Educational

Author Topic: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.  (Read 4479 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jack

  • Reiterative Utterance of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 14550
  • Karma: 0
  • You don't know Jack.
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #90 on: March 23, 2013, 09:44:24 AM »
:)

Offline RageBeoulve

  • Super sand nigger
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 16783
  • Karma: 927
  • Gender: Male
"I’m fearless in my heart.
They will always see that in my eyes.
I am the passion; I am the warfare.
I will never stop...
always constant, accurate, and intense."

  - Steve Vai, "The Audience is Listening"

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #92 on: March 23, 2013, 09:57:40 AM »
Have already stated, it's my understanding the rules of this site are that these are topics not acceptable for discussion, have already expressed the understanding that implications/accusations of people engaging in these activities are equally egregious offenses, have already expressed my own opinion that you are aware of unacceptable topics of discussion on this site. Only you can confirm what you know and don't know. Only an admin can confirm if my understanding of the rules of what can/cannot be discussed/implied/accused. Could be completely wrong about the rules of this site, and have stated my own lack of clarity on the subject. Not really sure what else you want.

Sure you know you have, and you will likely be given patience in the matter as a long standing member...........Don't really expect you to admit you might have stepped over the line a little...............Crap, sir. Not talking about the law, haven't mentioned the law, or implied you've broken any law. Talking about the rules of this site and how they're enforced. Save the legal semantics for the admins.

"Sure you know you have?" Ok Tell me why this is the case when it shows rather starkly here as shown above I actually have not...in the slightest...by any reckoning?

Don't expect you to admit you may have stepped over the line" - why not? Because i normally try to decieve? Because i am instinctively dishonest? Because i am looking for favouritism? Go on...

"Crap....Save the legal semantics" - Ok is that what my position was? trying to distract with legal semantics? OR was it something to do with the fact that Odeon bases his rules on what is or is not going to break the TOS? I mean it is one or the other right and on the basis that i was able to pull out Odeon's quote saying why he bases the Role and its scope is defined in Florida law...I say it is the latter. So why call it crap and me having to save legal semantics?

I like you too Jack but i don't know why you choose to come at me like this. I do not know why you insinuate that I am happy to lie or be dishonest about things and YES you do have a couple of things up there which are not just opinions. they are accusations against me and my values and character. Why on earth you decided to go there i really don't know but I am calling on you to back it up.
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Jack

  • Reiterative Utterance of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 14550
  • Karma: 0
  • You don't know Jack.
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #93 on: March 23, 2013, 10:11:05 AM »
"Sure you know you have?" Ok Tell me why this is the case when it shows rather starkly here as shown above I actually have not...in the slightest...by any reckoning?

Have already stated this as an opinion; if you dispute it, then fine, you are unaware of the rules, where the lines of the rules lie, and the exact implications of those rules, as I am in relation to the lines and implications.


Quote
Don't expect you to admit you may have stepped over the line" - why not? Because i normally try to decieve? Because i am instinctively dishonest? Because i am looking for favouritism? Go on...

Just don't expect you to come out and say it was out of line to start a bestiality rumor about cartman. No, not for those reasons; it's as simple as that. Don't really expect it. Maybe am wrong.

Quote
"Crap....Save the legal semantics" - Ok is that what my position was? trying to distract with legal semantics? OR was it something to do with the fact that Odeon bases his rules on what is or is not going to break the TOS? I mean it is one or the other right and on the basis that i was able to pull out Odeon's quote saying why he bases the Role and its scope is defined in Florida law...I say it is the latter. So why call it crap and me having to save legal semantics?

Because of never mentioning the law or breaking the law, or breaking the tos.

Quote
I like you too Jack but i don't know why you choose to come at me like this. I do not know why you insinuate that I am happy to lie or be dishonest about things and YES you do have a couple of things up there which are not just opinions. they are accusations against me and my values and character. Why on earth you decided to go there i really don't know but I am calling on you to back it up.

