Well, that tears it.
I forgot about the pickle incident.
I hereby rescind my previous character reference.
He has a good bagel place, though. That makes up for it.
For the record, this is exactly what I meant and no more.
As has been mentioned, I have met Billdo personally, and his sister Green Bean, at a couple of NYC dopefests several years ago. As has also been said, besides my own acquaintance, I know he is known personally to dozens of dopers, some of whom know his real name. And some have even been to his apartment.
Now none of this means that **Billdo ** is not a pervert. (Sorry Billdo.) My intention was not to vouch for him based on a casual acquaintance. I don’t have the slightest personal knowledge of what he actually does when he’s not at dopefests.
What it *does * mean is that he would have to be incredibly, unbelievably stupid to post what he did if his real intention was to find out how to troll for underage girls. Too many people here know who he actually is.
As for my remarks to Zambini57, here they are in full:
My intent here was mostly to inform Zambini57 that Billdo is known personally to some here, so it is unlikely he would soliciting information on illegal acts. Perhaps I could have elaborated a bit more on exactly what I meant.
But even if Zambini57 didn’t know this, it was still inappropriate for him to imply that **Billdo ** was a pedophile in GQ. If he had some suspicions about this, his proper course would have been to report the post rather than to make such an accusation in the thread. I probably would have cautioned him on that post even if I had no idea who Billdo was.
Nothing like those bright young freedom fighter Americans who think Castro is the poster child of evil dictators. Save me, save me!
You’re a clever boy, fetus, just don’t overshoot your point.
Probably? The point of all this is zambini’s comment was idiotic and it does not matter who you know or don’t know. Whether Bildo’s IRL ID is known is irrelevant given that the question was legit and in no way implied that anyone was looking to engage in illegal acts.
Ok, I definitely would have cautioned him, even if the OP of that thread had been a Guest. Accusations like that should be made by reporting the post, and letting the moderators handle it. I would have locked it if it had appeared to me that the OP actually had the intent of soliciting information about committing illegal acts. It did not.
Why you are completely misunderstanding him. “Who said I am anti-Communist? Note that I defended the victims of the Mccarthy era just one post ago”
I admit some of it is a little hard to comprehend.
I AM THE PAEDO-FINDER GENERAL!! By the power invested in me by
a Sky News text vote / the discredited research of Professor Ray Meadows / some bloke I met down the pub who said he knew for definite…
I pronounce you all PAE - DO - PHILES!
That makes sense, and I agree.
This may be the understatement of the day. Are you a non-native English speaker, maybe?
You appear to be arguing that because every person would hide this sort of wrongdoing, there’s no way to know that any person is not doing it. By this rationale, any accusation of conduct so heinious that NO ONE would admit it – child abuse, necrophilia, toad-licking, whatever – cannot be defended against by saying “I know the guy and he wouldn’t do that.” As I already said, that’s a pretty sad way to think.
And the fact that you think I’m wrong doesn’t make me wrong.
I don’t disagree with that.
No, it’s the fact that you’re wrong that makes you wrong. I could change my mind, but then I’d be wrong, too. Whether it’s a sad way to think, or not, there is no value to saying, “I know him and he’s not a pedophile.” How would you possibly know that? You can assume it, since it seems to be a pretty rare thing, but that’s about it.
By this logic, none of us ever know anything we cannot personally prove with 100% certainty our very own selves. Sun rising tomorrow? You don’t know that. :rolleyes: It’s not just a dark way to think, it’s fucking stupid.
And your tautology (“the fact you’re wrong makes you wrong”) doesn’t make me any less correct than I was before, nor does it make your posts more persusaive.
Umm, no that’s not true.
You’re going to have to do better than that if you expect me to respond.
Your analogy is false. The fact that we can’t know one thing doesn’t mean that we can’t know anything.
But the fact that under your rationale we can’t know anything certainly does mean we can’t know one thing.
What’s wrong with being a pedophile (or “paedophile” or “paieedophile” or however you want to spell it)?
If “philia” is a friendship or brotherly love (as opposed to eros, which is an erotic love or sexual/sensual desire), what’s so wrong about being friendly towards, or liking, children?
I never said that. It isn’t even implied in what I did say.
Zambini is completely out of line and Jodi’s (and others) castigation of him is well merited. No one who isn’t depraved would advocate the statutory rape of 13 year old girls by older men.
Sexual abuse of children is a touchy subject, especially for those who’ve had it happen to them or those who they know. Perhaps that’s what set Denquixote and Zambini off.
The attitudes and mindsets represented by Zambini and denquixote, however, are utterly deplorable. Free speech? Fuck you for trying to invoke that, denquixote. Zambini and you are enemies of free speech. You are insidiously stupid, and it’s people like you that give power to panderers, demagogues, and dishonest politicians. You are ignorance itself.