Quote
Hairball
Agree, that's why I used the phase 'launch his anti-Mick 'attacks' like it was an assault,
then said 'seemingly' harmless, as it's not what it really seemed, and then ended my paragraph with 'I dunno'.
It was more of a rhetorical reply acknowledging the disruption, because the repetitiveness of it all
even made some diehard Keith fans shake their heads in bewilderment. Like give it a break already, what's this dude's trip?

Thanks for clarifying, Hairball - I see what you mean now. Rock on :E

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I love it when people want to decide what others shouldn't take offense by. That's a battle one can't win

You should be offended at such your thought.

Quote
bv

Quote
Stoneage
Here is a statement: I'm not so sure it's okey that the signature Stones50 is acting like a thought police on this forum reporting every post that doesn't conform with his political ties.
Recently he closed down the Murdoch thread because someone dared to criticize Rupert Murdoch. Isn't it enough with one moderator on this forum?

The only person who moderate on IORR is me, the editor. The above statement is incorrect and not even relevant.

So, I managed to be both incorrect and irrelevant in one statement? Always something...

Had he closed down threads without neither permission or authority it would certainly have been both abusive and relevant, Stoneage

Sure, Dandelion. But what he did was reporting another poster. If he hadn't done that BV wouldn't have closed the thread down. I think it's a bad habit to be trigger-happy with the report button.
Anyway, it's history now. Let's move on to something else...

Any Off Topic might be deleted and/or closed at any time. This thread is about abuse. The more complaints I get about my modest moderation here on IORR the more the statement about abuse on Internet is confirmed. 99.9% of all posts ON IORR stay untouched. Some take up LARGE space here on IORR discusing microscopic un-intersting details about media moguls and other non-relevant topics.

Bjornulf