Does this prove I was targeted and banned by a "special" group here?

1. 82

   lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

   Does this prove I was targeted and banned by a "special" group here?
   
   This was said to a Liberal hubber on a thread:
   
   "Just be careful. The HP police are always about and I'd hate for you to get your panties in a wad, say something too nasty, and get banned before we've discovered we dislike you completely."
   
   Who is "we"? And why do they have the power to get people banned? And why does HP allow this?

   replyreport
2. 79

   junksellerposted 12 years ago

   Sounds like ridiculous nonsense to me. I don't know anyone from HP and haven't had any encounter with them, but I really suspect that they have far better things to do than run around policing petty spitfights. Some people online seem to develop strange emotional attachments to forums, ranging from Master of the Universe types to those who think there are grand conspiracies being waged against them. While Hubpages has an interest in maintaining a level of decorum, I seriously doubt there is any organized persecution.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You would think so, JS. However, I've seen some hubbers banned for some really petty stuff. LMC was one of them. She felt wronged and understand why. The HP police have been cleaning house lately. Several have been banned.

      replyreport
   2. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps you could tell me then, why I was banned, and AV and LL were not?
      http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/98847

      replyreport
   3. 79

      junksellerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well, you did threaten him. Maybe that is what did it. Or perhaps you simply got reported more. Maybe it had nothing to do with that thread at all. At any rate, hold more constructive dialogues and it shouldn't be a problem.

      replyreport
   4. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      And for qualification: IMO, what LH was "threatening" is "watch what you say, or "we'll" get you." What I was "threatening" is "stop insulting me, or I'll report."

      replyreport
   5. 0

      Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The context of my remark was "watch what you say or the HP police will get you." Hell, they've gotten me a couple of times. Surely, you're not trying to say I helped get you banned. I wasn't even on that forum.

      replyreport
   6. 79

      junksellerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      LMC: Again, I don't know how it works, but my suspicion is that they do not spend hours analyzing these situations like you have. Personally, I suspect they spend a couple of minutes. So, snap judgments rather than careful and balanced analysis.

      replyreport
3. 71

   stanwshuraposted 12 years ago

   Yes.  I'm sure it can't be too overt (sneaks and wrongdoers generally cheat to get their way, and oh yeah, HATE being held to account.  It is very ironic that one such commenter below attests that the threshold is malleable, and yes, petty.  It is also opaque and seems to follow the whim of hubbers with very suspicious influence.  "Be careful" sometimes means "don't disagree, rock the boat, or Heaven forbid, speak the truth".  Cowards don't like it when you do that.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "the whim of hubbers with very suspicious influence"
      This is exactly what I'm talking about.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You can say what you will, Stanley. Disagree. Rock the boat. Bring it on. Please, do. As for the truth, there's an old saying. "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen."

      replyreport
   3. 71

      stanwshuraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It ain't yer kitchen, co'mrad.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Never said it was, Stanley. By the same token, it's not my fault if you can't take a view that doesn't agree with your own. Typical liberal.

      replyreport
   5. 71

      stanwshuraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Projecting your own faults and moral turpitude onto others.  Typical conservative.

      replyreport
   6. 0

      Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That's the best you can come up with, Staaaanley? Wow, so disappointing but not surprising.

      replyreport
   7. 71

      stanwshuraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Awwwww....did I deny the hunter of long things (???) the pleasure of "getting under (my) skin"?  Jeepers, Wally - I didn't know you felt like thaaaaat!  Do some push ups, or yeah, YEAH!, take a cold shower.  I hear that helps.

      replyreport
   8. 0

      Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Why have you been back to the forums, Stanley? I saw your question. Did you get banned? Poor baby.
      
      Seriously, that's the best you can do? Wow, really? I knew you were joke when you appeared on the forums then I saw your picture an it was confirmed.

      replyreport
   9. 71

      stanwshuraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      And WHO is losing his cool?  I (snicker) wonder why that might be.   Give the man TWO flags, folks, for he has on two separate posts made HP t.o.u violations via ad hominem, DING -- this just in - 3 "personal attacks" in just as many posts.  Cellies?

      replyreport
   10. 0

       Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Okay, I'll be the bigger man. You win, Stanley.
       
