PDA

View Full Version : One day...



Barry Morris
08-24-2016, 09:55 AM
....one of the higher ups at Vianet will notice the lack of action over here, and will shut down Soonet. Probably without any warning, or fanfare, in the usual way they do things.

It's been a good run. I don't even remember how long the board ran before the major revision and restart in 2000, but 18 years, at least, is a very long time in today's Internet world. Older than almost all the social media sites.

So I just thought I'd say goodbye while the opportunity is still here. Made some good friends, found out the real heart of a few, good and bad, and ticked off a few losers!! :) :) :)

No regrets.

Anapeg
08-24-2016, 01:59 PM
Are you not just a little ray of sunshine in an otherwise burgeoning world.

Barry Morris
08-24-2016, 03:11 PM
Are you not just a little ray of sunshine in an otherwise burgeoning world.

Always was, alway will be!!! :) :) :)

Bluesky
08-25-2016, 09:12 AM
Facebook killed the BBS.

Hans
08-25-2016, 08:34 PM
Video killed the radio star.

blueboy
08-26-2016, 09:39 AM
who cares

Barry Morris
08-26-2016, 09:47 AM
Yup, there's one of the reasons.

The Voice
08-29-2016, 12:34 PM
They decided to put the fox in charge of the Hen House and that sounded the Final Death Knell.

But before that many wandered off to twitter where there is no unnecessary Editing by OVERLY ZEALOUS Mods.

Barry Morris
08-30-2016, 05:22 PM
They decided to put the fox in charge of the Hen House and that sounded the Final Death Knell.

But before that many wandered off to twitter where there is no unnecessary Editing by OVERLY ZEALOUS Mods.

Gee, you'd almost think that such a comment would be edited if the mods were over zealous. :) :) :)

Anapeg
08-31-2016, 04:41 PM
Gee, you'd almost think that such a comment would be edited if the mods were over zealous. :) :) :)

It seems that perhaps those upset with your being offered a position are going to make it a sticking point yet again.

Barry Morris
08-31-2016, 05:26 PM
It seems that perhaps those upset with your being offered a position are going to make it a sticking point yet again.

Reminds me of that old song, "..that deaf dumb and blind kid sure plays a mean pinball!!" :) :) :)

Anapeg
09-01-2016, 12:22 PM
Reminds me of that old song, "..that deaf dumb and blind kid sure plays a mean pinball!!" :) :) :)

Soon as some of the older posters find you have been reinstated traffic ought to pick up so gird thy loins and prepare for incoming.

Barry Morris
09-01-2016, 10:06 PM
Soon as some of the older posters find you have been reinstated traffic ought to pick up so gird thy loins and prepare for incoming.

It's so often good for a laugh!!!

riggs
09-05-2016, 04:07 PM
It's so often good for a laugh!!!

The laughs must be far and few between. It would appear that controversy may be the key to keeping this site alive. Now that the posters that created that have been banned, edited and generally silenced, this may be all that remains.

Barry Morris
09-05-2016, 04:16 PM
The laughs must be far and few between. It would appear that controversy may be the key to keeping this site alive. Now that the posters that created that have been banned, edited and generally silenced, this may be all that remains.

If some losers idea of controversy mostly consists of insulting people, we don't need him.

riggs
09-05-2016, 06:45 PM
If some losers idea of controversy mostly consists of insulting people, we don't need him.

I think the only losers are those that take those insults serious. When internet insults carry that much power over ones life, it's time to step away from the keyboard.

Anapeg
09-05-2016, 08:23 PM
I think the only losers are those that take those insults seriously. When internet insults carry that much power over one's life, it's time to step away from the keyboard.

I would tend to agree with the caveat, both sides need be in place. Those who agitate as well as those who take umbrage. Failing this, there is no drama, no drama, no traffic. The casual conversation, observations and queries of long ago has died with the advent of the bully. The less argumentative have moved on and have never been replaced. Casual conversations end in constant bickering regardless who is at fault it may be.

Barry Morris
09-05-2016, 09:41 PM
I think the only losers are those that take those insults serious. When internet insults carry that much power over ones life, it's time to step away from the keyboard.

I will always take issue with bullies, especially when their true intent is revealed in PM's!!

Hans
09-06-2016, 01:52 PM
Truth always lies in the eyes of the beholder.

Barry Morris
09-06-2016, 02:02 PM
Truth always lies in the eyes of the beholder.

I suppose that's one way to look at it.

But are you OK for me to repeat some of the stuff, and direct it at you??

Anapeg
09-06-2016, 09:46 PM
Even the moderators have a problem getting along it would seem.

Barry Morris
09-07-2016, 12:33 AM
Even the moderators have a problem getting along it would seem.

Some give a damn.

Hans
09-07-2016, 01:14 PM
Even the moderators have a problem getting along it would seem.

We get along just fine. That does not mean we have to agree on everything, as that would make for a boring experience.

Anapeg
09-09-2016, 10:37 PM
We get along just fine. That does not mean we have to agree on everything, as that would make for a boring experience.

Not entirely true is it Hans? I have seen more and a couple of scathing posts aimed at Barry when others were piling on. That was unethical, unnecessary and only added fuel to the attack. People of authority do not discuss differences in public as that serves to diminish your status. When you are an authority figure one discusses their views in camera,not in public.

Hans
09-09-2016, 11:35 PM
And it is an attack by what standards? What constitutes "an attack"?

Every medal has 2 sides, and I have seen some instances where I felt compelled to make some kind of public statement.
It does have something to do with ethics, but not in the negative way you portray it.
If people have a point they have a point, and I have no problem to admit in public they have a point.

Now if you were wondering why it is so silent on here, it is simple: certain people are making a point. I think they are making their point rather well actually.

Barry Morris
09-10-2016, 08:41 AM
And it is an attack by what standards? What constitutes "an attack"?

Every medal has 2 sides, and I have seen some instances where I felt compelled to make some kind of public statement.
It does have something to do with ethics, but not in the negative way you portray it.
If people have a point they have a point, and I have no problem to admit in public they have a point.

Now if you were wondering why it is so silent on here, it is simple: certain people are making a point. I think they are making their point rather well actually.

When a review was asked for of a certain member's posts, Admin banned him permanently. AND his alter ego had to have his posts approved by a mod. So it was with no small satisfaction I put that alter ego on ignore when he began to send me nasty PM's.

There are people who are not in the least concerned about attacks on others. "Not an issue" is the usual response. Of course, not an issue to them is the reality. And if it has become clear that the care and safety of others is not their concern, then it is easy to see where at least part of the fault lies.

