Daystar's ban - Discussion

[bozo]

I'm on the fence with splinters up my arse ( can I say that and not be banned? ).
I really don't much care either way, because I realised long ago that debating with the Daystar's of this world is pretty pointless if you're looking for a " result ".
I took the piss with him, and he with me, which seems fair enough.
I didn't take him that seriously to lose it at any juncture.

[Edwardo Piet]

The ban must stay for using multiple identities on this forum, not for the content of his discussion and certainly not for his refusal to accept your reasoning.

I urge you to rethink your policy on banning and to base it solely on complying to behavioural etiquette (personal attack beyond what's accepted informally here, and taking on multiple identities) and to avoid the suspicion that the content of arguments or disagreement about conclusions itself might be relevant for the right to participate in debate.

It wasn't because he disagreed its because he was deliberately causing trouble and didn't want to answer our questions that he didn't like. It was double standards. He wanted to force his opinions and ignore ours if he didn't like them.
It was trouble making. He knew what he was doing. Just as I was discussing with him and then he told me he was only trying to annoy me anyway. He failed as well. He was the one with the problem.
He was ok at first. Then he became a time waster at best and a flamer at best.
And of course that was all BEFORE he went undercover.
In the end he was devious, deceptive, arrogant, hypocritical, flaming and he deliberately tried to annoy and digressed to waste time and to suit himself.
And then there was the imposter ray thing.
Evf