This was really more about marx, his ban, and Elpresidente saying cartman should be banned while he engaged in taboo discussion of his own. Have already expressed not knowing you were involved. It was a bit of a surprise, frankly.

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #94 on: March 23, 2013, 10:33:49 AM »
"Sure you know you have?" Ok Tell me why this is the case when it shows rather starkly here as shown above I actually have not...in the slightest...by any reckoning?

Have already stated this as an opinion; if you dispute it, then fine, you are unaware of the rules, where the lines of the rules lie, and the exact implications of those rules, as I am in relation to the lines and implications.


Quote
Don't expect you to admit you may have stepped over the line" - why not? Because i normally try to decieve? Because i am instinctively dishonest? Because i am looking for favouritism? Go on...

Just don't expect you to come out and say it was out of line to start a bestiality rumor about cartman. No, not for those reasons; it's as simple as that. Don't really expect it. Maybe am wrong.

Quote
"Crap....Save the legal semantics" - Ok is that what my position was? trying to distract with legal semantics? OR was it something to do with the fact that Odeon bases his rules on what is or is not going to break the TOS? I mean it is one or the other right and on the basis that i was able to pull out Odeon's quote saying why he bases the Role and its scope is defined in Florida law...I say it is the latter. So why call it crap and me having to save legal semantics?

Because of never mentioning the law or breaking the law, or breaking the tos.

Quote
I like you too Jack but i don't know why you choose to come at me like this. I do not know why you insinuate that I am happy to lie or be dishonest about things and YES you do have a couple of things up there which are not just opinions. they are accusations against me and my values and character. Why on earth you decided to go there i really don't know but I am calling on you to back it up.

This was really more about marx, his ban, and Elpresidente saying cartman should be banned while he engaged in taboo discussion of his own. Have already expressed not knowing you were involved. It was a bit of a surprise, frankly.

I think I have shown that the rules are that anything that is against the TOS is against the rules. Bestiality IS against the rules. I have shown the Florida legislation showing the definition of what they consider bestiality. Anything that infracts this definition is against the rules. (and ought to be)
None of my posts have and neither has El Presidentes.
So....why would I assume I was breaking the rules?
I don't think Alfonso ought to be banned. Not yet at least. If he does something banworthy, I am all up for it and would say the same for anyone.
You did mention breakingrules = "stepping over the line". The TOS is informed by Laws of Texas and Florida I didn't break any of these laws. Not close. You also said that I knew I did
I have no problem in admitting what I said to Cartman

WTF! The failfag who "owns" that video prevents external embedding???


He too will learn to respect mah authoritah  :police:

That post was his little "Oh my, Im such a victim" post, and then *BAM* his attacker wanders over here. He practically had an orgasm when he knew I was here, his sex life being replaced by trying to flame people on internet boards, and dog fucking.

Trying to train dogs to respect your authority?



Remember kids,

intensitysquared=SRS BZNS!

I am not serious, I am having fun....unless you are saying the dog fucking allegation WAS serious??

 :doggy:

 :( Poor dog

Eeeeewww!  :zombiefuck: :thumbdn:

I think I read some where that Alfonso was into having sex with dogs. Is that true?

No I am not making it up or creating rumour. (well yes I am creating rumour but not making it up)

When he gets fucked he favours great Danes to fill his butt plug stretched anus and when giving he prefers chihuahuas as their tiny orifices fit his tiny dick.



Not the first time I have used DAAS

http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,18251.msg804929.html#msg804929\

So I used someone else's quote from years befire about him. I admiited to using it as a tease and posted DAAS youtube for him.

Unless that video actually had animal to human sex or human to animal sex or such like....I think I may have dodged a bullet....Not really. there was never anything in it.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2013, 10:46:38 AM by Al Swearengen »
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Jack

  • Reiterative Utterance of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 14550
  • Karma: 0
  • You don't know Jack.
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #95 on: March 23, 2013, 10:46:43 AM »
Missed that post too. This is the one that was noticed, once realizing why you felt the need to respond.