And that is just making a point!! :) :) :)

riggs
09-12-2016, 05:10 PM
. And if it has become clear that the care and safety of others

Are you saying members were crying out for help in the name of "care and safety" from this web site? If so, I feel pity for those who take a BBS so serious. Their life must be in absolute turmoil in the day to day struggles of reality. I can't even imagine allowing this site or any other to have so much control over ones life that they would pursue admin to review their post. In my view, if this was the biggest problem I was facing, I would consider myself to be fortunate and blessed knowing I have the power to walk away at any time.

Barry Morris
09-12-2016, 05:24 PM
Are you saying members were crying out for help in the name of "care and safety" from this web site? If so, I feel pity for those who take a BBS so serious. Their life must be in absolute turmoil in the day to day struggles of reality. I can't even imagine allowing this site or any other to have so much control over ones life that they would pursue admin to review their post. In my view, if this was the biggest problem I was facing, I would consider myself to be fortunate and blessed knowing I have the power to walk away at any time.

Nope, wasn't saying that at all.

If people asked for clarification before ranting, we'd have a lot less trouble.

riggs
09-12-2016, 08:03 PM
Nope, wasn't saying that at all.

If people asked for clarification before ranting, we'd have a lot less trouble.

Wasn't trying to strike a nerve Barry. There's no need for you to be defensive. My point is people have a choice to be here or not. If it becomes stressful to the point that they need someone to be removed then it's a healthy choice to let go and leave the site.

As for trouble.....it appears highly unlikely with only a few people posting.

Barry Morris
09-13-2016, 12:22 AM
Wasn't trying to strike a nerve Barry. There's no need for you to be defensive. My point is people have a choice to be here or not. If it becomes stressful to the point that they need someone to be removed then it's a healthy choice to let go and leave the site.

As for trouble.....it appears highly unlikely with only a few people posting.

Since you are obviously talking to someone else, I'll leave this conversation.

The Voice
09-19-2016, 07:51 PM
I will always take issue with bullies, especially when their true intent is revealed in PM's!!

Or in their posts or the people they run off????????? :) :) :)

Barry Morris
09-20-2016, 08:43 AM
Or in their posts or the people they run off?????????


And your consistent nastiness has no effect?? :) :) :)

blueboy
09-20-2016, 12:10 PM
Still nothing better to do ?

Anapeg
09-20-2016, 12:49 PM
I know of quite a few who left due to the constant derision. There were yet others who left simply due to the constant turmoil and the hijacking of threads. Many came here to natter, visit, commiserate, or simply exchange banter. That, unfortunately, became impossible.

The Voice
09-21-2016, 05:58 AM
Don't worry Pegger you and Barry have the place pretty much to yourself now.

Barry Morris
09-21-2016, 01:01 PM
Don't worry Pegger you and Barry have the place pretty much to yourself now.

An 18 year run is not bad, and this site has apparently outlasted most of the other Vianet BBS. So if those who only come to insult people are gone, I certainly have no problem with it.

Anapeg
09-21-2016, 01:32 PM
An 18-year run is not bad, and this site has apparently outlasted most of the other Vianet BBS. So if those who only come to insult people are gone, I certainly have no problem with it.

No problem with it doing what? Folding or starting over.

Barry Morris
09-21-2016, 05:18 PM
No problem with it doing what? Folding or starting over.

With the insulters gone.

Hans
09-21-2016, 06:58 PM
Well, that is a rather bold statement to make Barry.

Anapeg
09-21-2016, 08:05 PM
Well, that is a rather bold statement to make Barry.

Why is that? They were a very large part of the problem. Those of a milder nature or those not quite as adept with the English language were put upon in numbers. Beaten into submission until they gave up and left. I feel compelled to say RWGR was not guilty of the brow beating of those people, he and Barry were/are? at one another constantly to the exclusion of any and all threads prior to RW's forced sabbatical this time round.

Anapeg
09-21-2016, 08:13 PM
Don't worry Pegger you and Barry have the place pretty much to yourself now.

I sincerely enjoy discussions that remain respectful, minus the digs, innuendo, and bullying. If that is the way it must be, I will take vanilla and move on.

Hans
09-21-2016, 08:28 PM
Why is that? They were a very large part of the problem. Those of a milder nature or those not quite as adept with the English language were put upon in numbers. Beaten into submission until they gave up and left. I feel compelled to say RWGR was not guilty of the brow beating of those people, he and Barry were/are? at one another constantly to the exclusion of any and all threads prior to RW's forced sabbatical this time round.

And that is exactly why that is a bold statement to make.

The Voice
09-21-2016, 09:14 PM
I sincerely enjoy discussions that remain respectful, minus the digs, innuendo, and bullying. If that is the way it must be, I will take vanilla and move on.

Try taking the Echo?

Peace Out.

The Voice
09-21-2016, 09:17 PM
[QUOTE=Barry Morris;778129]And your consistent nastiness has no effect?? QUOTE]

Bite Me!!! ;) :) :)

Remember that 3 smilies mean I'm joking. Kind of.

Barry Morris
09-21-2016, 09:54 PM
Why is that? They were a very large part of the problem. Those of a milder nature or those not quite as adept with the English language were put upon in numbers. Beaten into submission until they gave up and left. I feel compelled to say RWGR was not guilty of the brow beating of those people, he and Barry were/are? at one another constantly to the exclusion of any and all threads prior to RW's forced sabbatical this time round.

RWGR was not guilty??

Wanna see his PM's??

Barry Morris
09-21-2016, 09:55 PM
[QUOTE=Barry Morris;778129]And your consistent nastiness has no effect?? QUOTE]

Bite Me!!! ;) :) :)

Remember that 3 smilies mean I'm joking. Kind of.

And the kind of means I avoid interactions of ANY kind.

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 12:23 AM
RWGR was not guilty??

Wanna see his PM's??

What I typed stated he was not guilty of bullying the quieter, more refined folk and I meant it. As to what transpired twixt RW and yourself I have not an inkling.

riggs
09-22-2016, 01:51 PM
RWGR was not guilty??

Wanna see his PM's??

I thought a private message was just that.....private

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 04:06 PM
I thought a private message was just that.....private

He was, I believe, speaking metaphorically.

Bluesky
09-22-2016, 05:57 PM
RWGR was not guilty??

Wanna see his PM's??

Yes.

Hans
09-22-2016, 06:01 PM
Interesting. Even in the absence of almost everyone, the fight and arguments continue.
Makes one wonder what the common factor is.

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 06:56 PM
Interesting. Even in the absence of almost everyone, the fight and arguments continue.
Makes one wonder what the common factor is.

He is a lightning rod as many seem jealous of his being made a moderator and jump at any chance to behave as an over-reacting soccer player to draw attention and elicit a reaction. Friendship aside, I would defend the man regardless for this is how I honestly see the goings on. This is how the crew got the family of Anna-noyance to pack up and leave. One slip of the tongue, a French individual using an English word in the wrong context and she and her family were branded as liars. This by the way despite the fact name-calling is not supposed to be tolerated by those owning the board.

