Post by moderator on Feb 3, 2008 12:47:58 GMT -5
I do not think it was deliberate falsehood but rather technical incompetence as the person said that her pop-up blocker setting was incorrect. my glassumption is she tried to reach this site from the main web site which is the only pop-up I spotted.
My complaint is specifically about being attacked by David. My request for information was based upon the person's original post but is still is a valid request despite the original poster's technical FUBAR.
I have spoken to David about refraining from attacking you personally. My only problem with your original post was that came across as an accusation (which turned out to be false), rather than a request for clarification. And before you assume that the original poster was only guilty of a technical FUBAR, you might want to ask why this poster continues to display the moniker under their profile of "PRE-BANNED by the LBHA site!"?
NOTE- the poster in question has since removed the false moniker under her profile name.
What are the ground-rules? Are statements critical of GAC grounds for immediate dismissal?
No, statements critical of GAC are not grounds for immediate dismissal, anymore than statements against Marcus Reno or Frederick Benteen were grounds for immediate dismissal from the old message board! lol. How absurd! The ground rules here have already been posted upon joining. BTW, they are exactly the same ground rules that were posted at the old LBHA message board.
P.S. You need to tweak the profanity filter as it does not like the word assumption. Very strange...everytime I edit it to the correct spelling in the message body it comes back with the GL in front of it, yet, in the post script it allows it.
Thanks Billy. I will check it out.