Eeeeewww!  :zombiefuck: :thumbdn:

I think I read some where that Alfonso was into having sex with dogs. Is that true?

No I am not making it up or creating rumour. (well yes I am creating rumour but not making it up)

Certainly you are correct, and no laws or tos were broken.

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #96 on: March 23, 2013, 10:54:15 AM »
Missed that post too. This is the one that was noticed, once realizing why you felt the need to respond.

Eeeeewww!  :zombiefuck: :thumbdn:

I think I read some where that Alfonso was into having sex with dogs. Is that true?

No I am not making it up or creating rumour. (well yes I am creating rumour but not making it up)

Certainly you are correct, and no laws or tos were broken.

No and therefore no Rules either. But you DID say that i had broken them and knew that I did and inferred that i would and accept the favouritism for not being harshly dealt with for purposely breaking rules. You also said that I would be unwilling to admit/confess to any wrong doing.
These are more than just mere opinion. Mere opinion wouldn't state such things about me as absolutes. You did and they were not ordinary things they were things against every action i have done on the board and every value I have. So it was not a speculation born of what I have done but rather what i haven't and so i ask why you were to make such judgments and why you stated them so absolute.
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Jack

  • Reiterative Utterance of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 14550
  • Karma: 0
  • You don't know Jack.
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #97 on: March 23, 2013, 11:04:54 AM »
Missed that post too. This is the one that was noticed, once realizing why you felt the need to respond.

Eeeeewww!  :zombiefuck: :thumbdn:

I think I read some where that Alfonso was into having sex with dogs. Is that true?

No I am not making it up or creating rumour. (well yes I am creating rumour but not making it up)

Certainly you are correct, and no laws or tos were broken.

No and therefore no Rules either. But you DID say that i had broken them and knew that I did and inferred that i would and accept the favouritism for not being harshly dealt with for purposely breaking rules. You also said that I would be unwilling to admit/confess to any wrong doing.

You can stop putting words in my mouth. Said you have stepped over the line of my understanding of the rules and the lines these rules should be clarified, stated the personal belief that you know what topics are unacceptable for discussion, and said I didn't expect you to admit it.


Quote
These are more than just mere opinion. Mere opinion wouldn't state such things about me as absolutes. You did and they were not ordinary things they were things against every action i have done on the board and every value I have. So it was not a speculation born of what I have done but rather what i haven't and so i ask why you were to make such judgments and why you stated them so absolute.


In the matter of fact base statements, yes, this is my posting style, to express opinion as matter of fact. This is true and won't change. This is my opinion in this matter. You know what topics are unacceptable, you will be treated differently by the admins than marx, and implying/accusing members of engaging in paedophilia or bestiality crosses the line of what's considered acceptable topics on this site.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2013, 11:07:03 AM by Jack »

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #98 on: March 23, 2013, 12:13:16 PM »
Missed that post too. This is the one that was noticed, once realizing why you felt the need to respond.

Eeeeewww!  :zombiefuck: :thumbdn:

I think I read some where that Alfonso was into having sex with dogs. Is that true?

No I am not making it up or creating rumour. (well yes I am creating rumour but not making it up)

Certainly you are correct, and no laws or tos were broken.

No and therefore no Rules either. But you DID say that i had broken them and knew that I did and inferred that i would and accept the favouritism for not being harshly dealt with for purposely breaking rules. You also said that I would be unwilling to admit/confess to any wrong doing.

You can stop putting words in my mouth. Said you have stepped over the line of my understanding of the rules and the lines these rules should be clarified, stated the personal belief that you know what topics are unacceptable for discussion, and said I didn't expect you to admit it.

I have not yet started putting words in your mouth.
If you are wanting to accuse me of that as well as knowingly breaking rules and and hiding/not admitting/deceiving (or however you view it) and accepting special treatment from rules I had knowingly broken......then maybe putting words in your mouth may be a acceptable way to debate with you. At the moment I don't believe I have.



