spiteful and insupportable accusation. Antisipatience should not complain of corrupt ethics, as such an ill-conceived, discourteous, dishonest testament to pettiness as this topic is an ethical affront to the EM&J forum.
No littering: All trash goes in its proper place.
Given the number of topics Antisipatience has started in various fora echoing the angry, dishonest accusation, and given the inability shown to support that accusation with any sense of evidence, and given the generally Himalaya-sized piles of evidence to the contrary, two points can be made right now:
(1) This topic is closed.
(2) I am compelled to not oppose the expulsion of this individual from this community, which s/he so obviously does not wish to be a part of. While I don't like seeing people banned, I have no sympathy for someone who should take so many opportunities to state their case and choose instead to waste our time with static. The removal of Antisipatience has my full endorsement at this time, and as some posters have advised in other versions of this topic strewn about Sciforums, is inevitable.
Antisipatience said:
This propaganda topic is based on a spiteful and insupportable accusation. Antisipatience should not complain of corrupt ethics, as such an ill-conceived, discourteous, dishonest testament to pettiness as this topic is an ethical affront to the EM&J forum.
No littering: All trash goes in its proper place.
Given the number of topics Antisipatience has started in various fora echoing the angry, dishonest accusation, and given the inability shown to support that accusation with any sense of evidence, and given the generally Himalaya-sized piles of evidence to the contrary, two points can be made right now:
(1) This topic is closed.
(2) I am compelled to not oppose the expulsion of this individual from this community, which s/he so obviously does not wish to be a part of. While I don't like seeing people banned, I have no sympathy for someone who should take so many opportunities to state their case and choose instead to waste our time with static. The removal of Antisipatience has my full endorsement at this time, and as some posters have advised in other versions of this topic strewn about Sciforums, is inevitable.
- Status