Ontological Disproof of God

[negatio]

Gee, I wonder what "Whilist we are generally lenient of insulting language/rudeness in other forums" means and how it can be applied here, a forum not named Introductions...?

INTRODUCTIONS FORUM RULES.
Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introductions Forum. Please welcome new members to the community in a nice manner, or refrain from welcoming them at all.

Note that this does not give you a carte blanche to act in an insulting or rude manner in other areas of the forums.  Please try to be welcoming and friendly at all times, even if a member is disagreeing with you. Rather than engaging with spammers and trolls, please report them to the staff and let us take care of them.

---

Please direct your attention to the third sentence in the above series of five sentences.  The third sentence disallows ever being insulting or rude in any area of the forums, to any member,
including newbies, and, overrides the first clause of the initial: "We are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introduction Forum."  
Sentence three contradicts and overrides the first clause of sentence one.  
The 'this' contained in the first three words of sentence three appears to be referring back to "Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums...
Sentence three of the series would have been absolutely clear had the auteur taken the time actually repeat what he is referring to, thus:
Note that whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, that general leniency does not give you a carte blanche to act in an insulting or rude manner in other areas of the forums. It is all so simply simple. 
During Negatio's newbie period, a responsible staff, given that Negation was a newbie totally unconscious of even the existence of the Introductions area of the forum, would either disallow any insulting/rude conduct to be directed against Negatio in the philosophy forum, or, would have been lenient up to a point, and, then, put a period to the constant ongoing insults transpiring against Negatio; a responsible staff most certainly would not have participated in insulting Negatio by accusing him of being a troll, which is an insult.
Negatio was a total Newbie, and thus he was supposed to be protected from insult, however, entirely lacking awareness of the protected introductory zone, he was a Newbie in the philosophy zone, and, members should have know better than to terrorize him to the point of creating the schizophrenogenic double bind, wherein Negatio was intently struggling to comprehend the most minimal piece of BB code requisite to properly doing reply to members, rather, instead, when he was just a few excess absent spaces in his code, he was hit by a staff, mistakenly thinking he was  troll, with a 25% reduction of his life-span on the forum, and, was told that if he did anything else incorrectly, he would immediately further punished.  These were the acts of a staff compulsively obsessed with an absolutely absurd and constant seeing, in every newbie, a troll; which acts further traumatized Negatio's psyche, and, alienating him, he began to immunize himself from staff further damaging his life, by exposing their participation in the insult which forum law prohibits in all sectors of the overall forum.  Negatio

[brewer]

INTRODUCTIONS FORUM RULES.
Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introductions Forum. Please welcome new members to the community in a nice manner, or refrain from welcoming them at all.

Note that this does not give you a carte blanche to act in an insulting or rude manner in other areas of the forums.  Please try to be welcoming and friendly at all times, even if a member is disagreeing with you. Rather than engaging with spammers and trolls, please report them to the staff and let us take care of them.

---

Please direct your attention to the third sentence in the above series of five sentences.  The third sentence disallows ever being insulting or rude in any area of the forums, to any member,
including newbies, and, overrides the first clause of the initial: "We are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introduction Forum."  
Sentence three contradicts and overrides the first clause of sentence one.  Negatio
The 'this' contained in the first three words of sentence three appears to be referring back to "Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums...

Nice try "taken out of context" boy. Time to mental masturbate some more.

[Abaddon_ire]

Gee, I wonder what "Whilist we are generally lenient of insulting language/rudeness in other forums" means and how it can be applied here, a forum not named Introductions...?

INTRODUCTIONS FORUM RULES.
Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introductions Forum. Please welcome new members to the community in a nice manner, or refrain from welcoming them at all.

Note that this does not give you a carte blanche to act in an insulting or rude manner in other areas of the forums.  Please try to be welcoming and friendly at all times, even if a member is disagreeing with you. Rather than engaging with spammers and trolls, please report them to the staff and let us take care of them.

