User Controls

Lanny Now Trashing Valid Content and Entire Threads

  1. #1
    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Lanny has begun trashing entire threads with valid posts in them from random users, just because the OP was banned. Why bother putting any effort into posting in threads at all, if your posts are just going to be trashed by Lanny? He's also removing non-spam posts willy-nilly from banned members who are evading bans, thus fucking up the flow of the conversations within the threads in the process. This is wrong. Yet another fuckup by the worst admin a BBS has ever seen.
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  2. #2
    mmQ victim of incest
    So it goes. Are we just gonna stand back idly and allow this, or are we gonna STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS?! Can I get a goddamn hallelujah???
  3. #3
    i remember this is the exact kind of freespeech your all for back in the days.

    you were the one promoting the acts of hiding freespeeches in places that no one can see;

    the trashcan and its mutation NIMF.
  4. #4
    Originally posted by mmQ So it goes. Are we just gonna stand back idly and allow this, or are we gonna STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS?! Can I get a goddamn hallelujah???

    ill give you an ammithabba.
  5. #5
    RisiR † 29 Autism
    Originally posted by mmQ So it goes. Are we just gonna stand back idly and allow this, or are we gonna STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS?! Can I get a goddamn hallelujah???

    Allahu Akbar!
  6. #6
    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny i remember this is the exact kind of freespeech your all for back in the days.

    you were the one promoting the acts of hiding freespeeches in places that no one can see;

    the trashcan and its mutation NIMF.

    Not true. What I would do is create a new thread in the trash and move the opening post there, while leaving the original thread intact, with the second poster in the thread as the new OP. Any of the offending posts buried in the thread would be moved, but the entire thread would remain untouched.
  7. #7
    Originally posted by -SpectraL Not true. What I would do is create a new thread in the trash and move the opening post there, while leaving the original thread intact, with the second poster in the thread as the new OP. Any of the offending posts buried in the thread would be moved, but the entire thread would remain untouched.

    a thread without the original OP is just like a penis without a head (dome).

    so much for not fucking up the flow of the conversation.
  8. #8
    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny a thread without the original OP is just like a penis without a head (dome).

    so much for not fucking up the flow of the conversation.

    It worked fine. The opening post is not all that critical to the flow of the thread's discussion.
  9. #9
    mmQ victim of incest
    Originally posted by -SpectraL It worked fine. The opening post is not all that critical to the flow of the thread's discussion.

    It is if you're a newcomer to the thread and dont know what the fuck is going on. Sure you can gather a good idea based on the conversation but I would want to know, for example, if the original post was a one-liner or a detailed post.
  10. #10
    Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country Space Nigga [my scoffingly uncritical tinning]
    OP, you yourself admitted that this is just a place Lanny set up to chat with his friends.
  11. #11
    ECAP Tuskegee Airman
    Originally posted by mmQ So it goes. Are we just gonna stand back idly and allow this, or are we gonna STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS?! Can I get a goddamn hallelujah???

  12. #12
    Originally posted by -SpectraL It worked fine. The opening post is not all that critical to the flow of the thread's discussion.

    yes they are.

    your just angry lanny deleted your posts.

    i would too if i were you.
  13. #13
    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny yes they are.

    your just angry lanny deleted your posts.

    i would too if i were you.

    You are a Lanny apologist, even though he unjustly banned you yourself. Quiet, bootlicker.
  14. #14
    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Originally posted by mmQ It is if you're a newcomer to the thread and dont know what the fuck is going on. Sure you can gather a good idea based on the conversation but I would want to know, for example, if the original post was a one-liner or a detailed post.

    If it's a spammer, 99 times out of 100 it's going to be a stupid, worthless, shitty, unfunny, idiotic, kidiotic one-liner.
  15. #15
    RisiR † 29 Autism
    Originally posted by -SpectraL If it's a spammer, 99 times out of 100 it's going to be a stupid, worthless, shitty, unfunny, idiotic, kidiotic one-liner.

    SpectraL is a child molester.
  16. #16
    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Originally posted by RisiR † SpectraL is a child molester.

    Think of your state of mind, man.
  17. #17
    RisiR † 29 Autism
    Originally posted by -SpectraL Think of your state of mind, man.

    Thanks for the reminder. It's already creeping up on me again. Fucknigger bitch.
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  18. #18
    Originally posted by -SpectraL You are a Lanny apologist, even though he unjustly banned you yourself. Quiet, bootlicker.

    show me which part of what i posted thats 'apologetic' in nature.
  19. #19
    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny show me which part of what i posted thats 'apologetic' in nature.



    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny yes they are.

    your just angry lanny deleted your posts.

    i would too if i were you.
  20. #20
    Originally posted by -SpectraL

    how is shifting the blame on you 'apologetic' ?
Jump to Top