Has he denied he was with Glen Beck that fateful night fifteen years ago? I’m not saying he was or he wasn’t, just that these are questions which need answering.
OK, going with five paragraphs of Balki “in America, what means factual? 
” is probably your only safe follow-up here, but it’s a tad predictable. You’re never going to be anybody, trolling-wise, if you simply tread well-worn paths.
I’d like to see some outrageous claims. Personal knowledge of secret government programs, a friend who was beaten up by liberals for not kowtowing to Obama, personal observation of some bizarre fetish that all women actually possess – something like that.
You are being treated arbitrarily and capriciously. I highly recommend you exercise what little control you have over the situation and remove yourself from the board.
Shoes?
I’ve told you this at least twice before, in ATMB threads. This board is what it is. You are the new guy. It is up to you to learn this board’s culture/rules, and comply with same. Instead, you’ve been whining and demanding that the board change to be what you want it to be. That is not going to happen.
As things stand, you’ve firmly established yourself as an annoying, ill-informed twit. You have zero credibility on any known subject. You have contributed little or nothing of value in any thread where you’ve been a participant. If you want to change that image, you’re going to have to change your ways.
Well, now we don’t know if Marley’s really just a woman who likes boxers.
This is very confusing.
And don’t reject the possibility that Marley’s a girl who wears thongs and likes to pretend that she’s a guy that wears thongs!
Marley, even a quick read of GQ and there is “Do I want a Kindle?” and “Why doesn’t Wikipedia require more cites?” just to name two. So there are factual answers to these, and in the last only people working for Wiki can answer because the facts must be verifiable and true? This is nonsense. I read GQ and almost every post is an opinion and I see little or no of what you claim the rules are.
Yes, I will stay away from answering there, but I believe bad rules deserve zero respect and I respect none of the opinions seen in this thread. I had a few science questions to post and I still will do that, but it is ridiculous just I can’t suggest a reason for anything unless I can verify it, no thread I read is like that. Let’s see you hold others to that standard.
OK, then…may as well get the “When does he get banned” pool going. I’m going to set the over/under at 30 days from today. And I think I’ll take the under.
They should be verifiable or true, at the very least.
We are absolutely horrible and can’t do anything right, we are not worthy of your intellectual prowess, and if it weren’t for the fact that we are the only message board on the whole internet, I bet you’d dump us in a New York minute.
Right?
Over. I bet that he’s going to leave by himself when he gets bored.
OK, here you simply blew your wad too early. Stamping your foot and throwing your diaper is a time-honored retreat maneuver, but you’ve got to let enough injustice well up that it seems plausible. I would have waited until page 4 at least. Definitely a misstep here.
I am hearing this as said by Bob Costas! anyone else?
ETa: what Giraffe said.
Listen to the man, dude-he knows what he is talking about. It’s really too bad there isn’t some other message board where you could go to learn things like this from such a wise man like Giraffe.
Yup. Too bad.
As the original moderator in question, I am just going to reiterate what has already been said by Marley23, Miller, and the other moderators who have posted in this thread. If your grasp of the difference between facts and opinions is as poor as your posts here indicate, you should stay out of General Questions entirely. As I noted in the original thread, I will issue official warnings to you if you continue to make similar posts in GQ.
Also, as I said in the original thread, while other posters stated opinions in that thread, your post was of such a nature and was sufficiently extreme that it suggested to me that you were trolling by deliberately seeking negative attention from other posters. In that it succeeded, since it elicited an insult from another poster in the thread and also prompted this Pitting.
In my personal opinion, many of your other posts suggest you are trolling, including your pose of martyrdom at being required to follow well-established board rules. So far, we have been giving you the benefit of the doubt that your posts are due to simple ignorance rather than being deliberately inflammatory. However, with each additional post you make this doubt is becoming increasingly slight.
Kolibri
Obergruppenführer
General Fragen
This would make an excellent template for many future posts. Let’s make sure to save it!
Except for the facts that: as he noted, the post was moved to IMHO, so he clearly wasn’t the only one spouting opinions in that thread, and that he wasn’t even officially warned.
Pitting him for his comments are one thing, and your post is technically true, but could be applied to almost every response in that thread.
Qad, yes it will, it proves the new rule others mentioned that “you are too ignorant to post” which is a new secret rule now. In any case I already agree to stay out of GQ, I want nothing to do with ignorant rules like that, even if no one else has to obey them.
When I ask a question, I welcome opinion and I will stay in the other forums then because of the stupid and never enforced rules in GQ, OK, I will agree to that. Interesting Col said others in that thread did indeed express opinion, and therefore were also in violation of “facts only” rule. I’d like to see everyone stay out of GQ as a result, till we have intelligent rules there for a normal discussion, which is all I was doing. It was ONE post, get over it.
I’m very glad to hear this. I will take you at your word.
Not really. You’ve made quite a few other non-factual posts in GQ, some linked to in this thread, based on ill-informed opinion.