Rather than let things die, each and every time they posted, the attacks continued. No one seemed to notice nor care as it was allowed to go on ad nauseam. I wonder who gets applause for the continuance? I can, if you wish carry on but I believe you get my side of the crap going on.

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 07:06 PM
Interesting. Even in the absence of almost everyone, the fight and arguments continue.
Makes one wonder what the common factor is.

Got that right.

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 07:16 PM
He is a lightning rod as many seem jealous of his being made a moderator and jump at any chance to behave as an over-reacting soccer player to draw attention and elicit a reaction. Friendship aside, I would defend the man regardless for this is how I honestly see the goings on. This is how the crew got the family of Anna-noyance to pack up and leave. One slip of the tongue, a French individual using an English word in the wrong context and she and her family were branded as liars. This by the way despite the fact name-calling is not supposed to be tolerated by those owning the board.

Rather than let things die, each and every time they posted, the attacks continued. No one seemed to notice nor care as it was allowed to go on ad nauseam. I wonder who gets applause for the continuance? I can, if you wish carry on but I believe you get my side of the crap going on.

Why is it that you never have any real squabbles with anybody?

Hans
09-22-2016, 07:41 PM
He is a lightning rod as many seem jealous of his being made a moderator and jump at any chance to behave as an over-reacting soccer player to draw attention and elicit a reaction. Friendship aside, I would defend the man regardless for this is how I honestly see the goings on. This is how the crew got the family of Anna-noyance to pack up and leave. One slip of the tongue, a French individual using an English word in the wrong context and she and her family were branded as liars. This by the way despite the fact name-calling is not supposed to be tolerated by those owning the board.

Rather than let things die, each and every time they posted, the attacks continued. No one seemed to notice nor care as it was allowed to go on ad nauseam. I wonder who gets applause for the continuance? I can, if you wish carry on but I believe you get my side of the crap going on.

There were/are several moderators on here, but if I understand you correctly there is only one many seem jealous about? Don't you wonder why that would be happening?

Me and RWGR are not exactly known to be the best of friends either, but that has never caused any issue on here. Makes you wonder.

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 08:15 PM
There were/are several moderators on here, but if I understand you correctly there is only one many seem jealous about? Don't you wonder why that would be happening?

Me and RWGR are not exactly known to be the best of friends either, but that has never caused any issue on here. Makes you wonder.

It could be that you don't throw out passive aggressive posts every 5 minutes followed by 3 smiley faces or start threads that you know will get off track quickly but do it anyway and then cry about it when it does.

It helps to have a friend like Anapeg to assure you that you're the one being victimized even when the true intentions of a certain individual are punching you in the face. I get it though, that's what friends are for and I accept it.

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 08:24 PM
There were/are several moderators on here, but if I understand you correctly there is only one many seem jealous about? Don't you wonder why that would be happening?

Me and RWGR are not exactly known to be the best of friends either, but that has never caused any issue on here. Makes you wonder.

If all are of the same mindset, why bring him back? If you and the other moderators think Barry to be the problem, are you not at fault for offering the position a second time? I realise my questions cannot be answered in an open forum BUT, they are food for thought. It seemed to me when the position was rescinded the *****ing and chewing continued without change, or am I being, once again, myopic?

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 08:27 PM
If all are of the same mindset, why bring him back? If you and the other moderators think Barry to be the problem, are you not at fault for offering the position a second time? I realise my questions cannot be answered in an open forum BUT, they are food for thought. It seemed to me when the position was rescinded the *****ing and chewing continued without change, or am I being, once again, myopic?

Of course it continued. He was still the same buffoon as before the rescinding but now when he started crap, he couldn't ban anyone and send multiple taunting PM's which was causing more problems.

Hans
09-22-2016, 08:42 PM
If all are of the same mindset, why bring him back? If you and the other moderators think Barry to be the problem, are you not at fault for offering the position a second time? I realise my questions cannot be answered in an open forum BUT, they are food for thought. It seemed to me when the position was rescinded the *****ing and chewing continued without change, or am I being, once again, myopic?

FYI, I was never consulted on any such matters and never had any say/input. I honestly have no idea why these things happen the way they happen.

Barry Morris
09-22-2016, 08:49 PM
"...send multiple taunting PM's..."

Odd.

How would anyone know that??

Barry Morris
09-22-2016, 08:51 PM
Interesting. Even in the absence of almost everyone, the fight and arguments continue.
Makes one wonder what the common factor is.

maybe it's a mod who lets anything slide. Where did the problem start in this thread this time??

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 08:51 PM
"...send multiple taunting PM's..."

Odd.

How would anyone know that??

Gee I don't know maybe by checking their private messages.

Hans
09-22-2016, 08:51 PM
maybe it's a mod who lets anything slide. Where did the problem start in this thread this time??

Really?

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 08:52 PM
maybe it's a mod who lets anything slide. Where did the problem start in this thread this time??

Post number 1

Barry Morris
09-22-2016, 08:52 PM
Gee I don't know maybe by checking their private messages.

Oh really?? Post 'em. And do make sure they were not preceded by others.

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 08:53 PM
Oh really?? Post 'em. And do make sure they were not preceded by others.

Against the rules. Nice try though.

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 08:55 PM
So I just thought I'd say goodbye while the opportunity is still here. Made some good friends, found out the real heart of a few, good and bad, and ticked off a few losers!! :) :) :)

No regrets.

Passive aggressive post with 3 smilies. Don't worry Anapeg didn't notice.

Barry Morris
09-22-2016, 08:55 PM
Against the rules. Nice try though.

Yeah, well, if the system works for you, why not, eh?? :) :) :)

Barry Morris
09-22-2016, 08:56 PM
Passive aggressive post with 3 smilies. Don't worry Anapeg didn't notice.

Yeah, but a loser did!!! :) :) :)

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 08:58 PM
Yeah, but a loser did!!! :) :) :)

See Anapeg. This is who you are defending. And with that I'm ouuta here. Hans I will come back in November to give you your Trump speech. LOL. Peace Hans

Hans
09-22-2016, 08:59 PM
That could be considered name calling Barry.

Hans
09-22-2016, 09:00 PM
See Anapeg. This is who you are defending. And with that I'm ouuta here. Hans I will come back in November to give you your Trump speech. LOL. Peace Hans

You were going to eat your hat when Trump wins, right?

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 09:02 PM
You were going to eat your hat when Trump wins, right?

I don't have one. But I will eat your Make America Great Again hat if in the 0.000001 chance he does.

Hans
09-22-2016, 09:04 PM
That's a deal, better have some salt and pepper ready!

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 09:04 PM
That's a deal, better have some salt and pepper ready!

If Trump wins, i'll eat it without seasoning.

Hans
09-22-2016, 09:07 PM
Ohhhh, you sound very confident in a Clinton win.

