Both of them fellas are still around........Eagle82 wrote:
BTW, what ever happened to Fido and Boonedawg?
Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
-
- SEOPS Hippo
- Posts: 104408
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:47 am
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
-
- SEOPS Hippo
- Posts: 104408
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:47 am
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
They taught that at the NCO Academy at Maxwell AFB when I was a student in AIC..........a lesson well learnedF-4 Phantom wrote:Having spent decades in the military, I've learned one needs to be specific when articulating/implenting direction. It is in the grey areas where most manipulate rules/regulations and standard operating procedures.
-
- Varsity
- Posts: 604
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 4:39 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
I'll have to look these over and the context in which they were given.Kentucky Trojan wrote:I have shown some examples that you can state that somebody makes a stupid comment; however, there is no inference that you are calling this individual stupid.F-4 Phantom wrote:Having spent decades in the military, I've learned one needs to be specific when articulating/implenting direction. It is in the grey areas where most manipulate rules/regulations and standard operating procedures. Through vast training, I've mastered the process!! :12224
Inferring someone is stupid or lacks intelligence because we don't agree with their opinion in the course of debate.
There is no Forrest Gump clause whereby, "Stupid is as stupid does."
There must be a direct personal attack on another poster.
-
- Varsity
- Posts: 604
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 4:39 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
I'm going to follow guidance as written. However, Pandora's box remains cracked and leaves open subjective policing. IMO
You are ignorant--forbidden
That's an ignorant comment, point of view, etc..--acceptable
Seems both will lead to further digression. But, I'm a simple man living in a complex electronic communication world. It has gotten me into trouble in the past and history has a way of repeating!
You are ignorant--forbidden
That's an ignorant comment, point of view, etc..--acceptable
Seems both will lead to further digression. But, I'm a simple man living in a complex electronic communication world. It has gotten me into trouble in the past and history has a way of repeating!
-
- Varsity
- Posts: 604
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 4:39 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
TigerTownTurkey wrote:They taught that at the NCO Academy at Maxwell AFB when I was a student in AIC..........a lesson well learnedF-4 Phantom wrote:Having spent decades in the military, I've learned one needs to be specific when articulating/implementing direction. It is in the grey areas where most manipulate rules/regulations and standard operating procedures.
I've spent a lot of time at the Gunter Annex. :12224
- mustang_lvr
- SEOPS Hippo
- Posts: 45784
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 10:45 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
F-4 Phantom wrote:I'm going to follow guidance as written. However, Pandora's box remains cracked and leaves open subjective policing. IMO
You are ignorant--forbidden
That's an ignorant comment, point of view, etc..--acceptable
Seems both will lead to further digression. But, I'm a simple man living in a complex electronic communication world. It has gotten me into trouble in the past and history has a way of repeating!
when it comes to a lawyer they will tell you always use think when calling someone a name
you are dumb is a no no, you can be taken to court to prove your statement if a third party is involved
i think you are dumb will keep you out of court if the third party can say for sure you said think
if either is in some form of reading, no third party needs to be involved. just need to prove the person put it in the form of reading.
This i know because i took a person to court over over a statement and they could not prove it it also helps if family members are good Columbus layers [cost] lol
-
- SE
- Posts: 2183
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:52 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
Me thinks I had better place the word "think" in everything that I write to mustang_lvr...mustang_lvr wrote:when it comes to a lawyer they will tell you always use think when calling someone a name
you are dumb is a no no, you can be taken to court to prove your statement if a third party is involved
i think you are dumb will keep you out of court if the third party can say for sure you said think
if either is in some form of reading, no third party needs to be involved. just need to prove the person put it in the form of reading.
This i know because i took a person to court over over a statement and they could not prove it it also helps if family members are good Columbus layers [cost] lol
Taking people to court over slander/libel is also a drain on our society....oh, I forgot...I think...
-
- Varsity
- Posts: 604
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 4:39 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
I'm a simple man. Lawyers, too complex, fast talkers and notorious for twisting the facts: I think! :12224mustang_lvr wrote:F-4 Phantom wrote:I'm going to follow guidance as written. However, Pandora's box remains cracked and leaves open subjective policing. IMO
You are ignorant--forbidden
That's an ignorant comment, point of view, etc..--acceptable
Seems both will lead to further digression. But, I'm a simple man living in a complex electronic communication world. It has gotten me into trouble in the past and history has a way of repeating!
when it comes to a lawyer they will tell you always use think when calling someone a name
you are dumb is a no no, you can be taken to court to prove your statement if a third party is involved
i think you are dumb will keep you out of court if the third party can say for sure you said think
if either is in some form of reading, no third party needs to be involved. just need to prove the person put it in the form of reading.
This i know because i took a person to court over over a statement and they could not prove it it also helps if family members are good Columbus layers [cost] lol
- mustang_lvr
- SEOPS Hippo
- Posts: 45784
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 10:45 pm
-
- SE
- Posts: 2183
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:52 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
Methinks it is just a website...The Oaf wrote:"Methinks it is like a weasel"
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
i'm planning on being in columbus a couple of days next week and i was just wondering if you might possibly be able to provide the names and addresses of a couple of those family members that are good columbus layers.mustang_lvr wrote:
when it comes to a lawyer they will tell you always use think when calling someone a name
This i know because i took a person to court over over a statement and they could not prove it it also helps if family members are good Columbus layers [cost] lol
i'm hoping that by your inserting the word [cost] in there that they are cheap.... well, actually i know they are cheap but i mean cheap as in inexpensive.
-
- SE
- Posts: 2183
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:52 pm
Re: Forum Rule Change: Matt, MODs
...I believe that they were cheap for her....but, not for others.....they are good after all...
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 20590
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:49 am
- Location: Next to a lake somewhere
- Contact: