Burning The Book

[IQSRLOW]

Just don't go claiming that censoring the excessiveness of that emotional language is a denial of free speech... because it aint.

I didn't. You did.

[Sappho]

Just don't go claiming that censoring the excessiveness of that emotional language is a denial of free speech... because it aint.

I didn't. You did.

Irony is you championing free speech considering the way you run your other forum

Your problem is that you are here in this thread championing free speech when your actions on your other forum speak otherwise.

Is it free speech that he is censoring, or foul language and insulting behaviour? There is a difference.

There is no difference if the other interlocutor also engages and begins with foul language and insulting behaviour in the course of a discussion yet the censorship is only applied to one side

No IQ. You did.

Are you sure you are not Aussie's sock? You are certainly starting to behave like him now.

[IQSRLOW]

No IQ. You did.

Nowhere have I claimed that censoring the excessiveness of that emotional language is a denial of free speech

Are you due for your period?

[Sappho]

Is it free speech that he is censoring, or foul language and insulting behaviour? There is a difference.

There is no difference if the other interlocutor also engages and begins with foul language and insulting behaviour in the course of a discussion yet the censorship is only applied to one side.

Nowhere have I claimed that censoring the excessiveness of that emotional language is a denial of free speech.

Yes you did. Your basic argument is that daddy ought to treat those inclined to foul language and insulting behaviour in the same way: that daddy's failure to do so is a denial of free speech. At the same time, you acknowledge that your foul language and insults are unprecedented... yet have the right to expression because lesser insults and lesser foul language is allowed.

You sound like an emotional little bully boy cross at daddy for punishing you, trying to use big ideas that you fail to understand to somehow justify your bad behaviour.

I should put you across my knee and give you a good spanking.

[IQSRLOW]

Your basic argument is that daddy ought to treat those inclined to foul language and insulting behaviour in the same way

No, that is still your argument no matter how many times you try to apply it to me.

[Sappho]

Your basic argument is that daddy ought to treat those inclined to foul language and insulting behaviour in the same way

No, that is still your argument no matter how many times you try to apply it to me.

Well then, you had better explain what you meant by this....

Is it free speech that he is censoring, or foul language and insulting behaviour? There is a difference.

There is no difference if the other interlocutor also engages and begins with foul language and insulting behaviour in the course of a discussion yet the censorship is only applied to one side.

[IQSRLOW]

Nowhere did I claim that foul language and insulting behaviour was the only moderated behaviour.

Those terms of reference were solely applied by you to bolster your own argument

[Sappho]

Nowhere did I claim that foul language and insulting behaviour was the only moderated behaviour.

Those terms of reference were solely applied by you to bolster your own argument

Well then, you had better explain what you meant by this....

Is it free speech that he is censoring, or foul language and insulting behaviour? There is a difference.

There is no difference if the other interlocutor also engages and begins with foul language and insulting behaviour in the course of a discussion yet the censorship is only applied to one side.

[IQSRLOW]

Well then, you had better explain what you meant by this....

To point out your false dichotomy

[Sappho]

Well then, you had better explain what you meant by this....

To point out your false dichotomy

Explain what you mean by that and also why you did not address it as such at the time.