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 09:12 PM
Ohhhh, you sound very confident in a Clinton win.

Actually no. I will just say a Democrat win

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 09:15 PM
I don't think a Trump presidency would be the end of the world and may even bring about some sort of reform for the better. Hillary will keep things status quo. I just know there are not enough people for Trump and not enough money exchanging hands.

Barry Morris
09-22-2016, 10:24 PM
That could be considered name calling Barry.

Oh really?? Now?? Finally??

Hans
09-22-2016, 10:32 PM
Oh really?? Now?? Finally??

Baiting is not your forte Barry. Just saying.

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 10:58 PM
Why is it that you never have any real squabbles with anybody?

I am not sure, I like to think it is because I respect others. You would have to tell me.

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 11:00 PM
FYI, I was never consulted on any such matters and never had any say/input. I honestly have no idea why these things happen the way they happen.

Ah, a soldier, not a commanding officer.

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 11:03 PM
Passive aggressive post with 3 smilies. Don't worry Anapeg didn't notice.

Oh, but I have and while I see them in a different view than some I see no malice?

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 11:05 PM
That could be considered name calling Barry.

I can see that.

Anapeg
09-22-2016, 11:07 PM
I don't have one. But I will eat your Make America Great Again hat if in the 0.000001 chance he does.

His chances are far greater than those of Mrs Clinton.

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 11:14 PM
His chances are far greater than those of Mrs Clinton.

Not a single semi-educated person in the world would agree with you

Official Cat of Soonet
09-22-2016, 11:16 PM
Not only will she win, it will be a landslide. We're talking historic.

Barry Morris
09-23-2016, 08:17 AM
Not a single semi-educated person in the world would agree with you

I suppose, Hans, the determination of name calling is highly influenced by the eloquence of the delivery!!

riggs
09-23-2016, 09:47 AM
He was, I believe, speaking metaphorically.

"wanna see his PM'S" is metaphorically?

a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God.”. Compare mixed metaphor, simile (def 1). 2. something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.

Barry Morris
09-23-2016, 10:27 AM
"wanna see his PM'S" is metaphorically?

a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God.”. Compare mixed metaphor, simile (def 1). 2. something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.

Can't reveal PM's of members.

But non members??

:) :) :)

Anapeg
09-23-2016, 11:44 AM
"wanna see his PM'S" is metaphorically?

a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God.”. Compare mixed metaphor, simile (def 1). 2. something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.

"a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable", is there a problem?

Anapeg
09-23-2016, 11:46 AM
Not a single semi-educated person in the world would agree with you

It will come down to the least offensive will win. Hillery's past has preceded her. Unlike the Canadian voter, the American counterpart has a very good memory.

Anapeg
09-23-2016, 11:49 AM
Can't reveal PM's of members.

But non members??

:) :) :)

Membership though rescinded is remembered I would think. The PM's made while a member in good standing would still benefit from rules and regulations in effect at the time of the PM.

riggs
09-23-2016, 11:52 AM
Can't reveal PM's of members.

But non members??

:) :) :)

I never noticed whether it stated that in terms and conditions of use of this site. Either way I would view a PM as private as it was sent when he was a member under those terms. I am curious though.......why would you keep PM's from a member who is permanently banned?

riggs
09-23-2016, 11:55 AM
"a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable", is there a problem?

There is.....the statement does not appear to be metaphorical. It comes off more as a threat.

riggs
09-23-2016, 11:56 AM
It will come down to the least offensive will win. Hillery's past has preceded her. Unlike the Canadian voter, the American counterpart has a very good memory.

Wynne comes to mind in that statement...

Barry Morris
09-23-2016, 02:21 PM
I never noticed whether it stated that in terms and conditions of use of this site. Either way I would view a PM as private as it was sent when he was a member under those terms. I am curious though.......why would you keep PM's from a member who is permanently banned?

But he is not banned in all his personas.

Barry Morris
09-23-2016, 02:22 PM
There is.....the statement does not appear to be metaphorical. It comes off more as a threat.

I am eternally amused by the comments that posts a mod disagrees with have been removed.

Anapeg
09-23-2016, 03:00 PM
There is.....the statement does not appear to be metaphorical. It comes off more as a threat.

"not literally applicable" to myself translate not able to be put into practice. That is, I realize my take on the meaning and any and all translations carry the same weight.

Anapeg
09-23-2016, 03:01 PM
Wynne comes to mind in that statement...

She comes to mind a lot. She is not unlike the booger on your finger that you just can't get rid of.

Anapeg
09-23-2016, 03:04 PM
But he is not banned in all his personas.

I am still computer illiterate to the point of being able to have multiple personas' on a single computer?

Hans
09-23-2016, 05:40 PM
The term "multiple personas" is often confused with the term "multiple accounts".

I think what he means is someone having more than 1 account, posting under different names. It is still the same person posting.
This is not the same as someone posting under different personas. This would be the same person posting in different roles, similar to an actor playing different characters. This often requires having multiple accounts to make it more believable.

Hans
09-23-2016, 05:42 PM
I suppose, Hans, the determination of name calling is highly influenced by the eloquence of the delivery!!

I fail to see how the sentence "Not a single semi-educated person in the world would agree with you" could be considered name calling.
However, if you believe it is, could you explain in more detail how exactly that is name calling?

Hans
09-23-2016, 05:44 PM
"not literally applicable" to myself translate not able to be put into practice. That is, I realize my take on the meaning and any and all translations carry the same weight.

But you can easily put this into practice by using the copy-paste function. Or if you want to be even more authentic, posting screenshots.

Barry Morris
09-23-2016, 06:28 PM
I fail to see how the sentence "Not a single semi-educated person in the world would agree with you" could be considered name calling.
However, if you believe it is, could you explain in more detail how exactly that is name calling?

Really?? Maybe THAT is the problem.

OK, the implication is that a semi-educated person would have a different opinion of the matter. In other words, "you" have a lesser level of education. Or none.

I trust you get the implication of THAT???

Hans
09-23-2016, 06:49 PM
Really?? Maybe THAT is the problem.

OK, the implication is that a semi-educated person would have a different opinion of the matter. In other words, "you" have a lesser level of education. Or none.

I trust you get the implication of THAT???

Well, there is this thing called "context". I believe it is something you are missing when it comes to "insults" and "name calling".

There are many well known people who use what you describe as "a lesser level of education" in a certain context.
I highly believe the following people were not "name calling" when they said the following.

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." Thomas Jefferson
"I no have education. I have inspiration. If I was educated, I would be a damn fool." Bob Marley
"The educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the dead." Aristotle
"Only the educated are free." Epictetus

And the list goes on.
Are those all considered "name calling" in your opinion?

Hans
09-23-2016, 06:55 PM
Mike Pence slams Obama for describing Trump as a “demagogue”: “I don’t think name calling has any place in public life”

Who agrees that Obama was "name calling" when he described Trump as a demagogue?