       This pettiness is ridiculous and going to get us both banned completely by HP. If that's what you want, go for it. The personal attacks have been going both ways. Your call.

       replyreport
   11. 82

       lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       If personal attacks are going both ways...how come stan is banned and you're not?Seems very one-sided to me.

       replyreport
   12. 71

       stanwshuraposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Ex post facto, LongPredator.  You can't claim the high road when it is you who drew first scum.  I know very well why you're backing off.  VERY wise decision.  I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the favoritism.  My ducks are now in a row, man.

       replyreport
   13. 0

       Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Stanley, give it your best shot, Hoss. You can't do anything to me. I'm already on my way out the door.  That's why I'm backing off. Packed up & leaving w/ a clear conscious. But you might get yourself banned completely for your threats. We'll se

       replyreport
4. 82

   lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

   "Get off this thread av, if you don't want to be reported. I'v taken enough of your bashing.
   Start your own thread to show your research and I will leave yours alone."
   
   This was my threat. So why didn't he leave the thread, and start his own? And why were he and LL not banned for personal attacks, if personal attacks are against the rules? Because no one reported them? So what! They still did it, and the adm would have to see it when they investigated the reports on me.
   
   They were not engaging in "constructive diaogue", it was personal insults.
   So how come they are still here?
   
   You just don't get it. It's not about engaging in dialogue-- it's about shutting people up!

   replyreport
   1. 79

      junksellerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "Get off this thread av. Last warning. And More than you deserve."
      To me, threats are a step past insults. I have no idea the actual reason, though. My best advice is to always argue the point, and never argue the person.

      replyreport
   2. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Threat of what? Reporting him for his attacks!. But what happened? After he and another engaged in personal attacks and insults....I'm the one that was banned. Forever. You may see that as fine and dandy---I see it as a high-five to the bully.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Longhunterposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The "we" I was referring to was just the people on the forums. Nothing more nothing less.

      replyreport
   4. 79

      junksellerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You are assuming they are actually familiar with the whole thread. Maybe they only read two posts. This isn't a court of law that guarantees fairness. Your behavior was questionable. Fair or not, you chose to behave that way.

      replyreport
   5. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      They're behavior was questionable, not mine. I have the right to defend myself from attack. Telling AV to leave or I'll report. Giving him fair warning. And instead, I was banned.
      And I know they were familiar wit the thread. Anti-Zionist they attack

      replyreport
   6. 79

      junksellerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      If you wallow in the mud with pigs, expect to get dirty. People surrounded by drama never seem able to see their own complicity and instead always focus on what everyone else did. It's a mistake. All you can control is yourself.

      replyreport
5. 61

   undermyhatposted 12 years ago

   Because it is a covert operation of the Neo-Cons who brought down teh World Trade Center, support Israel and are working hand in hand with the Bildebergers, CFR, Tri-lateral Commission and the Illuminati to prepare the world for tale over by the massive right wing kabal.  OOps, did I let the catout of the bag.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I've asked that before..is this a Hasbara site? It certainly is a Likud House of Reps.
      And RMoney is certainly working for Bibi, not the American people. A lot of American people are Arabs and he just called them culturally inferior. Mexico, Peru too

      replyreport
   2. 61

      undermyhatposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps because they are.  The condition of their societies demonstrates without a doubt that some cultures are inferior to others.

      replyreport
   3. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Military and monetary rule dictates the condition of societies. We are fast headed towards Gaza-ville ourselves. Look at police brutality on OWS. It's not superior to hold people as prisoners. In fact, it's very  base. Not high-minded in the least.

      replyreport
   4. 61

      undermyhatposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think beating up police car poopers, brick throwers and rapists is just fine.  I wonder when OWS will start wearing bomb vests like Palestinian terrorists who don't want to import computers and school books through the port of Gaza.

      replyreport
   5. 82

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You are either on the side of the abusers or the abused. I choose the abused. The abusers have enough at their disposal: Military, Media, Money.
      "Power Corrupts". Age old story.

      replyreport