Chauvin Murder Trial

[Angrboda]

I'm not engaging in revisionism.  Would you like a link back to the place where you blasted me almost word for word?  Why not just call me a liar again?

If you don't like the moderation of the forum it's perfectly fine to state your case, as you just did.

You are sensitive because you were treated unfairly, as you see it...somewhere else.

I've already apologized for my response to you and admitted I was wrong. Since that apology was made privately, I'll make it public by acknowledging that I over-reacted to your comments and was out of line with my behavior. That wasn't the revisionism that I was talking about. You seem to be the pot calling the kettle black with your comment about being sensitive because you were treated unfairly...somewhere else.

---

Fair enough.  But I wasn't aware being a rape apologist was against the rules.  So for my benefit, could you explain what he would be receiving reports or warnings or bannings about.  Have I missed a rule change?

It would fall under the rubric of trolling...’making provocative posts’. Suggesting that a man guilty of rape should let off because of his victim’s alleged prior behaviour is certainly provocative.

Boru

Typically I've understood that as applying to multiple instances spread across multiple topics. Are you saying that making provocative posts on a single subject is now trolling? That seems like an unhealthy expansion of the definition.