Australian Politics Forum - Strike-through and removal thereof.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 80205
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Strike-through and removal thereof.
Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:11pm

According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Users:-

A post, while ever it has any liability attached to it for wrongdoing, is also the intellectual property of the poster, and may not be altered or DEFACED. Indeed the very fact that posting carries with it a burden of responsibility reinforces the premise that the post is the sole property of the poster etc, and cannot be materially altered.

Ergo - striking through a post is an unlawful act in itself....

Furthermore - in view of the intellectual property ownership by the original poster - that poster at all times retains the RIGHT ABSOLUTE to ensure that the original post is not altered or defaced in any way.

Ergo - it is the RIGHT of the original poster to reverse any defacing of the original post - by reversing LAWFULLY any alteration of defacement of that original post.

Furthermore - such REVERSAL of DEFACEMENT can NOT be considered an offence.

So - the recent 'banning' I just underwent while away was falsely based and has no merit.

It also follows that striking through an entire post IS an offence... since it is not merely setting aside parts of that post that may not be relevant to the response - it is defacing the entire post.

Action please, moderators. Cool

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 80205 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Strike-through and removal thereof. Reply #1 - Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:29pm This is not in 'relationships' - this is a serious matter of right and wrong in any forum.... Let Right Be Done!
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male

Re: Strike-through and removal thereof.
Reply #2 - Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:31pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:11pm:

According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Users:-

A post, while ever it has any liability attached to it for wrongdoing, is also the intellectual property of the poster, and may not be altered or DEFACED. Indeed the very fact that posting carries with it a burden of responsibility reinforces the premise that the post is the sole property of the poster etc, and cannot be materially altered.

Ergo - striking through a post is an unlawful act in itself....

Furthermore - in view of the intellectual property ownership by the original poster - that poster at all times retains the RIGHT ABSOLUTE to ensure that the original post is not altered or defaced in any way.

Ergo - it is the RIGHT of the original poster to reverse any defacing of the original post - by reversing LAWFULLY any alteration of defacement of that original post.

Furthermore - such REVERSAL of DEFACEMENT can NOT be considered an offence.

So - the recent 'banning' I just underwent while away was falsely based and has no merit.

It also follows that striking through an entire post IS an offence... since it is not merely setting aside parts of that post that may not be relevant to the response - it is defacing the entire post.

Action please, moderators. Cool

I thought this issue had been resolved? Setanta took a stand, but then saw FD do the very thing he was trying to address.

Very odd.

Maybe this is best in Feedback?

Back to top

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 72209
Gender: male

Re: Strike-through and removal thereof.
Reply #3 - Mar 1^st, 2020 at 8:01pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:11pm:

According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Users:-

A post, while ever it has any liability attached to it for wrongdoing, is also the intellectual property of the poster, and may not be altered or DEFACED. Indeed the very fact that posting carries with it a burden of responsibility reinforces the premise that the post is the sole property of the poster etc, and cannot be materially altered.

Ergo - striking through a post is an unlawful act in itself....

Furthermore - in view of the intellectual property ownership by the original poster - that poster at all times retains the RIGHT ABSOLUTE to ensure that the original post is not altered or defaced in any way.

Ergo - it is the RIGHT of the original poster to reverse any defacing of the original post - by reversing LAWFULLY any alteration of defacement of that original post.

Furthermore - such REVERSAL of DEFACEMENT can NOT be considered an offence.

So - the recent 'banning' I just underwent while away was falsely based and has no merit.

It also follows that striking through an entire post IS an offence... since it is not merely setting aside parts of that post that may not be relevant to the response - it is defacing the entire post

Action please,. moderators. Cool

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 80205
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Strike-through and removal thereof.
Reply #4 - Mar 1^st, 2020 at 8:11pm

John Smith wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 8:01pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:11pm:

According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Users:-

A post, while ever it has any liability attached to it for wrongdoing, is also the intellectual property of the poster, and may not be altered or DEFACED. Indeed the very fact that posting carries with it a burden of responsibility reinforces the premise that the post is the sole property of the poster etc, and cannot be materially altered.

Ergo - striking through a post is an unlawful act in itself....

Furthermore - in view of the intellectual property ownership by the original poster - that poster at all times retains the RIGHT ABSOLUTE to ensure that the original post is not altered or defaced in any way.

Ergo - it is the RIGHT of the original poster to reverse any defacing of the original post - by reversing LAWFULLY any alteration of defacement of that original post.

Furthermore - such REVERSAL of DEFACEMENT can NOT be considered an offence.

So - the recent 'banning' I just underwent while away was falsely based and has no merit.

It also follows that striking through an entire post IS an offence... since it is not merely setting aside parts of that post that may not be relevant to the response - it is defacing the entire post

Action please,. moderators. Cool

Careful - you are attaching guilt to yourself for the first offence..... not a good look ..

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 80205
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male

Re: Strike-through and removal thereof.
Reply #5 - Mar 1^st, 2020 at 8:13pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:31pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:11pm:

According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Users:-

A post, while ever it has any liability attached to it for wrongdoing, is also the intellectual property of the poster, and may not be altered or DEFACED. Indeed the very fact that posting carries with it a burden of responsibility reinforces the premise that the post is the sole property of the poster etc, and cannot be materially altered.

Ergo - striking through a post is an unlawful act in itself....

