As Mal mentioned the topic for debate is 'Terrorist Children', not Mr. Powers, Lizaleanrob, Kenty, Mal, myself or anyone else.
If you find another member unappealing then either ignore their posts or discuss it in an adult manner via PM. Don't bring it onto the open boards.
As Mal only posted the first warning a few hours ago I'm going to leave this thread unlocked for those who wish to discuss the OPs topic, providing the conversation about personalities stops here!
After watching Harry Potter and spending several hours in deep concentration I can conclusively state that the Engorgio spell does absolutely sweet FA. :mad:
*goes off muttering about suing J K Rowling for false advertising*
Hi guys, just to let you all know that I did consider locking this thread, but decided against it because I feel it's important that you be allowed to have your say on this contentious issue.
Given that there's a grey area in the law that conflicts with peoples moral code, I'll allow this thread to remain open so people can have some input into what decisions may be made about re-examining this rule.
I'd ask that people consider others who may not have had the opportunity to comment yet, either for allowing NON-ILLEGAL discussions/fantasy or against, as I for one would like to get as many opinions as possible on the subject and how members feel it should be handled.
While I understand that emotions may run high on this discussion, I truly hope it won't descend into an argument or become an Op-bashing session.
Tweeky, are you using Firefox?
I've had similar issues so did a bit of hunting and I think it was one of the extensions I had installed that was causing conflicts with the latest Firefox update, which just happened to come along at the same time as the introduction of the IM chat thingy (techie term ;) ).
Try turning off your extensions and see if things change.
Didn't make it to our house. :lol2:
Thought you were talking about this........
Surely if someone was totally tolerant they'd have to apply it unequivocally? Otherwise they'd be selectively tolerant, which means they'd be intolerant to some things and couldn't then profess to be truly, totally tolerant, loosing their moral high-ground and any weight to their statements?
As I can't think of anyone who's ever been completely tolerant I guess it comes down to where you want to draw the line how your question's answered.
Think I need to go lie down now.
What they said ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oh and just to add that IMHO very very few crimes are committed by people suffering from an acute enough episode to absolve them of any intention or responsibility.
.... and I'll move this one too. ;)
Moved this to the Club Meets section.
Hope everyone going has a great time. :thumbup:
Firstly, I'm really sorry that you've had a problem in chat tonight and while I understand that you're frustrated by what happened, we're going to have to wait until admin can review the logs for that room before any further action is taken.
As this is waiting for them to review the logs I'm going to lock this for now to give them chance to make their decisions.
Please feel free to PM me if anyone involved feels that they wish to discuss this further and I will try to help.
:shock: ............
I'll need to get my hair done too and then there's the new outfit ....... jewellery.
:notes: :small-print:
I have no objections to having my nails painted for this at all. ;)
Plate's a bit too clean for a morning after breakfast, but will you look at the grease on those mushrooms. :shock: :lickface:
HTH. ;) :thumbup: