Saddam and Cousin Discussed Killing Thousands

[Bryan_Ekers]

@rjung

In all my years on the SDMB, I can’t recall a time when “OP” ever stood for “original poster”.

</nitpick>

I can’t recall a time when OP couldn’t refer to the post or the poster, depending on context.

[gigi]

@Bryan Ekers

I can’t recall a time when OP couldn’t refer to the post or the poster, depending on context.

Same here. “When will the OP come back to address the responses?”, for example.

[dropzone]

@Bryan Ekers

I can’t recall a time when OP couldn’t refer to the post or the poster, depending on context.

Yep. Same here.

[Happy_Fun_Ball]

@Bryan Ekers

I can’t recall a time when OP couldn’t refer to the post or the poster, depending on context.

This has always been my take.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@Bryan Ekers

I can’t recall a time when OP couldn’t refer to the post or the poster, depending on context.

True. But the context of the post tomndebb referred to was ambiguous. Either that post broke the rules for GD or it didn’t. You can insult the post but not the poster.That post was given the benefit of doubt.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@The Flying Dutchman

True. But the context of the post tomndebb referred to was ambiguous. Either that post broke the rules for GD or it didn’t. You can insult the post but not the poster.That post was given the benefit of doubt.

True enough, sayng an OP is pathetic could be taken against the person or his writings.

Better to say an OP is ill-conceived. Then it could be taken against his writings or his drunken parents.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@Bryan Ekers

True enough, sayng an OP is pathetic could be taken against the person or his writings.

Better to say an OP is ill-conceived. Then it could be taken against his writings or his drunken parents.