Milo Granger: How many lights do you see?Gopher Gary: Milo Granger: What's so funny?Gopher Gary: There are no lightsMilo Granger: Oh $#!+
0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Eclair on June 16, 2007, 07:56:46 PMLord, here we go....now it looks like all the WP's are joining here.Can I get banned from this site if this shit continues?Banned from Intensity? No way!
Lord, here we go....now it looks like all the WP's are joining here.Can I get banned from this site if this shit continues?
Let's say hypothetically, for the sake of argument, that an adult in one country sent naked pictures of himself or herself to an underage child in Oregon, where the age of consent is 18, and solicited similar pictures from the child. Looking at it from a pedantic legal standpoint, if these pictures are considered pornographic, whose laws would apply in this case: Oregon laws; US laws; the other country's laws; or international law?
Quote from: Callaway on June 16, 2007, 07:59:27 PMQuote from: Eclair on June 16, 2007, 07:56:46 PMLord, here we go....now it looks like all the WP's are joining here.Can I get banned from this site if this shit continues?Banned from Intensity? No way!Oh well, at least the membership might have an influx for a bit...
I posted a hypothetical situation on Graelwyn's thread, so just in case it gets deleted as well:Quote from: CallawayLet's say hypothetically, for the sake of argument, that an adult in one country sent naked pictures of himself or herself to an underage child in Oregon, where the age of consent is 18, and solicited similar pictures from the child. Looking at it from a pedantic legal standpoint, if these pictures are considered pornographic, whose laws would apply in this case: Oregon laws; US laws; the other country's laws; or international law?
Quote from: Callaway on June 16, 2007, 08:06:53 PMI posted a hypothetical situation on Graelwyn's thread, so just in case it gets deleted as well:Quote from: CallawayLet's say hypothetically, for the sake of argument, that an adult in one country sent naked pictures of himself or herself to an underage child in Oregon, where the age of consent is 18, and solicited similar pictures from the child. Looking at it from a pedantic legal standpoint, if these pictures are considered pornographic, whose laws would apply in this case: Oregon laws; US laws; the other country's laws; or international law?Is it just me or has the original thread of likedcalico's that was titled "I'm thinking of leaving Intensity" has disappeared from the haven?The very one where not only I defend myself, but also, where I question whether Grael should be a Mod?
Quote from: Eclair on June 16, 2007, 08:13:27 PMQuote from: Callaway on June 16, 2007, 08:06:53 PMI posted a hypothetical situation on Graelwyn's thread, so just in case it gets deleted as well:Quote from: CallawayLet's say hypothetically, for the sake of argument, that an adult in one country sent naked pictures of himself or herself to an underage child in Oregon, where the age of consent is 18, and solicited similar pictures from the child. Looking at it from a pedantic legal standpoint, if these pictures are considered pornographic, whose laws would apply in this case: Oregon laws; US laws; the other country's laws; or international law?Is it just me or has the original thread of likedcalico's that was titled "I'm thinking of leaving Intensity" has disappeared from the haven?The very one where not only I defend myself, but also, where I question whether Grael should be a Mod?it wasn't there. i looked for it, but i only found graelwyns.
eclair, would you like to pm it to me and i can give you an objective viewpoint as to whether or not it is as bad as you think it is?
Quote from: Spokane Girl on June 16, 2007, 04:06:49 PMQuote from: McWatcher on June 16, 2007, 03:57:14 PMbecause you troubled eclair. and she is my new friend.Wow I don't care, she hurt me so much she left me in tears. Accusing me of playing a game and then accusing me of playing it again on WP when I posted about my hurt feelings. We're both in the same boat. We insulted each other, hurt each other, and now hate each other. That's too bad, because I think it was just a misunderstanding.I posted in the thread, so now it will probably be deleted. Posted for posterity:Quote from: CallawayQuote from: TheMachine1Quote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEQuote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEi just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at allToo intelligent?you should be banned for that commentNot at all. Like here, most members there have Asperger's.There are a couple of HFAs, as well. . I do not doubt that but only a small percent of people here tend to bash others. And those bashers tend to have memberships on that site to. I think there are additional comorbid factors like narcissistic personality disorder and sociopathy that explain the difference. And typically in the DSM-IV your most negative diagnosis is your primary diagnosis. So by my own estimation that site is not an autism site.And exactly how much time did you spend on www.Intensitysquared.com before reaching this conclusion, TheMachine1? If I remember correctly, you got frustrated with the registration process and gave up too easily. Actually I can tell you the answer to this question. You joined Intensitysquared on October 22, 2006 and your last visit there was November 4, 2006. You spent a total of 2 hours and 55 minutes there and you made a total of 11 posts.That is not a lot of time to psychoanalyze everyone on Intensitysquared and reach the conclusion that we don't have autism or we have some other personality disorders in addition to autism. Why don't you spend more time there and then you can gather more information? We tend to be older than the average members here because we don't accept members under 18. Most of us are fairly intelligent people who are dedicated to the concept of freedom of speech. Most of us have some sort of ASD.
