posted 11-17-2003 11:34 PM            

His assertion in the "Questions" thread of CT Science that "Halva rants about how everyone else in the thread should be banned" violates two Forum rules:

1. Rudeness and derisive behavior may be grounds for loss of posting rights at the discretion of the Chemtrail Central Council and/or moderators.

and

5. Posting of any any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harrassing, obscene, profane, violent, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or in violation of any law is not allowed and may result in loss of posting rights at the discretion of the Chemtrail Central Council and/or moderators.

The assertion that halva advocated that everyone else in the thread be banned is knowingly inaccurate, since the relevant statement was merely an assertion that PHX Pilot, Eric and Wolf_Larson would have already been banned if their postings had been at chemtrailtrackingusa, i.e. a judgement of probable fact, not a recommendation.

posted 11-18-2003 11:03 PM            

Well, lets take a good look at a couple of these rules then.

Rudeness and derisive behavior may be grounds for loss of posting rights at the discretion of the Chemtrail Central Council and/or moderators.
and
Posting of any any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harrassing, obscene, profane, violent, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or in violation of any law is not allowed and may result in loss of posting rights at the discretion of the Chemtrail Central Council and/or moderators.

You mean to tell me that, in that same thread, Halvas statment "Eric, you are in collusion with PHX Pilot." and "You are disingenuous and I have better things to do than waste my time with you." is not in any way knowingly inaccurate, defamatory, abusive, hateful, or harassing?

posted 11-19-2003 12:05 AM            

I do not appreciate being publicly defamed like this. Therefore, I will post my defense where the people who see the charges will be sure to see it.

I see alot of what I think of as hypocracy on this board. The elite saying whatever they please, and smiting the 'untouchables' whenever they slip up one word. If we are going to have a system of rules, everyone must be held acountable for their actions and statements equally.

posted 11-21-2003 08:22 PM            

1. Chemtrails are the evil work of the United States.

2. That the United States government was responsible for 11SEP03.

3. That the war in Iraq is nothing but a ploy to gain control over their oil supply.

I also believe that the so called "council of nein" is out to rid the board of anyone who disagrees with them.

posted 11-21-2003 11:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Last Laugh:
nobody has yet given scientific proof that:

1. Chemtrails are the evil work of the United States.

2. That the United States government was responsible for 11SEP03.

3. That the war in Iraq is nothing but a ploy to gain control over their oil supply.

From what I've read here a lot of people don't know their ass from a hole in the ground about government and the way things need to be done as far as the war in Iraq and Afghanistan goes

---

Scientific: Relating to, or employing the methodology of science.

Science: The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

The key word here is theoretical. As in speculation. What exactly did you think scientific meant?

With all these post on all these threads, how can you sit there and act like “nothing” has sparked in your mind? The bulb did not turn on even once huh?

It is my scientific observation that you have a reading comprehension disorder. Is that scientific enough for you?

Maybe you should enlighten us asses and tell us the REAL reason [of course its not oil ] as to why we’re in the Middle East?

posted 11-22-2003 07:28 AM            

Rule 5 applies to you too. You've only had 3 posts compared to PHX Pilots 788 and you couldn't manage to control vulgar attack lanuguage.

You are not banned for your counter point of view you are banned for breaking forum rules.

As to PHX's request for a "ruling" on halva's comments. Having reviewed the thread it is my opinion that halva has posted reasonably and rationally in a polite manner. His opinion that there was collusion between Eric and PHX is not breaking rules, it is his honest observation right or wrong.

posted 12-02-2003 10:30 AM            

I've already destroyed any credibility or shred of intelligence that Halva wishes to pretend he has in the "questions" thread, but in case any of you missed it, here is my last reply to him that explains why he shouldn't be allowed to use the internet and interact with other people:

Halva, our highly intelligent Greek friend, still hasn't explicitly explained to me how I am a liar, what exactly I lied about, and how it has been PROVEN, as he earlier claimed. If Halva does not comply and answer these questions, I will make a formal complaint in the admin desk forum and await Halva's permanent ban from this forum.
Did what I just write look completely ridiculous to you? I agree completely. What I just wrote was ridiculous, unrealistic, and unfair to any reasonable person. Unfortunately for Halva, he is using this same ridiculous logic to complain about PHX Pilot and attempt to get him in some kind of administrative trouble. If there really is some kind of elusive "council" that is reviewing this, I hope that they are not only objective, but also have the sense to see the kind of logic loop that Halva has backed himself into. Let's take a look at some of Halva's excellent quotes throughout this thread:

"Eric, you are in collusion with PHX Pilot."