Quote
These are more than just mere opinion. Mere opinion wouldn't state such things about me as absolutes. You did and they were not ordinary things they were things against every action i have done on the board and every value I have. So it was not a speculation born of what I have done but rather what i haven't and so i ask why you were to make such judgments and why you stated them so absolute.


In the matter of fact base statements, yes, this is my posting style, to express opinion as matter of fact. This is true and won't change. This is my opinion in this matter. You know what topics are unacceptable, you will be treated differently by the admins than marx, and implying/accusing members of engaging in paedophilia or bestiality crosses the line of what's considered acceptable topics on this site.

I know what I believe are acceptable topics.
Here is one. What was the subject matter and how well was it received by members here (not YOU specifically but others)

http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,18251.msg804929.html#msg804929\

The second video look familiar? What was the subject matter in that second one?
I know, I know. These were simply comedy and meant to be in bad taste and was not really serious about bestiality or murder. Yes it was well received by the members here but that was........NO. No it wasn't.

Calling someone a "Dogfucker" is not nice. Calling someone a "cocksucker" is not nice or calling someone an "essayist" is not nice.  These things are neither unacceptable for discussion on here nor rule breaking.

That video is not unacceptable for discussion nor was it breaking rules.

So what does that leave me with?  :doggy: <====== I don't think anyone has had a hard time with him.

No wait a minute, there was that post I quoted from years ago. Yes I remembered I had come across an old existing post on this site by a previous member as to Cartman having sex with dogs. I did not write it and I simply quoted it and later said I was not serious about its content. I was actually more serious about the content of him confessing to threatening 15 year old girls and that is how i came across the posts.

But did the post break any rules? Nope.

But that is not the new measure is it? It is topics unacceptable for discussion....not breaking rules...we have moved the goal post. I guess too but stating what is and is not acceptable for discussion, you mean to you, and you define in what way?

I mean if me stating I had found something already posted on here that was (true or not) embarrassing (which I don't really think he cares about) and suggests he has sex with dogs, that is in your mind unacceptable BUT you MAY be fine with the boys from Doug Anthony All Stars singing about having sex with "dogs in the park, after dark, when the moon is a pie in the sky".
OR you may not but others may not mind. OR it may be that others are fine with both the video and that post BECAUSE it breaks no rules. OR they may think it funny or irrelevant or boring or stupid but not necessarily unacceptable.

What do you think? I think if I was posting dog sex things in volume (kinda like "Cartman or you would notice" kinda volume) that may warrant at the very least calling me out on my excessiveness. OR If I was really graphic in my descriptions? OR if I was serious? Or if I actually posting Animal/human porn - defined bestiality? Then yes I may very see you had a point in this unacceptable for discussion.

This is not a tea room and I don't know what your measuring tool is or whether you are happy to lump bestiality as all in - suggestion or graphic image same ballpark? Going on and on, or a couple of quips?

None of this really is a big deal. I think you were wrong, perhaps for the right intention, pointing out Alfonso ought not be banned (which I agree with). I don't care that you have changed the goalposts either.

What I don't like is after all I have been and have not been here, The thought that you would think that I would wimp out of owning my actions, or defending myself, and that I would leach off goodwill of people here to protect me from possible fallout, or lie about what I thought. I defend everything I do, and back myself, and accept when I consider I do wrong. I am not slow to apologise If I think I am in the wrong, and I hide behind no one. Never.

The thought that your opinion of me being a person that would is disappointing. Kind of "No Al, you never do those things BUT with this situation, I automatically suspected you naturally would. Just my opinion" That is how it read to me.

The Alfonso having sex with dogs? Someone else said it. I thought it was funny and reposted it. That was a few days ago. Were it not for regurgitating it now I probably would not have even gone there again. not out of a want to avoid trouble but because it was a quick laugh and the thread moved on.