Quote from: McWatcher on June 16, 2007, 03:57:14 PMbecause you troubled eclair. and she is my new friend.Wow I don't care, she hurt me so much she left me in tears. Accusing me of playing a game and then accusing me of playing it again on WP when I posted about my hurt feelings. We're both in the same boat. We insulted each other, hurt each other, and now hate each other.
because you troubled eclair. and she is my new friend.
Quote from: TheMachine1Quote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEQuote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEi just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at allToo intelligent?you should be banned for that commentNot at all. Like here, most members there have Asperger's.There are a couple of HFAs, as well. . I do not doubt that but only a small percent of people here tend to bash others. And those bashers tend to have memberships on that site to. I think there are additional comorbid factors like narcissistic personality disorder and sociopathy that explain the difference. And typically in the DSM-IV your most negative diagnosis is your primary diagnosis. So by my own estimation that site is not an autism site.And exactly how much time did you spend on www.Intensitysquared.com before reaching this conclusion, TheMachine1? If I remember correctly, you got frustrated with the registration process and gave up too easily. Actually I can tell you the answer to this question. You joined Intensitysquared on October 22, 2006 and your last visit there was November 4, 2006. You spent a total of 2 hours and 55 minutes there and you made a total of 11 posts.That is not a lot of time to psychoanalyze everyone on Intensitysquared and reach the conclusion that we don't have autism or we have some other personality disorders in addition to autism. Why don't you spend more time there and then you can gather more information? We tend to be older than the average members here because we don't accept members under 18. Most of us are fairly intelligent people who are dedicated to the concept of freedom of speech. Most of us have some sort of ASD.
Quote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEQuote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEi just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at allToo intelligent?you should be banned for that commentNot at all. Like here, most members there have Asperger's.There are a couple of HFAs, as well. . I do not doubt that but only a small percent of people here tend to bash others. And those bashers tend to have memberships on that site to. I think there are additional comorbid factors like narcissistic personality disorder and sociopathy that explain the difference. And typically in the DSM-IV your most negative diagnosis is your primary diagnosis. So by my own estimation that site is not an autism site.
Quote from: EEZEQuote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEi just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at allToo intelligent?you should be banned for that commentNot at all. Like here, most members there have Asperger's.There are a couple of HFAs, as well. .
Quote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEi just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at allToo intelligent?you should be banned for that comment
Quote from: EEZEi just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at allToo intelligent?
i just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at all
Quote from: Callaway on June 16, 2007, 04:15:54 PMQuote from: Spokane Girl on June 16, 2007, 04:06:49 PMQuote from: McWatcher on June 16, 2007, 03:57:14 PMbecause you troubled eclair. and she is my new friend.Wow I don't care, she hurt me so much she left me in tears. Accusing me of playing a game and then accusing me of playing it again on WP when I posted about my hurt feelings. We're both in the same boat. We insulted each other, hurt each other, and now hate each other. That's too bad, because I think it was just a misunderstanding.I posted in the thread, so now it will probably be deleted. Posted for posterity:Quote from: CallawayQuote from: TheMachine1Quote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEQuote from: calandaleQuote from: EEZEi just went on that site theres something not right about it they don't seem autistic at allToo intelligent?you should be banned for that commentNot at all. Like here, most members there have Asperger's.There are a couple of HFAs, as well. . I do not doubt that but only a small percent of people here tend to bash others. And those bashers tend to have memberships on that site to. I think there are additional comorbid factors like narcissistic personality disorder and sociopathy that explain the difference. And typically in the DSM-IV your most negative diagnosis is your primary diagnosis. So by my own estimation that site is not an autism site.And exactly how much time did you spend on www.Intensitysquared.com before reaching this conclusion, TheMachine1? If I remember correctly, you got frustrated with the registration process and gave up too easily. Actually I can tell you the answer to this question. You joined Intensitysquared on October 22, 2006 and your last visit there was November 4, 2006. You spent a total of 2 hours and 55 minutes there and you made a total of 11 posts.That is not a lot of time to psychoanalyze everyone on Intensitysquared and reach the conclusion that we don't have autism or we have some other personality disorders in addition to autism. Why don't you spend more time there and then you can gather more information? We tend to be older than the average members here because we don't accept members under 18. Most of us are fairly intelligent people who are dedicated to the concept of freedom of speech. Most of us have some sort of ASD.Deleted indeed. Just lost a hell of a lot of respect for the person who did it too. Seemslike HE can't take the heat of being attackedat all.
Note to self: Don't bold red font
Where did you get this from?
Quote from: Eclair on June 16, 2007, 08:43:15 PMWhere did you get this from?THIS thread. It's gone (not entirely, but you know)at WP.
