To: Daniel Miller who wrote (7583 ) 10/7/1999 10:20:00 PM From: BamaReb Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 12754
>>The reason I believe A@P should not be re-instated is merely because I think that SI needs to stand it's ground as to what they do or else they lose major credebility.<< That kind of thinking has gotten many "an innocent" death row inmate fried. I have spent the last 1/2 hour reading your posts of late and I've got to say your age shows right through. I personally could give a rats ass if young folk are allowed to post SI, however over looking rules in some cases and in not others is called "double standard". Your argument that SI administration should not allow what they perceive to be an infraction from A@P but should allow a minor to continue to be a member is laughable. I suspect that if SI chose to have you booted because of pressure from other members that not only would you would pitch a fit, but you (or mommy and daddy) would scream foul. SI admin. screwed up, period. To err is human. Now they should GAIN credibility and re instate him. BR PS...You ought to take notice of the place that you are posting. You are setting yourself up for a serious shellacking. This place is inhabited by haggards, drunks, convicts, lazy lieing fishermen who brag about huge catches that were really too small to legally keep, depraved wannabe poets, loose women (so Druss says anyway), hicks, red necks and even a lush that lives in an empty cardboard Tbird box. Your momma would ground you for a week if she knew you went to a place where such despicable people get a rise out of roasting newcomers that talk a lot and say little. PSS... Thread - my sincere apologies for the civility of this post. My paternal instincts got the best of me.