# No ill will



## Dogbert (Jan 10, 2015)

To call on an author a misogynist is not to call on to those who have benefited from him as well as misogynists. But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian. Thankfully this is only a forum and a society as a whole.

Goodbye


----------



## Dogbert (Jan 10, 2015)

To call on an author a misogynist is not to call on to those who have benefited from him as well as misogynists. But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian. Thankfully this is only a forum and a society as a whole.

Goodbye


----------



## Dogbert (Jan 10, 2015)

To call on an author a misogynist is not to call on to those who have benefited from him as well as misogynists. But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian. Thankfully this is only a forum and a society as a whole.

Goodbye


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

I wish you would reconsider. Really do.


----------



## Brigit (Apr 28, 2015)

Dogbert said:


> To call on an author a misogynist is not to call on to those who have benefited from him as well as misogynists. But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian. Thankfully this is only a forum and a society as a whole.
> 
> Goodbye


I didn't read your other post but I've called that author many things:

Creepy Nerdy Guy
Wet Noodle Looking Guy
Norman Bates
Mommy Issues Guy

...I think the author is repulsive. Good capitalist but repulsive.


----------



## Forest (Mar 29, 2014)

Dogbert said:


> To call on an author a misogynist is not to call on to those who have benefited from him as well as misogynists. But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian. Thankfully this is only a forum and a society as a whole.
> 
> Goodbye


Encounter with the "more equal"?


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Dogbert said:


> To call on an author a misogynist is not to call on to those who have benefited from him as well as misogynists. *But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian.* Thankfully this is only a forum and a society as a whole.
> 
> Goodbye


Not sure who you're addressing here, but this probably should've been taken to PMs.

Pun not intended... mostly.


----------



## ScrambledEggs (Jan 14, 2014)

I believe that the only way to express some important ideas is by offending. Or at very least, offense is impossible to avoid in truly speaking your mind. Add that to my belief that ideas should flow freely, I am as radical of a free speech nut as they come. I never support censorship unless it has degraded into the equivalent of shouting "fire" in a theatre.


----------



## Nucking Futs (Apr 8, 2013)

Dogbert said:


> To call on an author a misogynist is not to call on to those who have benefited from him as well as misogynists. But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian. Thankfully this is only a forum and a society as a whole.
> 
> Goodbye


I'm sure I speak for the majority of people who read this when I say I haven't got a clue what you're talking about.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

It looks like a moderator edited one of his posts.(?)

One of mine was edited which made it confusing because the moderator didn't claim the edit. Whatever. The mod was new on the job so I kept my mouth shut.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

This is a forum and not Manners University. In America, people are free to say what's on their mind, whether it's nice, mean, sensitive, stupid, or incorrect. Does the OP seriously care what some nimrod calls him? If I call you a Tangerine, you won't actually turn into fruit. I've been cussed out, beat on, shot at, rocketed, mortared, IEDd, and slashed. Unflattering words don't appear on my radar screen as threats.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

sargon said:


> He appears to be addressing the moderator who locked his thread and this thread is a sort of public protest to announce he's leaving the forum due to unfair censorship. It doesn't appear that anyone cares but regardless, *sending a pm is more akin to sneaking out the back door rather than standing in front of a building with a picket sign.*


Only if the intent is to leave.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

sargon said:


> I'd wager to guess that's why he said "goodbye".


Yeah, I get that.

My point is that he could've dealt w/ his frustration more productively via PM while simultaneously NOT choosing to leave in an overly emo/dramatic way involving posting essentially the same thread across multiple forums.

Derp.


----------



## MarriedDude (Jun 21, 2014)

wet noodle looking guy....

Lol.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

That would be unfortunate, Dogbert. Because your thread actually made an impact.

There were some 'unfortunate' posts made, but overall the conversation you started is still going on. 

I even changed the content of the Clubhouse sticky as a result.

If you do choose to move on, I wish you the best.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

We'll miss you Dogbert.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

sargon said:


> Well sure, he could have left quietly but he preferred to leave and announce he was doing so in a tribute thread to himself.
> 
> Sort of like that guy who was hit with unfair lifetime alimony and set himself on fire on the courthouse steps. He could have accomplished the same feat in a closed garage, and it probably wouldn't have even made the news, but he wanted to make a statement.


Except that immolation guy's statement would be at least _somewhat_ valid.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

I hope you reconsider doggy person. I had a lot of sophomoric fun with you.&#55357;&#56833;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

Dogbert said:


> But to edit my very short post in another thread by you, is simply Orwellian.


Mods have agendas too. When their agenda conflicts with your opinion, you can expect your post to be edited, deleted, or your account banned.

You just have to accept it, since your right to free speech does not extend to private message forums.


----------



## Brigit (Apr 28, 2015)

Deejo said:


> That would be unfortunate, Dogbert. Because your thread actually made an impact.
> 
> There were some 'unfortunate' posts made, but overall the conversation you started is still going on.
> 
> ...


TBH I didn't understand why Dogbert's thread was locked. The "Red Pill" thread has the exact same tone. FW feels Athol Kay is a low-life misogynist as well and has stated very clearly her views on her thread. I agree there doesn't need to be two threads stating the same thing but I don't feel Dogbert's should have been locked and should be unlocked.


----------



## Forest (Mar 29, 2014)

Brigit said:


> TBH I didn't understand why Dogbert's thread was locked. The "Red Pill" thread has the exact same tone. FW feels Athol Kay is a low-life misogynist as well and has stated very clearly her views on her thread. I agree there doesn't need to be two threads stating the same thing but I don't feel Dogbert's should have been locked and should be unlocked.



Which returns us to Dogbert's statement regarding Orwellian methodology.


----------

