Posted by Lou Pilder on June 18, 2011, at 16:38:58
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-peadoh » Lou Pilder, posted by sigismund on June 18, 2011, at 15:54:30
> Lou, everyone knows that the photo at the top is either of Bob or of someone or something with a connection to the people here.
>
> At least I thought so.
>
> For the record, I agreed with some of the sentiments expressed, but the photo thing was easily the weakest part of the argument.Sigismund,
I tend to lean to that there are posters coming here daily that could not know about the picture as it being of Bob or a relation or such. If there was a caption to the photo, that coud go a long way to dispel any doubts as to who the person is in the photo and why it is posted.
I think that the argument by the poster is well-researched and presented in a scholarly manner and that the poster has a deep knowledge of the historical record along with a knowledge of the effects that unrespnded to requests to the administration could have on the emotional/psychlogical parts of a human as to how emotional distress can cause harm to one. The poster may even have a knowledge of the legl aspects of that the administative team is allowing requests and notifications to go unanswerd for days ,weeks, months and years. I have to say that in the interest in humanity itself, the poster could be given praise.
One of the arguments concerns the photo. You see, there is a deep understanding that could be seen when one knows some things that may be unbeknownst to them. You see, Mr Hsiung has made a rule here that one can not post more than 3 consecutive posts, with some excptions. His rationale is posted and it has to do in some way that there could be a person that he calls a {less-confident} poster and for the reasons he has posted there could be something to them if one posts more than 3 consecutive posts and that by doing so, sharing the board in some way comes into this.
The point here is that Mr. Hsiung has made a rule to accommodate a particular type of person, the less-confident, so that they would not have whatever from someone posting more than 3 consecutive posts. Could then there be a rule here to accomodate pedophiles or people struggling with incest, that one could not post a photo of young child? Could the photo not trigger the pedophile or the person struggling with incest, to go and molest a child or have sex with a family member?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:984958
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20110117/msgs/988687.html