Official Cat of Soonet
09-23-2016, 06:57 PM
I fail to see how the sentence "Not a single semi-educated person in the world would agree with you" could be considered name calling.
However, if you believe it is, could you explain in more detail how exactly that is name calling?

I'm not saying it as an insult. I really mean there is not one semi educated person that believes Trump has a WAY BETTER shot than Hillary. Does he have a shot. Sure. Even the strongest if Trump supporters realize he has a shot but not a way better one.

riggs
09-23-2016, 10:50 PM
She comes to mind a lot. She is not unlike the booger on your finger that you just can't get rid of.

Well said

Barry Morris
09-24-2016, 08:44 AM
Mike Pence slams Obama for describing Trump as a “demagogue”: “I don’t think name calling has any place in public life”

Who agrees that Obama was "name calling" when he described Trump as a demagogue?

What a silly question to ask in this context.

Barry Morris
09-24-2016, 08:46 AM
Well, there is this thing called "context". I believe it is something you are missing when it comes to "insults" and "name calling".

There are many well known people who use what you describe as "a lesser level of education" in a certain context.
I highly believe the following people were not "name calling" when they said the following.

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." Thomas Jefferson
"I no have education. I have inspiration. If I was educated, I would be a damn fool." Bob Marley
"The educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the dead." Aristotle
"Only the educated are free." Epictetus

And the list goes on.
Are those all considered "name calling" in your opinion?

I know you have the "baffle 'em with BS" down pretty good.

And do consider your own word, "context".

Anapeg
09-24-2016, 12:11 PM
I fail to see how the sentence "Not a single semi-educated person in the world would agree with you" could be considered name calling.
However, if you believe it is, could you explain in more detail how exactly that is name calling?

I too see it as an opening shot. Basically, they have said I lack even a basic education. It comes down to sensibilities, if you are easily offended you might jump all over that like a fat kid on a candy bar and yet another distraction is born. Yet others keep track, feeling put upon and simply move on.

Anapeg
09-24-2016, 12:15 PM
But you can easily put this into practice by using the copy-paste function. Or if you want to be even more authentic, posting screenshots.

It is not that one lacks the ability to perform the task, rather, while they have the ability they also have the morals and the integrity to abide by the rules not to do it.

Anapeg
09-24-2016, 12:16 PM
Well, there is this thing called "context". I believe it is something you are missing when it comes to "insults" and "name calling".

There are many well known people who use what you describe as "a lesser level of education" in a certain context.
I highly believe the following people were not "name calling" when they said the following.

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." Thomas Jefferson
"I no have education. I have inspiration. If I was educated, I would be a damn fool." Bob Marley
"The educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the dead." Aristotle
"Only the educated are free." Epictetus

And the list goes on.
Are those all considered "name calling" in your opinion?

He is not alone, see my post.

Anapeg
09-24-2016, 12:17 PM
Well said

I thank you sir.

Anapeg
09-24-2016, 12:19 PM
I'm not saying it as an insult. I really mean there is not one semi-educated person that believes Trump has a WAY BETTER shot than Hillary. Does he have a shot? Sure. Even the strongest if Trump supporters realise he has a shot but not a way better one.

It always comes down to perception and the thickness of your hide. Some are far more defensive and delicate.

Barry Morris
09-24-2016, 02:46 PM
It always comes down to perception and the thickness of your hide. Some are far more defensive and delicate.

The defensive and delicate left, afraid to be attacked next, IMO.

Hans
09-24-2016, 03:26 PM
I know you have the "baffle 'em with BS" down pretty good.

And do consider your own word, "context".

I do consider context, which is something you are sorely lacking sir.
All you do is think in terms of "insults" and "attacks" for a select few you constantly single out and bait, just so you can give them another point.

But carry on, it has done many good things for this BBS and eventually there will only be a select few left.

Anapeg
09-24-2016, 05:18 PM
I do consider context, which is something you are sorely lacking sir.
All you do is think in terms of "insults" and "attacks" for a select few you constantly single out and bait, just so you can give them another point.

But carry on, it has done many good things for this BBS and eventually there will only be a select few left.

There are a select few as we speak. You seem to credit Barry with single-handedly reducing the population on the BBS Hans. While he has contributed, he was by far and away not alone. Others, who to anyone watching, need not be brought up by name were as culpable if not more so. The exodus has been brought on by interpreting the rules and regulations rather than enforcing them. The killing off of members has been a marathon, not a sprint. Every one of us, bar none, need look inward and honestly take inventory as to how we were guilty and contributed. Nary a one of us is without sin in this faux pas.

lynys
09-24-2016, 05:47 PM
Barry is why I am not here much. In case anyone wondered. ;)

Barry Morris
09-24-2016, 06:08 PM
Barry is why I am not here much. In case anyone wondered. ;)

Nope.

Barry Morris
09-24-2016, 06:12 PM
..All you do is think in terms of "insults" and "attacks" for a select few you constantly single out and bait, just so you can give them another point.
....

Yup. Sure. Look around, are you blind?? If that's all I thought of, there would be more missing.

Anapeg
09-24-2016, 10:01 PM
Barry is why I am not here much. In case anyone wondered. ;)

Thank you Lynys, has the reason already been stated?

lynys
09-24-2016, 10:43 PM
Well, of course Barry doesn't miss having me around. When I called him on his bull**** accusations, the hole he dug for himself wasn't nearly deep enough to hide in.

Anapeg
09-25-2016, 12:10 AM
Well, of course, Barry doesn't miss having me around. When I called him on his bull**** accusations, the hole he dug for himself wasn't nearly deep enough to hide in.

Even given my sketchy memory, I believe I recall something of this.

Barry Morris
09-25-2016, 06:45 AM
Even given my sketchy memory, I believe I recall something of this.

So do I, my problem being the difficulty believing someone could be so two-faced. I'm glad things are working out.

lynys
09-25-2016, 11:12 AM
So do I, my problem being the difficulty believing someone could be so two-faced. I'm glad things are working out.

Who was two-faced? And, of course things are working out. The rumour you were spreading was completely false.

Barry Morris
09-25-2016, 01:12 PM
Who was two-faced? And, of course things are working out. The rumour you were spreading was completely false.

Any explanation given at this point would spread the story much further than the original. I don't think you wish to continue.

Anapeg
09-25-2016, 05:19 PM
A disagreement being (sort of) handled as adults, I have my doubts a resolution will be agreed upon but this is refreshing.

lynys
09-25-2016, 09:38 PM
Any explanation given at this point would spread the story much further than the original. I don't think you wish to continue.

"Spread the story"? The tale you came up with, or the truth? You don't like my husband, so you spread word that you thought he beats me. The truth is, you don't like my husband, he doesn't like you, and he has never laid a finger on me. So, uh... yeah. The story has nowhere else to go from that.

Barry Morris
09-25-2016, 09:50 PM
"Spread the story"? The tale you came up with, or the truth? You don't like my husband, so you spread word that you thought he beats me. The truth is, you don't like my husband, he doesn't like you, and he has never laid a finger on me. So, uh... yeah. The story has nowhere else to go from that.

It's true that I don't like people that are gratuitously abusive. One does not have to be like that, even when one disagrees with you.

One MIGHT consider a person to be two faced if he's nice to one person, but nasty to another, simply over disagreements.

But hey, it's nice that everything is fine.

lynys
09-25-2016, 09:57 PM
It's true that I don't like people that are gratuitously abusive. One does not have to be like that, even when one disagrees with you.

One MIGHT consider a person to be two faced if he's nice to one person, but nasty to another, simply over disagreements.

But hey, it's nice that everything is fine.

You've never been nasty to another person? We've all seen you and your behaviour towards our friend RW. That would be the pot calling the kettle black there. *eyeroll*

Barry Morris
09-25-2016, 10:09 PM
You've never been nasty to another person? We've all seen you and your behaviour towards our friend RW. That would be the pot calling the kettle black there. *eyeroll*

Sure, Lynys, whatever.

_daynzy
09-30-2016, 07:38 AM
You've never been nasty to another person? We've all seen you and your behaviour towards our friend RW. That would be the pot calling the kettle black there. *eyeroll*

heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey you :msnrose:

lynys
09-30-2016, 01:19 PM
heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey you :msnrose:

How's it going Little Man? Getting much sleep? :P

Barry Morris
10-04-2016, 06:54 AM
Interesting.

Anapeg
10-04-2016, 04:34 PM
I know where this thread started but it seems to have wobbled a tad to encompass so much more so I feel I can wander some myself. While we are making judgements on the two front runners in the U.S. election we seem to have turned a blind eye to the two spendthrifts we call duly elected to do the bidding of the Canadian voter/taxpayer. We are now getting robbed from both Federal and Provincial governments. I voted Liberal and I apologise. I now wonder if we can afford to let Wynne and Trudeau run out their terms? For more than a few haveing to make a choice to pay for food, heat, lights and/or rent/mortgage.

Hans
10-04-2016, 06:01 PM
I told you to vote for me. You would not have had these issues.

Anapeg
10-05-2016, 12:14 AM
I told you to vote for me. You would not have had these issues.

You have it all figured out eh Hans?

Hans
10-05-2016, 06:14 AM
I would not be a good leader if I didn't.

Anapeg
10-05-2016, 09:21 AM
I would not be a good leader if I didn't.

In less than 100 words, fill me in.

Hans
10-05-2016, 07:34 PM
- Removal of tax from gasoline.
- Abandon tax free status for natives.
- Harbor/pipeline to Japan for export of gas.
- Pipeline/harbor to US to export oil/gas.
- Add refineries in Canada.
- Stop purchasing electricity and increase power generation if required by adding nuclear power plants of Canadian design. (Candu)
- Forbid export of raw Canadian unprocessed resources into the US or Mexico.
- Withdraw from NAFTA.
- Increase taxes on products totally or partially made in Mexico to remove the unfair wage advantage.
- Decrease GST to 12%
- No tax on purchase of second hand vehicles, or purchase of already constructed homes.
- No employment under age of 18.
- Schools are forbidden to make profit, instead get subsidized by government.

Let's start with that.

Barry Morris
10-06-2016, 09:07 AM
So which social services are you willing to give up to save all that tax money??

Anapeg
10-06-2016, 10:40 AM
- Removal of tax from gasoline.
- Abandon tax-free status for natives.
- Harbor/pipeline to Japan for export of gas.
- Pipeline/harbour to the US to export oil/gas.
- Add refineries in Canada.
- Stop purchasing electricity and increase power generation if required by adding nuclear power plants of Canadian design. (Candu)
- Forbid export of raw Canadian unprocessed resources into the US or Mexico.
- Withdraw from NAFTA.
- Increase taxes on products totally or partially made in Mexico to remove the unfair wage advantage.
- Decrease GST to 12%
- No tax on the purchase of second-hand vehicles, or purchase of already constructed homes.
- No employment under age of 18.
- Schools are forbidden to make a profit, instead get subsidised by the government.

Let's start with that.

Your premise seems based on increasing our carbon footprint or, at the very least, enabling others to increase theirs. Hardly good for the environment. Then you wish to tax Natives because we took their land? I do not see you being a terribly well thought of leader, Hans.

Hans
10-06-2016, 08:00 PM
Natives did not have a currency or concept of ownership on property.
So I fail to see why removing a tax exemption would be any concern for them. After all, they do insist in being able to honor their native traditions. What better way to honor original traditions than giving up tax exemption?

And as far as carbon footprint goes, carbon is what drives the economy. Ever wondered how a country like China is able to have such large growth year after year? It is because they are not concerned about carbon footprint.
Carbon footprint is made up in order to be able to tax citizens.
18.5% of the human body consist of carbon. I highly doubt it is bad for the environment.

Anapeg
10-06-2016, 08:34 PM
Natives did not have a currency or concept of ownership on a property.
So I fail to see why removing a tax exemption would be any concern for them. After all, they do insist on being able to honour their native traditions. What better way to honour original traditions than giving up tax exemption?

And as far as carbon footprint goes, carbon is what drives the economy. Ever wondered how a country like China is able to have such large growth year after year? It is because they are not concerned about carbon footprint.
Carbon footprint is made up in order to be able to tax citizens.
18.5% of the human body consist of carbon. I highly doubt it is bad for the environment.

The native currency was trading. I will give you one of these for two of those. Now you and some select others see fit to charge them for land that was theirs by prior use?

Hans
10-07-2016, 06:09 AM
Natives did not have land ownership, they were nomadic in nature.
So it is not "their land", it is everyone's land.

Hans
10-07-2016, 06:10 AM
So which social services are you willing to give up to save all that tax money??

None, since a much better performing economy will offset tax losses.

Barry Morris
10-07-2016, 07:44 AM
Natives did not have land ownership, they were nomadic in nature.
So it is not "their land", it is everyone's land.

Really??? Well, I'm certainly glad YOU live closer to the swamps they were forced on to as reserves. Maybe you will be forced out first when they finally smarten up.

Barry Morris
10-07-2016, 07:47 AM
"- No employment under age of 18."

I'm curious about this. Kids often leave home at 16, whether that's smart or not I don't know, but sometimes it's inevitable.

Are they going to be welfare kids for two years??

Barry Morris
10-07-2016, 07:49 AM
.... Ever wondered how a country like China is able to have such large growth year after year? It is because they are not concerned about carbon footprint.
....

