# MartialTalk Signature Policys



## arnisador (Mar 27, 2003)

*Mod Note: This thread spun off from the 'Open Letter" thread to focus on the 'Signature issue' raised in there. - Kaith *





> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *So then change the rules*



I believe that the rules adequately cover the matter. These are different cases.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-


----------



## Kirk (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *I believe that the rules adequately cover the matter. These are different cases.
> 
> -Arnisador
> -MT Admin- *



Whatever dude!  That's a load of bull and you know it.  So it's
now policy to lay down statements like this and not explain any
further?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 27, 2003)

> Signature Policy:
> Each MartialTalk Membership comes with the ability to display a signature. This signature can be used to promote your site, business, or other ventures. Your Signature must follow these guidelines:
> · Signature size is limited to 6 lines of 65 characters.
> · A blank line counts as a line.
> ...



We've tackled about a dozen Sig related issues here that I can recall... a few dealt with profanity (I think quotes from movies, songs) that made it thru the filter (or were circumventing the filter), a couple of graphics that were a bit too big, and a couple of those we thought didn't 'fit' here.

We usually contact the holder of the sig, and let them correct it first.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *That's a load of bull and you know it.  *



This statement is not correct.



> *
> So it's now policy to lay down statements like this and not explain any further? *



We are quite willing to discuss issues such as this. However, I do not think it's appropriate to change this thread into a lengthy discussion of MartialTalk signature file policies. Please start another thread or, better yet, PM an admin. with your specific question(s) on this matter.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-


----------



## Rich Parsons (Mar 27, 2003)

I posted a whole song lyric once and Katih sent me a message saying he liked the song, yet it was too long for the signature. 

I re-read the rules after I shortened it.

This was all doen with PM and no one knew about the issue.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *I posted a whole song lyric once and Katih sent me a message saying he liked the song, yet it was too long for the signature.
> 
> I re-read the rules after I shortened it.
> ...



I had a sig that said "Jesus Did It For The Chicks" .. arnisador
insisted that it be changed.  Someone or someones   had a
problem with it.  But I have a problem with a signature dealing
with the folks who serve our country in the military.  I think it's
bull.  I think the rules should state the humor in religion is not
allowed, but insulting those that serve in the military, are open
game.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *This statement is not correct.
> 
> 
> ...



You don't answer my PMs


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 27, 2003)

I personally didnt find the Hemmingway quote to be offensive...nor would I find a Heinlin (sp) quote that was also referenced to be offensive.  I don't see the insult, especially in the full quote.

There are many quotes, comments, etc that while I dont personally find them offensive, we must balance that against those who might.

If we think theres a possible problem, we ask the member to change it.

If we have a problem with it, we will change it ourselves.
For example, on September 12th, 2001 the phrase "boxcutter-fu" turned up on 3 different boards...on all 3, it was rapidly yanked.  1 board removed signature privilages for all its members after that.

Certain areas are prone to stricker moderation than others - religion, the abortion issue, and politics are 3.  Music lyrics and commedian quotes are also looked at carefully.


I have a quote from Patton for example that I like a lot, but out of consideration to those involved in the military, now is not the time to use it.


----------



## Matt Stone (Mar 28, 2003)

I don't care for the person in question's political stance, and I don't care for her misquoting (seemingly) the source of her her quote.  And while I am offended at the folks whose politics seem to me to be only half-baked at best, her signature is her method of expressing her beliefs, feelings, etc.

In that context, and in the context in which I think she is posting the quote, I'm not offended any more than I suspect folks are offended by my signature line.

Gambarimasu.
:asian: :tank: :asian:


----------



## Seig (Mar 28, 2003)

Boot 'em all in the groin


----------



## Nightingale (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *I don't care for the person in question's political stance, and I don't care for her misquoting (seemingly) the source of her her quote.
> Gambarimasu.
> *



the source of my quote is Hemingway. how am I misquoting that?  If you're meaning that I didn't use the entire quote, I give you the following example...

If I quote Shakespeare, Act II, Scene 2 as:

"Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou, Romeo?"  
-Shakespeare

That quote is correct.  Its what Shakespeare wrote.

However,  this method is also correct.

"Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou, Romeo?
Deny thy father and refuse thy name
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love
and I'll no longer be a Capulet...
'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself."
-Shakespeare

Either method of quoting is correct.  I knew the portion of the Hemingway quote that I had (in a book of quotes someone had given me) was correct, so that was the portion I used, and attributed it to the person who said it.

**I'm not implying that I quoted the Shakespeare correctly.  I just wrote it down from what I remembered in high school English class... it was just for example's sake, so I didn't bother to go look it up...***


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

First off, nightengale, I apologize for YOU being the subject of
this.  I *know* that you and I are on waaaaaay opposite
sides of the fence when it comes to politics and religion, and 
that's all this is about, really.  But not opposing the right to 
express your views.  Just the fact that you can express yours, 
offensive be damned, but I can't express mine.  I would in 
fact "take it to PM" if multiple attempts in the past weren't 
ignored.  So for that, I apologize.  Again .. we're on opposite
sides of the fence, and because of this, I have to bring into 
question the TRUE intent of your signature.  I feel that what 
you've presented as your intent is a brush off, really.  So's to
keep the offensiveness down.  



> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *I don't care for the person in question's political stance
> *



That's why I was offended in the first place. 



> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *And while I am offended at the folks whose politics seem to me to be only half-baked at best, her signature is her method of expressing her beliefs, feelings, etc.*



If that's the case, then the guidelines need editing.  Political 
jokes, inferences, and insults are allowed, yet humorous 
comments involving religion will not be tolerated.



> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *In that context, and in the context in which I think she is posting the quote, I'm not offended any more than I suspect folks are offended by my signature line.*



I don't think you'd take the context she *eventually* put
forward, if you'd read her numerous posts regarding politics, and
specifically the current war on kenponet.


----------



## Phil Elmore (Mar 28, 2003)

Signature compliance test.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 28, 2003)

We try to be relaxed on the signatures.  That is why despite the 6 line rule, we haven't really cracked down on the small novels that are starting to turn up in sigs.

My suggestion is, pick a quote, and cycle thru them.  Don't try to use them all.

We make an exception to the length rule for staff -IF- they are also trying to include board tips or links in them. (ie support info)


Regarding Nightingales political/religios views - she, as well as everyone is entitled to express them, as long as they are within the forum guidelines.  She quoted a noted and respected author, whe is a vet.  She didn't say "soldiers are baby killers".  That would have been axed.  She said "War is a crime"...war, not the warriors.  I happen to agree, war is a crime.  Its a crime against life.  I think there are usually better ways to resolve things.  However, I do not have a problem with those in the military.  They are doing what they must.  Remember, I also come from a military family.

Regarding Kirks "Jesus did it ..." sig. - That was deemed to be close to the borderline, and possibly offensive to our more religious members. (We have around 10-12 openly Christian members).  We couldn't ignore it and more than we could the "Mohomads Rib-B-Q" or the Carlin quote (I cant recall it exactly) that we also nixed a while back.


The ultimate decision on what is and what is not acceptable is the administative team.  If we have a problem, we will contact you about it.

I will look at the existing rules, and try to expand them to better cover the concerns in here.  

One thing to remember...we can always turn off signatures.  They like the Smilies, Private Messaging, and other features are all 'extras' that we have enabled provided they are not abused or become a huge headache to us.

Sigs seen used in this thread:

Phil - that one is fine, as was the previous one you were using. The previous one was too large in file size. Phil was quick to switch when we notified him about it.

Kirk - too long

Yiliquan1 - too long


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by nightingale8472 _
> *the source of my quote is Hemingway. how am I misquoting that?  If you're meaning that I didn't use the entire quote, I give you the following example...
> 
> If I quote Shakespeare, Act II, Scene 2 as:
> ...




It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt" 
~ Mark Twain 

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." 
~ Abraham Lincoln (and Confucius) 

"Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding. " 
~ Proverbs 17:28 


...and the one I'm most familiar with: 

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." 
~ George Eliot


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *We try to be relaxed on the signatures.  That is why despite the 6 line rule, we haven't really cracked down on the small novels that are starting to turn up in sigs.
> 
> My suggestion is, pick a quote, and cycle thru them.  Don't try to use them all.
> ...



