Conversation

Notices

1. william.maggos (wjmaggos@liberal.city)'s status on Wednesday, 31-Jan-2024 10:39:08 JST william.maggos

   • arcanicanis
   • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠
   • Birbpilled Kranichposter
   • Bunnyslope

   @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis

   no, most will just not use it. you will pervert/kill this place. same with your concept that forced exile of people unlike yourself from the US and Europe will finally give everybody peace and prosperity. it's ridiculous selfish propaganda.

   servers block/mute spammers and illegal content etc, even jerk fedi servers do that. and that doesn't make us a less free speech network. it makes it more welcoming.

   • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠ (amerika@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 01-Feb-2024 13:38:53 JST ≠ Brett Stevens ≠

     in reply to

     • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:
     • arcanicanis
     • Birbpilled Kranichposter
     • Bunnyslope
     @wjmaggos @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
     
     Not true at all. Most people are going to resopnd to them the same way people responded to you when you tried to grief @p in the memoriam thread for his canine.
     
     We sigh, mute, and move on.
   • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist: (p@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 01-Feb-2024 13:38:53 JST pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:

     in reply to

     • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:
     • arcanicanis
     • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠
     • Birbpilled Kranichposter
     • Bunnyslope
     @amerika @wjmaggos @Bunnyslope @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @arcanicanis Yeah, it's the only reasonable approach: instead of deciding on others' behalf what they get to see, you let them decide what they'll look at. Worse than attempting to decide are people like this guy, that demand that others decide on behalf of more people that they don't know.
     
     > when you tried to grief @p in the memoriam thread for his canine.
     
     I can understand if he wants to argue with me, but that seemed like probably the worst place for him to do it, and he doesn't even want to talk anything out: every time I talk to him, he's just posturing in the form of senseless demands.
     † top dog :pedomustdie: likes this.
   • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist: (p@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 01-Feb-2024 14:50:57 JST pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:

     in reply to

     • arcanicanis
     • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠
     • Birbpilled Kranichposter
     • Bunnyslope
     @wjmaggos @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
     
     > do you allow spam on your server?
     
     The thing you keep claiming FSE allowed was the thing that resulted in the first ban, and probably the majority of bans that happened here for quite some time. Harassment was covered under spam. I am frustrated that you repeatedly made the accusation. Aside from things that are illegal, indiscriminate spam was the other thing that could result in a ban without warning.
     
     What is "allowed" is a moot point now, though, because it's all being replaced, which I announced very loudly a very long time ago.
   • william.maggos (wjmaggos@liberal.city)'s status on Thursday, 01-Feb-2024 14:50:59 JST william.maggos

     in reply to

     • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:
     • arcanicanis
     • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠
     • Birbpilled Kranichposter
     • Bunnyslope

     @p @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis

     do you allow spam on your server?

   • william.maggos (wjmaggos@liberal.city)'s status on Thursday, 01-Feb-2024 14:51:28 JST william.maggos

     in reply to

     • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:
     • arcanicanis
     • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠
     • Birbpilled Kranichposter
     • Bunnyslope

     @p @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis

     did you answer the question? less text please. do you allow spam?

   • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist: (p@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 01-Feb-2024 15:05:12 JST pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:

     in reply to

     • arcanicanis
     • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠
     • Birbpilled Kranichposter
     • Bunnyslope
     @wjmaggos @amerika @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis
     
     > I didn't say anything negative about him or his dog.
     
     :ronmad: ...Because you shat on the floor last time I threw a party, and--
     :reggieoops: I may have shat on the floor, but I didn't shit *in* the punch bowl!
     
     :ronmad: So he basically walked into the funeral and took a shit and--
     :reggieoops: Hey! DID YOU READ WHAT I WROTE? I DIDN'T SHIT *IN* THE COFFIN.
     
     > I pointed out that we know people on his server would say horrible shit if the dead was a minority etc.
     
     I was completely hammered and sad about my dog and you wanted to engage in posturing over your "culture war" bullshit because you are a cunt. As far as I am concerned, you're in the same category.
     
     Worse, "Yeah, but we all know some unspecified people would have, they totally would have, and it's your fault!" is the type of argument I am unaccustomed to having with an actual adult man, it seems more like the type one would have with a belligerent woman in the middle of the night. To borrow a phrase from the former president's book, "Dreams of My Father", you ain't my bitch.
     OBAMA_FRIES.mp3
     Machismo likes this.
   • william.maggos (wjmaggos@liberal.city)'s status on Thursday, 01-Feb-2024 15:05:13 JST william.maggos

     in reply to

     • pistolero :thispersondoesnotexist:
     • arcanicanis
     • ≠ Brett Stevens ≠
     • Birbpilled Kranichposter
     • Bunnyslope

     @amerika @p @EmoIsDeadAndSoAmI @Bunnyslope @arcanicanis

     did you read what I wrote? I didn't say anything negative about him or his dog. I pointed out that we know people on his server would say horrible shit if the dead was a minority etc. everybody knows that. and everybody knows that this means it wouldn't be posted in the first place. you get a network where you never have to hear about these minorities (as they are forced out of the country like you hope happens). w/o direct censorship.