---

Please direct your attention to the third sentence in the above series of five sentences.  The third sentence disallows ever being insulting or rude in any area of the forums, to any member,
including newbies, and, overrides the first clause of the initial: "We are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introduction Forum."  
Sentence three contradicts and overrides the first clause of sentence one.  Negatio
The 'this' contained in the first three words of sentence three appears to be referring back to "Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums...
Sentence three of the series would have been absolutely clear had the auteur taken the time actually repeat what he is referring to, thus:
Note that whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, that general leniency does not give you a carte blanche to act in an insulting or rude manner in other areas of the forums. It is all so simply simple. Negatio

[Angrboda]

Gee, I wonder what "Whilist we are generally lenient of insulting language/rudeness in other forums" means and how it can be applied here, a forum not named Introductions...?

INTRODUCTIONS FORUM RULES.
Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introductions Forum. Please welcome new members to the community in a nice manner, or refrain from welcoming them at all.

Note that this does not give you a carte blanche to act in an insulting or rude manner in other areas of the forums.  Please try to be welcoming and friendly at all times, even if a member is disagreeing with you. Rather than engaging with spammers and trolls, please report them to the staff and let us take care of them.

---

Please direct your attention to the third sentence in the above series of five sentences.  The third sentence disallows ever being insulting or rude in any area of the forums, to any member,
including newbies, and, overrides the first clause of the initial: "We are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, this kind of behavior is explicitly disallowed in the Introduction Forum."  
Sentence three contradicts and overrides the first clause of sentence one.  
The 'this' contained in the first three words of sentence three appears to be referring back to "Whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums...
Sentence three of the series would have been absolutely clear had the auteur taken the time actually repeat what he is referring to, thus:
Note that whilst we are generally lenient with insulting language/rudeness in other forums, that general leniency does not give you a carte blanche to act in an insulting or rude manner in other areas of the forums. It is all so simply simple. 
During Negatio's newbie period, a responsible staff, given that Negation was a newbie totally unconscious of even the existence of the Introductions area of the forum, would either disallow any insulting/rude conduct to be directed against Negatio in the philosophy forum, or, would have been lenient up to a point, and, then, put a period to the constant ongoing insults transpiring against Negatio; a responsible staff most certainly would not have participated in insulting Negatio by accusing him of being a troll, which is an insult. Negatio

(emphasis mine)

That third sentence does in fact allow insult and rudeness "up to a point," and that point at which the insult and rudeness may be disciplined is when a member repeatedly makes posts which are nothing but insults. That is called flaming, and is covered by the rule against flaming. That is what it means when it says you are not given carte blanch to be rude and insulting because that specific behavior is forbidden. That you don't understand this and are reading that third sentence to mean that members are forbidden from being rude and insulting to you simply shows that you have serious reading comprehension issues. Members are freely allowed to be insulting and rude so long as they do not cross certain lines covered by the flaming rule, the prime directive, and in certain cases, the trolling rule. That is all that "not given carte blanch" means. You are misreading that third sentence and coming to an understanding of it that is incorrect.

[KevinM1]

[emjay]

Final bit of advice negatio:
Step 1: Take your computer.
Step 2: Throw it out the window.
Step 3: Buy a pad and pen. It's easier.

---

In case you took that too literally, this is a joke.

---

But with a kernel of truth... some people and computers just don't mix.

---

---

I bought my first computer in 1999, an 850 something for $850. At that time I had not heard of Dell, and, who knows how many computer, laptops, laptop/notebook hybrids, notebooks, smart phones it has been since.
Things were moving so fast yesterday, and I had gotten so tired, that I really absolutely failed to understand why you so summarily tossed me out of your life for only the second time ! ? I'll have you know that as an existentialist I take full responsibility for everything that happens to me because it happens through me; except when I just plain like being a little girl sissy.  I use pen and paper constantly.  However as to mixing with computers you just now make me realize that Khemikal is probably a cyborg. P.S., I spent lots of time replying to Abadon_ire, only to see it go puff puff the magic dragon poof into nothingness, lost. So, here I am stuck with Ire thinking I think I am too good to respond, only too computer maladapted. 
DuanoNegaoClintonio

