I just got a second (in the last 6 months) invite to re-join my previous discussion site. ('new administration' yeah, right!). After the way I was treated before I got banned? I told them what they could do with their messageboard. In a polite way though.
Maybe you should have gone back to see if you would get banned again. Go for the three strikes and you are out.. Just a thought.
Perhaps they did something like what my former posting forums did to themselves. PoliticalJack once had about the same posting traffic as PoliticalForum and yet we watched the administrators methodically start doing every boneheaded thing that they could -- from a business perspective -- to make posting on their site as unpleasant as possible for both the Left and the Right. That in turn started when the idiots switched to a brand spanking new but utterly unvetted posting format that simply irritated the bejesus out of everyone. Today? PJ has got . . . nothing but a few old diehards posting exclusively to one another.
It was the following in my case - or at least it was the catalyst: There's an Olde English aphorism which goes 'A woman, a dog, and a walnut tree, the harder you beat 'em, the better they be.' I used it as one of my signatures, but some pillock complained that it was misogynistic and I was told to delete it. I refused, and the rest is history, as they say. I'm glad it happened, otherwise I wouldn't have found this board and I love it here.
Definitely. And it is misogynistic. It’s suggests beating women will make them better. If that isn’t misogyny what is?
It is just a saying from years ago, I would look at it more as something humerous than something to be banned over. Violation of first ammendment rights.
Of course it's meant to be humour - it was even back in the days when it was coined. I mean cant they tell that from the 'walnut tree' bit? Like anyone would actually beat a tree?? Give me bloody strength!
I agree with you. I was banned from a political site that was a precursor to this one. I was asked to go back, but refused. The mod didn't like it when I showed him to be wrong.
Maybe we were too controversial? But then vibrancy is the life-blood of discussion forums. I have to admit it was so boring I was quite glad when they did ban me. lol
It happens. This forum seems to be fairly well moderated (despite their tolerance for the neo-Nazis).
People tend to have less sense of humor about painful issues in their life For instance, I might make a joke about fat people.... but not in front of a very fat friend. In this case, lots of women have been abused, and they are not amused by jokes on this topic You seem either unaware of this fact, or you know and don’t care Fwiw, it is a counterintuitive fact that some plants are more productive in response to hardship. In this case, apparently walnuts were harvested by beating a walnut tree with long poles But I have to agree, the idea of beating a dog is very funny
I don't know about 'funny', but it does work. When I was in the RAF police as a dog-handler one of the other handlers had what I'd call a psycho-dog, because it would suddenly attack him without warning, and at any given time. Naturally enough he eventually got fed up with it (and for the sake of clarity lest there by any doubt, the handler became fed up with being attacked by the dog, not the dog got fed up with attacking the handler! ), so he suspended the dog by its leash from the undercarriage of a plane and gave it an effing good hiding - and I mean a good hiding, and it never attacked him again.
This probably also explains why slaves were (are) beaten.... it WORKS and, funny or not, it seems likely that a beaten woman is a better behaved woman... unless or until she kills you
The use of long poles to dislodge the nuts and encourage new growth is documented as far back as Aesop's Fables in the 1490's. In the instance of the tree it is a means of harvesting and pruning versus punishment and discipline for the others. That there were combined is a form of humor, albeit of the dark variety and not acceptable today since neither animal nor female abuse is legal. However I doubt that anyone would look askance as harvesting nuts from trees since it is still a recommended practice. https://www.gardeningknowhow.com/edible/nut-trees/walnut/walnut-tree-harvesting.htm
Right Now all we have to do is ask a few women if they consider it respectful to joke about beating them to make them behave....
Hmmmm.....do you like being beaten? Does it make you more subservient and docile? Does it "Turn You On"?
why do people 'ban' in the first place? Do they own the site? 'Curse' words are not allowed.. pornography is not allowed... not nudity although since some art work is in the 'nude', derogatory statements are not allowed, intentional provoking is not allowed, ... etc... but they are part of the rules and to be banned for breaking the rules is understandable but why would a person be banned for having an opinion and expressing the opinion in a non derogatory, non pornographic, non curse, non provoking, etc... way? Should a person be banned for talking about STDs and what they can do to the actual human 'organ'; such as the genital areas and maybe even having some references to show the validity of the statement? Maybe even the moderators are afraid of the Truth.