Let us have the list of the “trolls” please.
Innuendo, accusation without individual probable cause, does disservice to this Forum and to those who, unnamed, might be confused as “trolls” by other Freepers.
Please list those whom you consider “trolls” and as time permits, provide the reason why each of them is to be judged (by you, and by implication, other FReepers) as a “troll.”
Those “accused” have the right to know the charges brought against them and to see the testimony against them by their accusers. OR??
So please have the courage of your convictions, and do not hide behind innuendo and anonymous accusations. Name the names, please, of the “trolls.”
Inquiring minds are waiting.
See 104 and my reply.
This isn't a court of law, it's a chat room. People will form their own opinions, and as you know, they don't have to justify them.
-- Those "accused" have the right to know the charges brought against them and to see the testimony against them by their accusers. --
This isn't a court of law. Sheesh, lighten up, Francis. All that's happening is name calling. You may have a list of poster that you find disagreeable, and if so, it's your business. I have a list of posters that I find disagreeable, some of them I tell to their face, others I don't. That's all my business, and the evidence is out in the open, in posts on a public forum. Read the posts, make up your own mind.
I had been referring to them as parade bikes .... turns out the more acceptable term is ‘urban trawlers’.
These gangland nutriders operate the same way they imagine law enforcement does. They are describing their own behaviour and tendencies. But what is there to expect from people who roam internet forums defending criminal gangs?