Replies

Which is why I continue to put "conspiracy" in quotes.

That's fine.. Can we agree on a different term to describe the act more appropriately?

this being a definite change in tone from "[g3k] was conspired against and banned".

The tone was inferred by you. I simply defined my use of the term, as I inferred that you perceived my use of it in a negative light... My intended tone has remained intact..

You mean by name?

Sure why not? whattajoke has already admitted his involvement and claimed the scalp. (if he wasn't kidding, I can't tell). By acclimation the mods can't and don't read every post. Someone wanted some action taken or they wouldn't have mashed abuse or sent the mods freepmail. I'm just wondering if anyone will own up to it. If, as everyone proclaims g3k got what he deserved, why don't those who helped purify the forum step up to the podium? It is possible that they have, but I missed the posts.

If, as everyone proclaims g3k got what he deserved, why don't those who helped purify the forum step up to the podium? It is possible that they have, but I missed the posts.

I didn't participate in the forum where 3k got nuked. Perhaps you would like to call the main perp to the stand, Jim Robinson.

whattajoke has already admitted his involvement and claimed the scalp. (if he wasn't kidding, I can't tell).

My apologies - I'm late to the "conspiracy" insanity. As one who has never pinged a mod, never hit the abuse button in my life, and never even threatened to do so, I can assure you I had nothing to do with G3K's or anyone else's banning.

darby - in the future if you're doubting whether or not I'm joking, check my screen name again.