Possibly offend?  I was told by arnisador that you receive 
SEVERAL complaints. :shrug: 

Would "Budda Did It For The Chicks" be better?

Or how about "I would like to see Gou banned - Arnisador" .. that
would only offend him.  But I bet you'd make me change it.  
There's no misquote there.  And no lack of context.

And again, the message here .. political slam, okay .. religious is
not.

Your statement of the interpretation of nightengale's post only
came once she explained it.  More lack of consistency.  You posted
before the interpretation came about, why didn't your statement
of "I happen to agree, war is a crime. Its a crime against life." 
come out at that time?  Because you too, needed the context
expanded upon. 

How many members don't visit the locker room, and will never see the intent?

But, okay, you da man, I'm just a squirrel in your world, I won't
even post here anymore.  I would've gotten out of it long ago
had arnisador not been so mean about it in the first place.  Mean
when he told me to take it off, and apparently lied about the
reason behind it.  And mean now, in his posts of not even 
attempting to explain the differences, when politely asked.  I 
guess mods don't have to follow the rules when they dislike the
member.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Or how about "I would like to see Gou banned - Arnisador" .. that would only offend him.*



I'm well aware of Arny's secret love for me. We talked about it and he has had to accept that I'm just not ready for a relationship right now, but he's welcome to send me gifts to keep trying.

 

P.S. - I have a kewl new sig now too! Woo woo!


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> .....I personally didnt find the Hemmingway quote to be offensive...



Could it be b/c it was in the sig line of Nightingale who happens to be a MT mod and a well respected and well liked member too?  

If it was in my sig line, my *** would be glass, huh?  lol


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *If it was in my sig line, my *** would be glass, huh?  lol *



Maybe you need a better sig line then?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 28, 2003)

Sorry, you're right Kirk...its all a conspiracy against you.
I'm sorry I don't have perfect recall, nor the time to wade thru tons of posts looking for the 'real' reason we are so against you personally.

Obviously, we must be, else you wouldn't feel the need to hammer us every time we do something you don't like.

To you, we are communists (though you obviously do not understand the definition of 'communist')



> Def - A member of a Marxist-Leninist party.
> A supporter of such a party or movement.
> A Communard.
> often communist A radical viewed as a subversive or revolutionary.




To you we are censors (Though we've only eliminated certain profanities, and personal attacks).


To you, we have secret biases and conspire against our members


Arnisador and Gou -HAD- their differences.  To the best of my knowledge they have worked them out.


I do not see a political slam in her quote...why do you have such a resentment towards her? It seems that ever since sh became a mod, you have seen fit to take her to task and hold her to standards you yourself could not meet.  Thats not fair.

So she's a pacifist?  Big whoopin deal.  I'm a pagan....you wanna burn me at the stake?  Take me to task too? 

My statement came after she explained it.... Oh Gawd! I'm sorry if I can't read minds, travel thru time, and answer things before they are asked.  I'm sorry if I don't post complete explainations with full cross referencing to meet your high standards.

Political slam?  Where? When?  Who?

Regarding Arnisadors 'meanness'...have you ever considered he is just tired of going thru the same childish crap -every- time you get your nickers in a knot over us doing something you don't like.


I try to run this place as fairly as I can....it eats up a ton of my time...time I could be using elsewhere, and crap like this makes me wonder why I even bother.  Kirk, if its so bad here, and we are so against you, and so unfair, why do you bother to come?  Go somewhere that you can do and say what you like..try RMA, there you can be as free as you want, and say what you want, and no worries.


Here's the deal... You are a guest here....we have guidelines... if you wish you remain a guest, you will follow those guidelines. If you cannot do so, then leave.  Based in part on community feedback, we determine what is and is not acceptable here. We also base those on what we consider to be 'professional' behavior.  This is an evolutionary process with the associated bumps in the road along the way.

We found her Hemmingway quote to be within those standards...we found your Jesus one to not be.  End of argument.

*Your current signature is too long. Please shorten it or we will be forced to do so for you. Failure to comply may result in elimination of signature rights. Childish 'seat kicking' type actions will result in a suspension and/or ban.*

Do I make myself clear Kirk?

When this forum started, we had 10 simple rules...now, we have 8 pages of them.  Must we look for, and consider every possible issue and rule specifically for it? 

