Fri May 29, 2009 at 15:21:42 PM EDT
|
Hope it was not one of you. I think I know who it was:
From the FAQ (9+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
taylormattd, Adam B, phenry, Treg, Debbie in ME, zhimbo, brklyngrl, hillgiant, curtisgrahamduff
Controversial 9/11 Diaries
DailyKos accepts that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by agents of Al-Qaeda. It is forbidden to write diaries that:
1. refer to claims that American, British, Israeli, or any government assisted in the attacks
2. refer to claims that the airplanes that crashed into the WTC and Pentagon were not the cause of the damage to those buildings or their subsequent collapse.
Authoring or recommending these diaries may result in banning from Daily Kos.
by sleight on Thu May 28, 2009 at 10:59:01 AM CDT
http://www.dailykos.com/commen...
Now can not receive gift subscriptions, Wonder why? Only recently started posting and then mostly in Cheers and Jeers and Mojo Fridays. What could user #209930 have done to be banned?
http://www.dailykos.com/user/s... |
| deedogg :: Some One Got Sleighted |
Pager nailed this one. A newbie should not be so up on koskop rules. Hey! Looks like Jacks buddy Taylormattd recced this banned user, given they are both members of UGOG makes me wonder if he should not be reported? Shitheads would have reported me for reccing any of your socks there. This is pretty good:
Not inappropriate (1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
raboof
if you read through this thread. I found it highly ironic that a banned user (sleight) would be giving lessons on what is a bannable offense and what is appropriate behavior. Perhaps he should read through the FAQs about how inappropriate and unethical it is to create a new account after being banned, particularly when he was one of the biggest Kops at this blog for years and made outing zombies one of his prime activities.
And again, this diary is primarily about linking to a comment from another blog made by a banned user and that seems to be largely overlooked by most folks replying here.
They're like the Inspector Clouseaus' of the blogging world.
by Pager on Thu May 28, 2009 at 03:54:35 PM CDT
Well, you're right about the "banned" (0+ / 0-)
stuff it seems.
There are two kinds of people in this world: Those who fit into one of two mutually exclusive categories, and those who don't.
by zhimbo on Thu May 28, 2009 at 05:37:01 PM CDT
Yeah. (0+ / 0-)
It's weird how you get to where you can recognize some users, no matter how many new UID's they come back under. Kind of like knowing your mom's voice when she's yelling at you. :)
They're like the Inspector Clouseaus' of the blogging world.
by Pager on Fri May 29, 2009 at 09:31:46 AM CDT
I find it creepy, to say the least, (1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
Pager
that (if this guy is who he appears to be) a banned user attempts to come back, not because he feels his thoughts have been censored (which one can understand if not always agree with), but because he wants to start kopping again. That's not mentally normal behavior.
by raboof on Thu May 28, 2009 at 08:38:55 PM CDT
http://www.dailykos.com/commen...
A banned former koskop returning to kop again. How crazy is that notion? Where is Butt Boy and sofia when you need them? It would seem to me that the proper thing for a koskop to do when banned is to continue to insure no banned users can return. If all they can do is keep their banned asses banned, then by God that is what they should do.
And just for you, Bye Bye sleight:
 |
| Poll |
| sleight was the sock of: |
|
|
|
Results
|
|
|