Know anybody trying to breathe the air over there??? I do. It's not nice.

riggs
10-07-2016, 09:43 AM
The native currency was trading. I will give you one of these for two of those. Now you and some select others see fit to charge them for land that was theirs by prior use?

They never believed in ownership of land. It was always the creators land until they were forced to live on parceled sections which is no longer the case.

riggs
10-07-2016, 09:46 AM
Really??? Well, I'm certainly glad YOU live closer to the swamps they were forced on to as reserves. Maybe you will be forced out first when they finally smarten up.

Yes really. Ownership of land was a concept foreign to them until the settlers and government introduced it.

riggs
10-07-2016, 09:47 AM
Know anybody trying to breathe the air over there??? I do. It's not nice.

I do and you're correct. The smog is a death sentence.

Nihilistic Heathen
10-07-2016, 10:55 AM
Natives did not have land ownership, they were nomadic in nature.
So it is not "their land", it is everyone's land.

Personal or private ownership of a parcel of land was foreign to them, they understood territorial boundaries between different tribes/nations.

Barry Morris
10-07-2016, 03:24 PM
Yes really. Ownership of land was a concept foreign to them until the settlers and government introduced it.

I was responding to the second part of Hans post.

Hans
10-07-2016, 03:51 PM
"- No employment under age of 18."

I'm curious about this. Kids often leave home at 16, whether that's smart or not I don't know, but sometimes it's inevitable.

Are they going to be welfare kids for two years??

Well, I don't know any that leave home at 16. So it's a good thing what I suggested, as now they will have to wait until they are 18, giving them 2 more years to smarten up.

Hans
10-07-2016, 03:56 PM
Really??? Well, I'm certainly glad YOU live closer to the swamps they were forced on to as reserves. Maybe you will be forced out first when they finally smarten up.

I live next to the reserve. Looks perfectly fine to me. In fact, for some reason they all have newly build homes including landscape grass and brand new roads on that reserve.

This is how that reserve looks: https://www.google.ca/maps/@46.5325191,-84.266784,3a,75y,70.02h,80.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg4_KaUfeTo3yZgOF6gcLkQ!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656?hl=en

I would say that it looks pretty new and nice.

Hans
10-07-2016, 03:59 PM
Personal or private ownership of a parcel of land was foreign to them, they understood territorial boundaries between different tribes/nations.

That still does not make it "their" land. You could argue it makes it "their territory". In which case they lost it to a different tribe. It is the natural way of things, and I am sure being one with nature they get that concept.

Hans
10-07-2016, 04:03 PM
"- No employment under age of 18."

I'm curious about this. Kids often leave home at 16, whether that's smart or not I don't know, but sometimes it's inevitable.

Are they going to be welfare kids for two years??

I forgot to clarify why I set it at 18: it is to force various chain businesses to actually hire people for more than minimum wage, instead of exploiting kids using a rinse and repeat system. And no, you don't get "valuable work experience" working at such establishments.

Barry Morris
10-07-2016, 09:44 PM
Well, I don't know any that leave home at 16. So it's a good thing what I suggested, as now they will have to wait until they are 18, giving them 2 more years to smarten up.

You don't know any.

Barry Morris
10-07-2016, 09:46 PM
I forgot to clarify why I set it at 18: it is to force various chain businesses to actually hire people for more than minimum wage, instead of exploiting kids using a rinse and repeat system. And no, you don't get "valuable work experience" working at such establishments.

Forget it Hans, you live in some other world.

Hans
10-08-2016, 04:38 PM
Forget it Hans, you live in some other world.

No I don't. Go grab a burger and tell me how many kids are making it for you. Then ask yourself why kids and not adults.

Hans
10-08-2016, 04:38 PM
You don't know any.

Yes, that is what I said.

Anapeg
10-09-2016, 01:48 PM
Natives did not have land ownership, they were nomadic in nature.
So it is not "their land", it is everyone's land.

Not so. Each tribe had traditional ground and fights arose with transgressors over "ownership".

Anapeg
10-09-2016, 01:50 PM
Yes really. Ownership of land was a concept foreign to them until the settlers and government introduced it.

While "ownership" was a European concept rights to land through prior use was not. Each tribe had traditional lands they would kill to protect.

Hans
10-09-2016, 04:28 PM
Not so. Each tribe had traditional ground and fights arose with transgressors over "ownership".

Well, then what is the issue with the land? They lost to a transgressor.
I don't get why they wont accept that and move on.

Hans
10-09-2016, 04:29 PM
While "ownership" was a European concept rights to land through prior use was not. Each tribe had traditional lands they would kill to protect.

They did, they lost. Why is it different when Europeans do it as opposed to another tribe?

Nihilistic Heathen
10-09-2016, 10:19 PM
Well, then what is the issue with the land? They lost to a transgressor.
I don't get why they wont accept that and move on.

Treaties were made in perpetuity, and fortunately the legal system doesn't side with the transgressor. We are at a point now where Natives can hold the transgressors accountable for their transgressions. Why is that hard for many to accept.

Anapeg
10-09-2016, 11:13 PM
Well, then what is the issue with the land? They lost to a transgressor.
I don't get why they won't accept that and move on.

They, as you put it have never surrendered nor signed any formal papers of surrender. The Natives were robbed, not conquered.

Anapeg
10-09-2016, 11:20 PM
They did, they lost. Why is it different when Europeans do it as opposed to another tribe?

They lost nothing. There was no war, there was not so much as a card game. People moved in and told the gullible Natives they would be taken care of. All Natives have ever gotten from whites was chicken pox, small pox,measles that decimated their ranks so they could not mount any concentrated response to the overwhelming numbers of people who came in waves across their land. If you see that as a "win", you are sadly mistaken, misinformed, misguided and brainwashed by your historians.

riggs
10-10-2016, 02:12 PM
While "ownership" was a European concept rights to land through prior use was not. Each tribe had traditional lands they would kill to protect.

Is the term "rights" to the land not just another word based on a legal concept brought forth and practiced by the settlers? If so, would that still not make the concept foreign to the natives? Are you perhaps just chasing your tail looking for a word or phrase that describes ownership without using the word?


I agree they would fight for land but it was for usage, not ownership.

Anapeg
10-10-2016, 05:57 PM
Is the term "rights" to the land, not just another word based on a legal concept brought forth and practised by the settlers? If so, would that still not make the concept foreign to the natives? Are you perhaps just chasing your tail looking for a word or phrase that describes ownership without using the word?


I agree they would fight for land but it was for usage, not ownership.

Ownership, the concept? No. Guardianship definitely. Simply not understanding the concept of ownership does not negate their possession of the land nonetheless. Anyone trying to supersede their right to their territory would die, be pushed off or the protectors would die to try.

riggs
10-10-2016, 07:55 PM
Ownership, the concept? No. Guardianship definitely. Simply not understanding the concept of ownership does not negate their possession of the land nonetheless. Anyone trying to supersede their right to their territory would die, be pushed off or the protectors would die to try.

But their belief that it's the creators land would.

Anapeg
10-10-2016, 11:17 PM
But their belief that it's the creators land would.

They were the keepers of the land bequeathed to them, the holders, the caretakers. To have a person have the balls to say HE discovered the land is assinine. How does one discover a land already occupied? It cannot be done. He 'stole' the land for his sovereign.

Hans
10-11-2016, 03:01 PM
Treaties were made in perpetuity, and fortunately the legal system doesn't side with the transgressor. We are at a point now where Natives can hold the transgressors accountable for their transgressions. Why is that hard for many to accept.

And that there is the problem. They should have never been made in perpetuity. Got the Queen to thank for that stupid move.

To me, natives want to live in the past with the perks of today. It is time they make a decision, and either go live in a tent using their old traditions, or join the rest of the world.

Hans
10-11-2016, 03:02 PM
They were the keepers of the land bequeathed to them, the holders, the caretakers. To have a person have the balls to say HE discovered the land is assinine. How does one discover a land already occupied? It cannot be done. He 'stole' the land for his sovereign.

It is equally balsy to say you are the caretakers of the land. Who appointed natives to that position, besides the natives?

riggs
10-11-2016, 03:49 PM
They were the keepers of the land bequeathed to them, the holders, the caretakers. To have a person have the balls to say HE discovered the land is assinine. How does one discover a land already occupied? It cannot be done. He 'stole' the land for his sovereign.

Bequeathed? Really? Who left it to them? The creator? You can sound off like a lawyer all you want, but you're discussing a time of simplicity. The natives never thought the way you do now and you should learn to rewind your thought process to that time. What you speak of would have been foreign to them at the time. All they wanted was to migrate seasonally to different lands because that increased their odds of survival.

Anapeg
10-11-2016, 09:45 PM
Bequeathed? Really? Who left it to them? The creator? You can sound off like a lawyer all you want, but you're discussing a time of simplicity. The natives never thought the way you do now and you should learn to rewind your thought process to that time. What you speak of would have been foreign to them at the time. All they wanted was to migrate seasonally to different lands because that increased their odds of survival.

You are to a point correct. Having said that, they were none the less robbed in the name of the monarchy. Robbed of the land they migrated on, robbed of their lifestyle, robbed of their freedom to carry on as they had for thousands of years. Personae non gratae in their own land.

Anapeg
10-11-2016, 09:47 PM
It is equally ballsy to say you are the caretakers of the land. Who appointed natives to that position, besides the natives?

The relationship betwixt the creator and his peoples living on the land thought to be such that yes, we were the caretakers as such.

Hans
10-11-2016, 09:55 PM
You are to a point correct. Having said that, they were none the less robbed in the name of the monarchy. Robbed of the land they migrated on, robbed of their lifestyle, robbed of their freedom to carry on as they had for thousands of years. Personae non gratae in their own land.

Not robbed. They fought, they lost.
They can do 2 things: either live in the present, or live in the past.
They cannot live in the present past.

Anapeg
10-12-2016, 05:14 AM
Not robbed. They fought, they lost.
They can do 2 things: either live in the present, or live in the past.
They cannot live in the present past.

Hans, please regale us with stories of the Canadian Indian wars.

Barry Morris
10-12-2016, 08:17 AM
Hans, please regale us with stories of the Canadian Indian wars.

Sounds like a subset of "white privilege", "european privilege".

Anapeg
10-12-2016, 01:25 PM
Sounds like a subset of "white privilege", "European privilege".

The Government, AKA to the Natives as The NWMP began a continued protection, feeding, doctoring etc. of the Native population as was promised through treatises and that went for years. The U.S., on the other hand, were openly hostile to southern compatriots, to the point the deliberately giving natives bedding, clothing laced with small pox.

Anapeg
10-12-2016, 01:38 PM
Not robbed. They fought, they lost.
They can do 2 things: either lives in the present or live in the past.
They cannot live in the present past.

The Indian Act:
denied women status;
introduced residential schools;
created reserves;
renamed individuals with European names
restricted First Nations from leaving reserve without permission from Indian Agent - see picture above (update: 18/04/16 - the pass system was a policy endorsed by the government; it was never an Order In Council or Regulation but was definitely designed to keep First Nations on the reserve)
enforced enfranchisement of any First Nation admitted to university [1];
could expropriate portions of reserves for roads, railways and other public works, as well as to move an entire reserve away from a municipality if it was deemed expedient;
could lease out uncultivated reserve lands to non-First Nations if the new leaseholder would use it for farming or pasture;
forbade First Nations from forming political organisations;
prohibited anyone, First Nation or non-First Nation, from soliciting funds for First Nation legal claims without special license from the Superintendent General. (this 1927 amendment granted the government control over the ability of First Nations to pursue land claims);[2]
prohibited the sale of alcohol to First Nations;
prohibited sale of ammunition to First Nations;
prohibited pool hall owners from allowing First Nations entrance;
imposed the “band council” system;
forbade First Nations from speaking their native language;
forbade First Nations from practising their traditional religion;
forbade western First Nations from appearing in any public dance, show, exhibition, stampede or pageant wearing traditional regalia; [3]
declared potlatch and other cultural ceremonies illegal; [4]
denied First Nations the right to vote
created permit system to control First Nations ability to sell products from farms;
is a piece of legislation created under the British rule for the purpose of subjugating one race - Aboriginal people.


Major amendments were made to the Act in 1951 and 1985. In the 1951 amendments, the banning of dances and ceremonies, and the pursuit of claims against the government were removed. In 1985, Bill C-31C-31 was introduced. For more on this Bill, please see "Indian Act and Women's Status - Discrimination via Bill C31 and Bill C3"

I take it this is what you believe we adhere to?

Hans
10-12-2016, 01:46 PM
Hans, please regale us with stories of the Canadian Indian wars.

Where is the "protector" part when it was needed the most?

Anapeg
10-12-2016, 08:38 PM
Where is the "protector" part when it was needed the most?

This is your best shot? You eluded to 'wars' between Natives and Canadian representative forces. I see no evidence? Natives lived on the land for thousands of years and did no harm. How long have the Europeans been here?

Barry Morris
10-14-2016, 09:42 PM
Where is the "protector" part when it was needed the most?

The "protectors" were the guys South Africans talked to when setting up apartheid.

blueboy
10-16-2016, 02:38 PM
Nothing better to do ???

Anapeg
10-18-2016, 11:40 AM
Hans has gone away...

Hans
10-18-2016, 03:11 PM
I am here every day, don't worry.

Anapeg
10-18-2016, 04:50 PM
I am here every day, don't worry.

Oh, well, the lack of response threw me off, sorry.