Signatures are subject to all other rules...specifically they must comply with our signature policy.


> Signature Policy:
> Each MartialTalk Membership comes with the ability to display a signature. This signature can be used to promote your site, business, or other ventures. Your Signature must follow these guidelines:
> *· Signature size is limited to 6 lines of 65 characters.
> · A blank line counts as a line.*
> ...



What more do I need to say here before you really understand? 

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go post about this on the private "Kirks a Looney" forum we've set up for our conspiracy, and then will have to defend myself against both the Canadians (who will be insulted I compared you with the currency) and the Monty Python fans (who dont think youre as good as teh Black Knight).

Good day!
:soapbox:


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

Whatever, your board your rules.  Go ahead and change my 
sig, if it makes ya feel powerful enough.  Mock the "conspiracy"
all ya want, but HEY  LOOKIE LOOKIE, there's a BOAT LOAD of
sigs as long as, if not longer than mine.  Hmmm .. where's the
mention of THEIR signatures?


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 28, 2003)

Nightingale's sig was offensive to those who bled and died in war. It is like "hey, your grandpa or uncle or dad or son or husband or daughter or wife  died in a criminal activity... blah blah"  Yeah, how would you like that?   I have a lot of respect for N-  , but if someone threw that line in my face, he would be picking up his teeth on the sidewalk.   No matter how idealistic the quote represents, it simply invokes resentment from people who made the ultimate sacrifice.  (Having said that, I suppose I have no right to protest, as I am not fighting in this war.)


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *Arnisador and Gou -HAD- their differences.  To the best of my knowledge they have worked them out. *



Now if I could just get him to stop touching me in my _bathing suit_ area, things would be perfect...


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Mar 28, 2003)

Kirk - Those will be addressed.

JN - Good points.  

Gou - Well..if you would stop wearing your trunks on your head....


Kirk seems to think I like 'flexing my Naziness' as one person put it a while back....fine, I will.  Signature changed.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *Gou - Well..if you would stop wearing your trunks on your head....*



Hmmm...that explains a lot actually...thanx.
:shrug:


----------



## WilliamTLear (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *Hmmm...that explains a lot actually...thanx.
> :shrug: *



It's the scratch and sniff bikini briefs that you need to stop wearing on your head, but I guess that's why your still wearing the trunks (kinda covers up your dark secret). :rofl:


----------



## Rob_Broad (Mar 28, 2003)

One of the principle the U.S. is founded on isfreedom of speech, and that means anyone has the right to say just about anything they want.  My only problem is too many people take this right for granted and forget the cost there was for them to be able to say what they want.

Freedom of speech is a beautiful thing but it does not mean you have to speak out at everything, some times silence is just as powerful.

This thread is getting a little hot, maybe everyone should reflect on what is really important.  Innocent people are dieing as human shields, not by their choice but by force.  People are butchered for their speech if they do not follow a party line.  War is a horrible thing, but the real crime is the global community let thei mad man  stay in power this long.  It will take decades for Iraq to heal, and yes there are innocent lives being lost, but it is for the greater good.


----------



## Elfan (Mar 28, 2003)

Perhaps the signature size limit could be coded into the user CP so that you *can't* make a sig thats too big.  I did a quick test and there didn't seem to be any size limit.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *I had a sig that said "Jesus Did It For The Chicks" .. arnisador
> insisted that it be changed. *



My recollection is that we informed you that someone (person or persons, I don't recall) was bothered by it and asked if you would mind changing it as the mods. agreed that you then-current .sig was iffy. I can investigate however and see whether my memory is correct in this regard.

As to not answering your PMs, this is not correct. I do not intentionally ignore _]any_ MartialTalk-related PMs or e-mail. It is certainly possible that I have occasionally done so by oversight, but not by design.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *My recollection is that we informed you that someone (person or persons, I don't recall) was bothered by it and asked if you would mind changing it as the mods. agreed that you then-current .sig was iffy. I can investigate however and see whether my memory is correct in this regard.
> *



Please do.  My recollection, I was told several.  But damned sure
wasn't told "iffy'.



> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *As to not answering your PMs, this is not correct. I do not intentionally ignore any MartialTalk-related PMs or e-mail. It is certainly possible that I have occasionally done so by oversight, but not by design.*



I disagree.


----------



## Elfan (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *Nightingale's sig was offensive to those who bled and died in war. It is like "hey, your grandpa or uncle or dad or son or husband or daughter or wife  died in a criminal activity... blah blah"  Yeah, how would you like that?   I have a lot of respect for N-  , but if someone threw that line in my face, he would be picking up his teeth on the sidewalk.   No matter how idealistic the quote represents, it simply invokes resentment from people who made the ultimate sacrifice.  (Having said that, I suppose I have no right to protest, as I am not fighting in this war.) *



The author of the quote was one of those who fought and bled in war.  The quote was *not* like "hey, your grandpa or uncle or dad or son or husband or daughter or wife  died in a criminal activity... blah blah" Which would be rather offensive.  I belive it is perfectly resonable for a signature quote.


----------



## qizmoduis (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *Could it be b/c it was in the sig line of Nightingale who happens to be a MT mod and a well respected and well liked member too?
> 
> If it was in my sig line, my *** would be glass, huh?  lol *



No.  Her sig could not be considered offensive by any reasonable person.  I personally find your posting style irritating, but there should be nothing offensive about that sig attached to your posts either.  At least when considered by a reasonable person.

(The rest is not directed at JN personally)

This whole manufactured-uproar about her sig is ludicrous.  Frankly, I find it OFFENSIVE.

Cripes I'm sick of that word!  What a stupid word.  I'm offended, you're offended, they're offended.  Grow thicker skin and a backbone and don't be so afraid to allow others to have and express opinions that don't fit into your twisted, narrow little worldview.  


:soapbox:


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Elfan _
> *The author of the quote was one of those who fought and bled in war.  The quote was *not* like "hey, your grandpa or uncle or dad or son or husband or daughter or wife  died in a criminal activity... blah blah" Which would be rather offensive.  I belive it is perfectly resonable for a signature quote. *



"Jesus did it for the chicks" is not like "hey you're {insert insult}
because you're Christian".  And a number, either zero, one or
several were upset about it .. just like nightengale's.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *"Jesus did it for the chicks"*



Now I'm not to sure on this because I'm not a christian but rumour has it that Jesus pretty much loves everyone and pretty much hung around forgiving everybody for anything. So I think he'd be ok with it.

But that's just me...


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 28, 2003)

That's the problem today everybody is offended over everything.  You know what not everybody agree's with you. Too bad deal with. If you don't like it don't look at it. I didn't find anything offensive about kirk's sig so what it offended your religious beilief's to bad.......whine....whine.  develop thicker skin or sense humor if you can't then go home and hide in your closet where no one can offend you. Stop taking everything so personally and if you can't then go screw yourself.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *Now I'm not to sure on this because I'm not a christian but rumour has it that Jesus pretty much loves everyone and pretty much hung around forgiving everybody for anything. So I think he'd be ok with it.
> 
> But that's just me...
> *



I AM christian, and I agree.  Humor one of God's creations.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

...I don't know about anyone else Kirk...but I really am out to get you. Just thought I would let you know. Just to make it interesting.
:cheers:


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *...I don't know about anyone else Kirk...but I really am out to get you. Just thought I would let you know. Just to make it interesting.
> :cheers: *



ROFLMAO!!!!!! .. you're such an *** sometimes!


----------



## arnisador (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz _
> *Arnisador and Gou -HAD- their differences.  To the best of my knowledge they have worked them out.*



This was never a personal matter. This was about a pattern of posts I found to be out of line with our standards. Not all mods. agreed with me. Things were discussed in private. This is how we we work--we discuss matters and attempt to reach a consensus. Different mods. view different situations differently. This diversity of opinions is a _good_ thing (as Kaith knows and agrees--note, he has voluntarily given Cthulhu and me considerable authority on _his_ board).



> *
> We found her Hemmingway quote to be within those standards...we found your Jesus one to not be.  End of argument.*



Indeed. It is precisely that simple. We endeavour to be fair and consistent--but judgment calls must be made.

