Dirty Words

[Dan Alaimo]

Apparently I have a higher tolerance for certain expressions of language than others, and so does the community. This would be in moderation, used mainly for emphasis, and not repeating, for example "mother f*****" at every opportunity. To move this discussion out from another where it was off-topic, let's reintroduce it.

I won't repeat all the words from there, but will offer a comment on "assholes". A couple of years ago Aaron James wrote a book about the word attempting to define it (https://www.amazon.com/Assholes-Theory- ... 0804171351). One of the examples he used was a person who is currently running for President. I would argue that with the candidacy of Donald Trump, the word has become mainstream.

To incite some trouble, does anyone have access to the George Carlin monologue and would dare to test the waters by posting it?

[Corey Rossen]

There are no waters to test, it is a free for all. Approved by the "community" spokesman, Jim.

[cameron karslake]

Exactly!

You're getting it, Corey.

No censorship.

Post away and own it.

[Corey Rossen]

Exactly!

You're getting it, Corey.

No censorship.

Post away and own it.

Sounds good.

Now if only the Project would own it in their Policies section so they can't ban me for one of their selective rules they list. Or call me a whiner for holding them accountable for not enforcing their own written rules. By hey, who needs accountability when you're a media outlet.

You know, just like how they banned kate e parker, yet claim they have never banned anyone. It turns out now that they banned her for written rules that don't really exist except for selective enforcement. Seems pretty shady to me. I would hate to have my freedom of speech violated by the Project.

Besides you would miss me and I'm not falling for your bait.

[Corey Rossen]

So if dirty words are allowed, and according to Jim prove the Deck "works," why have people been banned for using the words that make the Deck work? Seems like bad management.

[Corey Rossen]

Exactly!

You're getting it, Corey.

No censorship.

Post away and own it.

Here's something I find humorous about your post. And it shows how blinded by hate you are.

I am the only one on the Deck calling for a cleansing if it. Asking for enforcement. Asking that the Policies be followed. Trying to rid it of swearing, fake names, etc and other things that they claim are not allowed in their own Policies.

So what do you do out of blind hate - tell me to go ahead and swear away on here, as if that has been what I have been asking for. You really just don't get it, but are so eager and willing to fling your hate. You look ridiculous. That is humorous to me.

So now I see there are no rules so I ask for the justification by redemption to allow someone back on here that was falsely banned by Jim's own words. (When he said actions like kate e parker's make the Deck "work.").

It funny to watch you scramble to attack me. It provides great entertainment for me. Thanks.

You are all fighting me to keep the filth. Now that's quality management and wise followers. Hilarious!

[james fitzgibbons]

Corey, keep digging, you are getting deeper and deeper, soon there will be no return. You will be at the bottom of the list, let the cards fall where they may!

[cmager]

Or call me a whiner for holding them accountable for not enforcing their own written rules.

I don't specifically remember anyone calling you a whiner. But be assured, you are a whiner.

...And it shows how blinded by hate you are.

...So what do you do out of blind hate - tell me to go ahead and swear away on here, as if that has been what I have been asking for. You really just don't get it, but are so eager and willing to fling your hate. You look ridiculous. That is humorous to me.

Mr. Rossen, you use the word "hate" in the hope someone uninformed believes it, in the hope that your use of the word "hate" is tied to those who are are "AGAINST", and that you somehow sway the vote. I don't know about others, but I don't hate you. I'm bored by you.

There are many here speaking out about saving the $300M taken in a bad deal by bad government. There are those who disagree. Many people have facts and data and substance, and make a contribution to the dialogue. Mr. Rossen, you appear to be amongst the few who contribute none of those, instead trying to kill the conversation and the media platform on which that conversation takes place. Big axe to grind, but lousy approach to grinding it.
-----
Don't let Mr. Rossen (or others on his team) distract you from the important work of getting out the message and the vote. VOTE AGAINST 64.