All you're trying to do is impose political correctness here and instead you will wind up killing off this this group. No one will come here. Who wants to read the posts of a bunch of pansies. :D
FFL R.I.P. 2001-2007 Duveyoung wrote: > Judy, > > I didn't go very deeply into it, because, well, Rick would know > whatever you seem to know that I don't know regarding this matter. > That and the fact that I am a sinner of this very kind of sinning and > to the same or worst degree. I didn't delineate my own conceptions > because Rick is the one who has the power to describe what a flame is. > I merely bring to his attention a posting that -- even if editorially > reiterative -- "abuses the spirit of our group's intent to keep things > a bit more responsible." To wit: the swear words and the ad hominem > attacks cited have been "actively and mindfully edited into a 'list of > past offenses' for the obvious purpose of attacking the character of > another poster." We've all sinned, but for Willy to single you out -- > gratuitously -- is a flame in my opinion. > > Others may have other issues to "see" in this scenario, but mine is > the first one to pop in my mind. > > Come on, you folks o'light, ain't it a flame on Judy? > > Given that at a this time when we're trying to "begin anew" to have > "community of civility" here that at the least accords each poster the > dignity of having logic, truth, and kindness (sweet truth) applied to > her/his presentation with the expectation that all will enjoy the > benefits of these velvet constraints on our egoic artistries, why the > Willytext posts? We all know, right? If you're silent, thanks for > agreeing with me. > > If there's any aging hippies out there reading this, "Give peace a > chance you hosers!" > > Edg > >