I am in full agreement with Kaith's post on this matter. My brief responses to *Kirk* in this thread are indicative of my belief that he is asking questions not in order to get answers but rather to stir trouble. While it's true that Kaith invests a great deal of time here because he has technical as well as administratibe duties, I invest a great deal of time here as well--monitoring, directing, welcoming new members, posting references to old threads, and helping coordinate matters behind the scenes as well. I've written internal documents for mods. and the first drafts of many of our public documents, which are then hashed out behind the scenes. I'm happy to help, but this seems to me to be merely a tirade. I will not ignore the questions but I have no desire to be dragged into posting lengthy replies to questions that serve only to advance a personal agenda.

Indeed, I find the whole matter tiresome and childish--especially the "I was a mod. once and here's a secret I know" part.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *ROFLMAO!!!!!! .. you're such an *** sometimes!  *



Thought you might like that. We all do what we can with the gifts we're blessed with.
:cheers:

Now can you move the plant from under the window at the side of the house? I am having a tough time seeing what you are doing...much less be able to get in and out of the house quietly.

Much thanx.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *This was never a personal matter. *



_**hiking my pants up around my armpits and sniffling a la "Mr Furley" from 3's company**_

Yep...he wanted me.
:ladysman:


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *Thought you might like that. We all do what we can with the gifts we're blessed with.
> :cheers:
> 
> ...


I can mail you a copy of his house key. The code to his house alarm is 210.  His neighborhood is clear from 2-3 best time to booby  trap his house. If you need anything else let me know.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by fist of fury _
> *I can mail you a copy of his house key. The code to his house alarm is 210.  His neighborhood is clear from 2-3 best time to booby  trap his house. If you need anything else let me know. *



Do you even KNOW what the meaning of _"silent partner"_ is d@mn it?


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Indeed. It is precisely that simple. We endeavour to be fair and consistent--but judgment calls must be made.
> *



Ever think that you own agenda comes into play?  Are you for or
against this war?  What is your religious faith? Christian?



> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *I am in full agreement with Kaith's post on this matter. My brief responses to Kirk in this thread are indicative of my belief that he is asking questions not in order to get answers but rather to stir trouble. *



No.  My father was stationed Danang(USMC), twice, and was 
wounded. My grandfather served in WWII, several uncles in 
Korea.  My brother was in the Navy, my father in law, the Air 
Force (served in Vietnam as well).  This isn't about stirring 
trouble, this is about my opinion of the intent of the signature.  If 
any trouble was stirred, it was by your refusal to discuss it.  I 
don't like my family, and NUMEROUS friends who have fought/are 
fighting for my liberties to be referred to as criminals.

Nightengale posted an explaination of what her intent, and once
that was put in the pooper, she came back with one that 
everyone is suddenly happy with (except me, because I've read
her anti war comments on kenponet .. SEVERAL of them, and I
have an opinion of her feelings about it).  Until then, there were
_several_ who had a problem with it. 



> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *Indeed, I find the whole matter tiresome and childish--especially the "I was a mod. once and here's a secret I know" part.*



Sorry dude, I told Gou about your comments the day you made
them.  

I grow tiresome hearing about the relentless volunteer work you
do here, with "no reward".  It's just as childish.  Everyone knows
you -HAD- a problem with Gou ... Would quoting you offend 
anyone but you?  How about a ruling here, is it okay to quote
you in my signature?


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *Do you even KNOW what the meaning of "silent partner" is d@mn it?
> *



Oh yeah, that's just what this world needs right now .. the two
of you collaborating on anything! :rofl:


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Sorry dude, I told Gou about your comments the day you made
> them.*



..and I cried that day d@mn you! I cried my little heart out! But you had to go on and tell me about the easter bunny too you heartless b@stard...
:cuss:



> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Everyone knows you -HAD- a problem with Gou ... Would quoting you offend anyone but you?*



Actually, the only people who really should have cared were me and him. At the time, I think only he cared. Lotta people have a problem with me. I'm beginning to suspect that it might actually be me.
:idunno:



> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *How about a ruling here, is it okay to quote you in my signature? *



You know, it wouldn't bother me 'cause I don't care. I'm flattered that Arny's undying love for me is known. In fact, I'm working on an angle to turn him out and work the streets for me. 