I am? Prove it. I give you my word that I am not "in collusion" with PHX, but even if I was, how does that affect you? You still haven't acknowledged this. This shouldn't stop you from answering all of my questions. Oh that's right, you aren't able to answer all of my questions so instead you have to resort to crap like this. I forgot.

"Eric you have lost credibility with me, proving yourself not only a debunker but also a liar."

Really? That's quite an accusation you've made there. If that is true, what in particular did I lie about and where is your proof? Since I'm quite positive that I haven't lied about anything thus far in this thread, I am going to have to assume that you broke this part of the forum's rules:

"Posting of any any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory"

Halva, if you want to defend yourself and show everyone that you did not break the forum's rules and do not deserve to be banned, then you are going to have to offer proof of me lying. If you do not offer this proof, then everyone will immediately have to assume that you lied to us, and mind you, we will have proof of this.

"As is my wont, I took this conversation opener in good faith, and began a discussion in good faith."

Don't make me laugh. You didn't begin discussion of anything. You simply told me that my questions aren't worth your time and then gave me a cop out answer. Also, if my questions were so "unnecessarily monopolistic", then why did you waste so much time on not only me, but everyone else in this thread without ever actually answering any questions? Is it because you are a hypocrite? Yes, I believe so. Is it also because my questions may have challenged your FAITH in chemtrails and were thus not fit for a response within your reasoning? Yes, I believe so too.

"I became suspicious that they were colluding, as debunkers systematically do on this forum and elsewhere."

That's nice. However, you should have kept your unsubstantiated suspicions to yourself because they were not only off-topic, but also against this forums rules and grounds for banning. Now, I don't actually agree with that, but don't forget, we're going by your loopy logic here Halva.

"You are disingenuous and I have better things to do than waste my time with you."

Really? That's quite nice, but however if this were true, then I find all of the time you have spent on this thread responding quite puzzling. But no, our good friend Halva isn't a hypocrite. Let's just ignore this.

By the way, do you even know what "disingenuous" means? It means "giving a false appearance of simple frankness". Now, since I am apparently not being frank with you and instead giving a false appearance, I am looking forward to your evidence to support this. Otherwise I look forward to you being banned, because this is definite harassment *cough*.

"is typical not only of chemtrail debunkers but of all American defenders of the existing international order"

Are you joking? So now I am not only a debunker (even though I have already expressed my belief in spraying operations of some extent), but I am now also defending America? Yes, I am American, but I am also most likely more anti-government than even you and wouldn't defend this country in a million years. I don't see what that has to do with this discussion. Looks to me like you are trying to change the subject and go off about your political views. HINT: No one cares about your political views. Let's focus on the topic at hand, which is you being hilariously wrong.

I believe that PHX has already summed up this entire ridiculous situation earlier in this thread:

"Eric asks a question
Halva refuses to answer
PHXPilot answers
Halva accuses PHXPilot and Eric of being in collusion
Wolf_Larson asks Halva why he believes that
Halva rants about how everyone else in the thread should be banned"

Now Halva, you may argue; "but I didn't rant about anyone being banned, I simply stated that another forum would have banned you". My question for you is: WHY did you even mention that if you didn't want us banned? What exactly did we do wrong that would warrant a ban not only in this forum, but ANY forum? Logical questions are against the rules now? Defending against unsubstantiated claims are against the rules now as well?

So, as we can see, our good friend Halva has quite a bit of explaining to do. I said before that I'm on to you Halva. I wasn't pulling your leg. That nonsense that you've been throwing at everyone here isn't going to fly with me. I'm watching.

posted 12-22-2003 05:10 PM            

We now have whitemajikman violating more than several rules with nary a warning from anyone. Unbelievable . . .

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by halva:

[I am authorized by the Council to issue the following warning to PHX Pilot:

His assertion in the "Questions" thread of CT Science that "Halva rants about how everyone else in the thread should be banned" violates two Forum rules:

1. Rudeness and derisive behavior may be grounds for loss of posting rights at the discretion of the Chemtrail Central Council and/or moderators.

and

5. Posting of any any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harrassing, obscene, profane, violent, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or in violation of any law is not allowed and may result in loss of posting rights at the discretion of the Chemtrail Central Council and/or moderators.

The assertion that halva advocated that everyone else in the thread be banned is knowingly inaccurate, since the relevant statement was merely an assertion that PHX Pilot, Eric and Wolf_Larson would have already been banned if their postings had been at chemtrailtrackingusa, i.e. a judgement of probable fact, not a recommendation.

If there is any repetition of such derisive behaviour and knowing inaccuracy, PHX Pilot will be excluded from posting rights at this forum.]

posted 12-23-2003 04:04 PM            

More like zero tolerance for troublemakers.

Its okay to disagree.