« Last Edit: March 23, 2013, 12:22:15 PM by Al Swearengen »
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Jack

  • Reiterative Utterance of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 14550
  • Karma: 0
  • You don't know Jack.
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #99 on: March 23, 2013, 01:23:15 PM »
Have said all there is to say about it. These are my thoughts and they wont change. Fall on your own sword, or not; claim it was fine and all the reasons why; it doesn't really matter. </endfaggyjack>

Offline odeon

  • Witchlet of the Aspie Elite
  • Webmaster
  • Postwhore Beyond Repair
  • *****
  • Posts: 108879
  • Karma: 4482
  • Gender: Male
  • Replacement Despot
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #100 on: March 23, 2013, 05:03:08 PM »
Didn't see this until now. Since I made some of the quoted comments, I felt I should clarify them.

Re bestiality: this was a while ago but I'm pretty sure I meant in the context of posting pictures. Calling someone a dogfucker is, as mentioned, not nice but I fail to see how it would violate anything. It might be defamatory but that sort of thing is very hard to prove. MLA might know but he is no longer here.

As for the rules of this site, we do need to follow the Hostgator TOS, which means that we need to follow the applicable laws in the states of Texas and Florida, but this is an internet message board and the laws that we can break against are about publishing content. In other words, we won't be able to engage in bestiality but we might post pictures of it, and that would violate the TOS.

Paedophilia and copyrighted material would be my greatest concerns, however. Both could get us shut down.

As for other rules, I've pointed out more than once that if your objective is to harm the site, you won't be here for long.

Marx was stupid enough to post pictures, illegal content, which was the direct reason for his ban. That he tried to make it look as if Anton had posted them, which was just as stupid. He also made veiled threats, which didn't help his case.

Combine those and there's no reason to limit the consequences to harsh words. He was an idiot.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

- Albert Einstein

Offline skyblue1

  • Overlooked of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Obsessive Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 8945
  • Karma: 737
  • Gender: Male
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #101 on: March 23, 2013, 05:08:24 PM »
Didn't see this until now. Since I made some of the quoted comments, I felt I should clarify them.

Re bestiality: this was a while ago but I'm pretty sure I meant in the context of posting pictures. Calling someone a dogfucker is, as mentioned, not nice but I fail to see how it would violate anything. It might be defamatory but that sort of thing is very hard to prove. MLA might know but he is no longer here.

As for the rules of this site, we do need to follow the Hostgator TOS, which means that we need to follow the applicable laws in the states of Texas and Florida, but this is an internet message board and the laws that we can break against are about publishing content. In other words, we won't be able to engage in bestiality but we might post pictures of it, and that would violate the TOS.

Paedophilia and copyrighted material would be my greatest concerns, however. Both could get us shut down.

As for other rules, I've pointed out more than once that if your objective is to harm the site, you won't be here for long.

Marx was stupid enough to post pictures, illegal content, which was the direct reason for his ban. That he tried to make it look as if Anton had posted them, which was just as stupid. He also made veiled threats, which didn't help his case.

Combine those and there's no reason to limit the consequences to harsh words. He was an idiot.
informative :plus:

P7PSP

  • Guest
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #102 on: March 23, 2013, 08:01:22 PM »
Sure you know you have, and you will likely be given patience in the matter as a long standing member, and maybe you should. Not saying you should be banned; in fact, don't know that marx should have been either. Never really understood where the lines of these rules lie. More intersted in the thoughts of the admin who banned him.
I am the first member here to call for Marx being banned.

Marx fabricated evidence in an attempted frame up of Alfonso with the intent of getting Alfonso banned. The fact that the scumbag planted evidence with that intent is a great reason to ban the POS IMO.

As far as references to bestiality go  :doggy: does not get anyone banned and neither did calling Duke Nukem a pig fucker.

Offline Jack

  • Reiterative Utterance of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 14550
  • Karma: 0
  • You don't know Jack.
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #103 on: March 23, 2013, 08:40:44 PM »
Have actually had the thought he's much like an older version of duke, cartman. He should come back.

P7PSP

  • Guest
Re: Marx fabricated screen shots to get Alfonso banned.
« Reply #104 on: March 23, 2013, 10:09:28 PM »
Joan Jett is cool.