I haven’t read your post, but I think I’ll take the admin moderator’s offer up and hit the abuse button & call you out as a troll, which is basically what I’ve been doing on that other thread. So I’ll hit the abuse button and see what kind of exchange is required to prove that you fit the definition of troll as stated on this thread.
You said — “I haven’t read your post, but I think I’ll take the admin moderator’s offer up and hit the abuse button & call you out as a troll, which is basically what I’ve been doing on that other thread. So I’ll hit the abuse button and see what kind of exchange is required to prove that you fit the definition of troll as stated on this thread.”
Ummm..., a troll when you didn’t read my post at ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2165967/posts?page=155#155
I would think that one should read it first before determining whether it was “trollish”... LOL...
In particular I accuse Star Traveler to be an Issue Specific troll, in this case the issue is CoLB. The Orly Taitz interview thread would likely suffice to show her to be such a troll:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2162033/posts
That is, if FR is going to be using the definition cited in this thread as the operating definition. Does it not apply to specific issue trolling? Having a long term signup date is not evidence against trolling behavior on specific issues, such as FairTax. At least the definition above makes no mention of seniority or signup dates as a proof against trollhood.