I've already given my reasons; because it's pointless continuing, for all concerned, you included. As blunt as it is, this thread and you being here is a waste of everybody's time, including yours since you're never gonna get it... everything goes right over your head. Say someone did have the patience to provide you with a lengthy procedure to do every little thing, do you think you would ever understand what you were doing enough to be able to generalise and extrapolate your own solutions to problems etc... ie to take the initiative of what do next based on what you've learned so far? For instance actually looking up rules or procedures, rather than having everything spoon-fed to you? I strongly doubt it, and that being the case means all I can see is you learning by rote a bunch of procedures going forward but with no idea what you're actually doing, so that every time you come up with a problem, you'll need another text wall of explanation solve it, which no-one has the patience for, to do ad infinitum.

And now, for the same reason as the above; because of your clear inability to understand context and nuance, you're hung up on a too literal understanding of the rules; arguing what they mean with the people who actually wrote them! All in the name of maintaining your paranoid conspiracy theory of victimization by the staff, and in spite of the olive branches and other ways out of your situation being offered by members and staff. I'm not blaming you for the way your mind works, but at the same time, I realise the pointlessness of this situation going forward, since I can just imagine six months down the line, still explaining every little thing and still pedantically arguing about the rules. So yeah, I'm washing my hands of it, and suggest you do as well, for your own sake. This site just isn't for you.

[The Grand Nudger]

It's the same problem in his argument, perhaps unsurprisingly.  He doesn't actually understand what he's saying, but he's learned it by rote and so repeats it.  This is why he's incapable of rephrasing, and why when challenged simply demands that others deconstruct "whatever x said".

A parrot could argue just as effectively for any point.

Double nihilation..squaaaawk.

Beautiful words.....squaaawk.

Kafka kafka kafka.

[KevinM1]

It's the same problem in his argument, perhaps unsurprisingly.  He doesn't actually understand what he's saying, but he's learned it by rote and so repeats it.  This is why he's incapable of rephrasing, and why when challenged simply demands that others deconstruct "whatever x said".

A parrot could argue just as effectively for any point.

Double nihilation..squaaaawk.

Beautiful words.....squaaawk.

Kafka kafka kafka.

?

[emjay]

It's the same problem in his argument, perhaps unsurprisingly.  He doesn't actually understand what he's saying, but he's learned it by rote and so repeats it.  This is why he's incapable of rephrasing, and why when challenged simply demands that others deconstruct "whatever x said".

A parrot could argue just as effectively for any point.

Double nihilation..squaaaawk.

Beautiful words.....squaaawk.

Kafka kafka kafka.

I think you're right and I think conflating things goes hand-in-hand with this context problem.

[negatio]

The third sentence is a portion of the primemost rules of the Atheist forum written for the sake of protecting new members, Newbies.

Negatio was a newbie in an "other" sector of the forum, under the protection of sentence three, which point blank protects Negatio as a Newbie.  

The  Flaming consideration cannot even touch sentence three in any way whatsoever, as long as Negatio is a Newbie. Who would flame a Newbie, only criminal members.

Every person now responding to Negatio's explication of the forum law which protected him as a newbie, flamed Negatio as a newbie, and all are at jeopardy, thus the mistaken twisting 

desperation to contort the forum's newbie protection law into something it is not. Khemikal is here railing against me when he is currently blocked from Negatio's thread !  He is the

forum cracker criminal, you all cow tow to his nonsense and follow.  He never posits anything against the OP that pure assertive nonsense, nothing real, yea, sure, I don't understand 

Spinoza or Sartre, absurd.  The entire forum is in operation against its own rules in the obsessive compulsive to constitute Duane as a troll, it just will not stop.

I have to cut down trees and prepare for winter; am taking a break, if staff remains indifferent to the reality of what has transpired I will see about implementing arbitration. Members 

have conducted themselves criminally against their own laws, and, of course, refuse to see what is the case, deluded persons who believe in trolls telling Duane he is conflating text 

simplest of possible direct reading of applicable forum law.