--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley" <j_alexander_stanley@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > (snip) > > > > He left a carpet of broken lives. This is my opinion. I know > > > > others, including the creator of FFL feel differently and if > > > > Alex and Rick want to ban me for expressing what I believe > > > > (which ain't much of a stretch given his behavior) then so be it. > > > > > > As much of an asshole as you're showing yourself to be, > > > nobody's about to "ban" you from FFL for expressing your > > > views on Maharishi and the TMO. > > > > > > That you would consider being banned for doing so even a > > > faint possibility is a very clear demonstration of your > > > inability to think rationally about anything TM-related. > > > (Or anything else, for that matter, given your recent > > > idiotically paranoid tirade against vaccines.) > > > > Banning people for the content of posts has been done very > > sparingly over the years, always by Rick, and the offenders > > are usually allowed back after some time. Kirk, Ravi, Dan > > Friedman, and Tom Pall are the only ones that come to mind > > right now. Rick also gave the boot to docwhammo, and he has > > not been allowed back; personally, I would have allowed > > docwhammo to stay, but Rick makes those decisions. > > But they weren't banned for expressing negative views of > Maharishi and the TMO, were they?
No, of course not. They were banned for being egregiously offensive (extreme profanity or racism) or repeatedly breaking the rules. I should also point out that in this discussion, I'm referring to legitimate FFL participants; I routinely boot spammers. > Because that's what Michael is suggesting may happen to him. Well, http://youtu.be/e5JCp2Hd5L8