Furthermore - in view of the intellectual property ownership by the original poster - that poster at all times retains the RIGHT ABSOLUTE to ensure that the original post is not altered or defaced in any way.

Ergo - it is the RIGHT of the original poster to reverse any defacing of the original post - by reversing LAWFULLY any alteration of defacement of that original post.

Furthermore - such REVERSAL of DEFACEMENT can NOT be considered an offence.

So - the recent 'banning' I just underwent while away was falsely based and has no merit.

It also follows that striking through an entire post IS an offence... since it is not merely setting aside parts of that post that may not be relevant to the response - it is defacing the entire post.

Action please, moderators. Cool

I thought this issue had been resolved? Setanta took a stand, but then saw FD do the very thing he was trying to address.

Very odd.

Maybe this is best in Feedback?

Never been able to get into feedback...

What was the stand Setanta took?

A continuation of this kind of practice from people will result in both a strike-through war and a reporting war... the first shots were fired at me without proper reason - beware those who did it - I am going lightly on you at this time... but you know who you are.

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 72209
Gender: male

Re: Strike-through and removal thereof.
Reply #6 - Mar 1^st, 2020 at 8:15pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 8:11pm:

John Smith wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 8:01pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Mar 1^st, 2020 at 6:11pm:

According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Users:-

A post, while ever it has any liability attached to it for wrongdoing, is also the intellectual property of the poster, and may not be altered or DEFACED. Indeed the very fact that posting carries with it a burden of responsibility reinforces the premise that the post is the sole property of the poster etc, and cannot be materially altered.

Ergo - striking through a post is an unlawful act in itself....

Furthermore - in view of the intellectual property ownership by the original poster - that poster at all times retains the RIGHT ABSOLUTE to ensure that the original post is not altered or defaced in any way.

Ergo - it is the RIGHT of the original poster to reverse any defacing of the original post - by reversing LAWFULLY any alteration of defacement of that original post.

Furthermore - such REVERSAL of DEFACEMENT can NOT be considered an offence.

So - the recent 'banning' I just underwent while away was falsely based and has no merit.

It also follows that striking through an entire post IS an offence... since it is not merely setting aside parts of that post that may not be relevant to the response - it is defacing the entire post

Action please,. moderators. Cool

Careful - you are attaching guilt to yourself for the first offence..... not a good look ..

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male

Re: Strike-through and removal thereof.
Reply #7 - Mar 2^nd, 2020 at 10:25am

Quote:

Never been able to get into feedback...

What was the stand Setanta took?

A continuation of this kind of practice from people will result in both a strike-through war and a reporting war... the first shots were fired at me without proper reason - beware those who did it - I am going lightly on you at this time... but you know who you are.

He was enforcing action against those who did not post all of what a Member posted and then made a comment on the shortened version.

Problem was....the worst offender was FD, so Setanta abandoned that ship.

Back to top

IP Logged

The Heartless Felon Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2869 Gender:	Re: Strike-through and removal thereof. Reply #8 - Mar 2^nd, 2020 at 10:52am According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Owners:- ...Good luck Grap.
Back to top	IP Logged

Grappler Truth Teller Feller Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 80205 Proud pre-1850's NO Voter Gender:	Re: Strike-through and removal thereof. Reply #9 - Apr 11^th, 2020 at 12:45am The Heartless Felon wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2020 at 10:52am: According to the International Convention on the Rights of Forum Owners:- ...Good luck Grap. I made that on up - but it sounds good... and they have blue helmeted peacekeepers, too... come right through your screen...
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg Gold Member Offline WE ARE BORG Posts: 26460 Australia	Re: Strike-through and removal thereof. Reply #10 - Apr 11^th, 2020 at 5:15am the strikethrough was implemented because someone (grap??) didnt like ppl quoting just part of what they said. This was the compromise wasnt it? Spot
Back to top	Whaaaaaah! I'm a Moron! - edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 46487 Gender:	Re: Strike-through and removal thereof. Reply #11 - Apr 11^th, 2020 at 10:53am The end of striking through other member's posts would strike out 50% of Peccary's posts.
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged

mothra Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 34507 Gender:	Re: Strike-through and removal thereof. Reply #12 - Apr 12^th, 2020 at 8:54am This is hilarious. Grappler strikes through pretty much every post i make in his direction. Now all of a sudden, it's an intellectual property issue. On an anonymous message board. Go figure.
Back to top	If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning. IP Logged

The_Barnacle Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6205 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Strike-through and removal thereof. Reply #13 - Apr 12^th, 2020 at 12:05pm Aussie wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2020 at 10:25am: He was enforcing action against those who did not post all of what a Member posted and then made a comment on the shortened version. So my post would be against the rules? I can't respond to a single comment? That's getting a bit pedantic
Back to top	The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said. IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male

Re: Strike-through and removal thereof.
Reply #14 - Apr 12^th, 2020 at 12:13pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Apr 12^th, 2020 at 12:05pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2020 at 10:25am:

He was enforcing action against those who did not post all of what a Member posted and then made a comment on the shortened version.

So my post would be against the rules?
I can't respond to a single comment?

That's getting a bit pedantic

Setanta backed off enforcing it because FD was the worst offender. But, who knows what his current position us, so best wait to see what he says.

I will lift his ban from posting here, as of now.

Back to top

IP Logged