Searches and incorrect conclusions

I imagine that explains the disconnect, then. I would characterize the following post (for example) as “being about child porn”:

…whereas you would characterize it as not being about child porn. I suggest most people might agree with me, and further suggest you consider tailoring your arguments to take that into account.

Neither true, nor responsive. One more time: Do you actually think that “some sort of news specifically regarding legal vs. illegal porn in Australia” is the same thing as “a very current proposal regarding a country-wide internet firewall a la China for Australia”? Do you understand why I’m asking this?

The point is Cesario likes discussiong child porn. Do you agree or disagree?

Eh. First of all, I didn’t know about that thread until you started this thread. I really don’t think you’re in a credible position to complain about me noticing that thread when you’re the one that brought it up. Second of all, the only reason I posted here at all was because you were factually incorrect about that thread. Third of all, I can call Giraffe a retard if that will make you feel better.