I need a new boat.
:rofl:

However, I will go on the record as stating that _"Praise Allah and pass the ammunition"_ is probably a no go.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *Oh yeah, that's just what this world needs right now .. the two
> of you collaborating on anything! :rofl: *



The worst thing is that HE'S the brains of this operation...


----------



## Master of Blades (Mar 28, 2003)

Theres too much sexual tension in this post  

And Gou.......least your honest :asian:


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *The worst thing is that HE'S the brains of this operation...
> *



I feel so special he said I'm the brains 

C I new i waz samrt. I got me som xcelllent cipherin skills.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Elfan _
> *The author of the quote was one of those who fought and bled in war.  The quote was *not* like "hey, your grandpa or uncle or dad or son or husband or daughter or wife  died in a criminal activity... blah blah" Which would be rather offensive.  I belive it is perfectly resonable for a signature quote. *



If you need people to spell everything out for you, sure.....

Nightingale in her clarification, stated that "the soldiers probably think they are doing the right thing" .....  Gee.... So they died doing the WRONG thing then?  I don't think that Nightingale means them anything negative.  She most likely means that war is wrong and that to engage in warfare is wrong. That is idealistic.  Be that as it may be. To those who gave their lives so the rest of us can live in peace, their kins have a right to feel insulted.  But Nightingale has no menace nor ill-will, so I would harbor none against her.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Master of Blades _
> *And Gou.......least your honest :asian: *



I shall never lead you astray.

Now go see brother Seig. I think he has something for you.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *..and I cried ...
> 
> Actually,
> ...




Never You Gou, it is always them, Externalize it all.


----------



## Elfan (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *"Jesus did it for the chicks" is not like "hey you're {insert insult}
> because you're Christian".  And a number, either zero, one or
> several were upset about it .. just like nightengale's. *



Kirk my post had nothing to do with your sig.


----------



## Kirk (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Elfan _
> *Kirk my post had nothing to do with your sig. *



I know .. it dealt with the subject at hand, though, which is why
I addressed it. :asian:


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *Never You Gou, it is always them, Externalize it all.  *



Finally...justification...life is sweet. Thanx Rich.


----------



## Master of Blades (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *I shall never lead you astray.
> 
> Now go see brother Seig. I think he has something for you. *



Let me guess......


----------



## jfarnsworth (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Master of Blades _
> *Let me guess...... *



RIGHT!!!!!!! A _boot to the groin_ and an _axe kick to the head._


----------



## Master of Blades (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jfarnsworth _
> *RIGHT!!!!!!! A boot to the groin and an axe kick to the head.  *




*sigh*.........:shrug:


----------



## jfarnsworth (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Master of Blades _
> **sigh*.........:shrug: *



Shouldn't you be in bed now Jr.


----------



## arnisador (Mar 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *against this war?  What is your religious faith? Christian?*



While we are all shaped by our biases, this is irrelevant to the discussion here. The .sig issue is a matter of judgement--knowing what influences said decisions won't change them. Further, anyone in such a position would have such biases. Are you proposing religious litmus tests for MartialTalk moderators?



> *
> If any trouble was stirred, it was by your refusal to discuss it. ?*



I think my continued presence here belies that notion.



> *
> because I've read her anti war comments on kenponet *



Perhaps they would be best left there rather than being brought here.



> *
> Sorry dude, I told Gou about your comments the day you made
> them. *



That was clearly inappropriate and duplicitous, but also needless. He was well aware of the discussion via in-person and phone conversations with Mr. Hartman who knows him personally.



> *
> I grow tiresome hearing about the relentless volunteer work you
> do here, with "no reward". *



Here I grant you have a point. It has been especially busy lately with chat rolling out and my frustrations are perhaps showing.



> *Everyone knows you -HAD- a problem with Gou*



Any issue with any member is over his or her posts. It isn't personal. Mr. Hartman assures me I'd like *GouRonin* in person. I believe him. Any issue, including a decision to suspend or ban, is based on the posts and how they fit with our policies. I don't have a personal problem with any member--I have an opinion as to how their posts fit in with our view of what MartialTalk should be. This is the basic notion of professionalism.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

Note: I hadn't noticed this thread was closed--it doesn't affect admins. and so I didn't realize it until after I had posted.


----------

