Home

[s] Unregisted User cynic wrote on 15:39, 16th Apr 2004: [s] Pilmour Boy wrote on 15:05, 16th Apr 2004: [i] even though I feel I could continue to be impartial. Most people don't think that you're impartial now, like in the celibacy thread. It's for this very reason that I wasn't the moderator over ...

[s] Unregisted User registered testing. wrote on 11:45, 16th Apr 2004: [s] Pilmour Boy wrote on 09:28, 16th Apr 2004: [i] If you don't like this system, you'd probably be better off telling Oli rather than just shouting at me. Indeed, as these problems have only arised since you were made moderator....

[s]ever_nocturnal wrote on 14:39, 16th Apr 2004:


Name them... actually hold on, the election candidates from last year are probably on the recently updated union website



Rebecca Zieglar (Sorry, I can't remember how to spell her surname.)

[s] Prophet Tenebrae wrote on 14:56, 16th Apr 2004: Furthermore - I think the point that Pilmour will, if not currently then certainly in a not too distant future, will face a conflict of interests. You're probably right about this the potentially occurring (I've asked Oli for guidence on a few issu...

[s] harmless loony wrote on 14:16, 16th Apr 2004: Pilmour Boy, I don't understand why you have interpreted the rules in the way you have. Oli and James both acted as moderators of this board, under the same rules that you are currently bound to and yet we never saw this level of censorship of unregi...

[s] exnihilo wrote on 20:42, 15th Apr 2004: Yup, have to say I don't get it either. If its a topic worth discussion, who cares who starts it? If a topic is worthy of discussion, then it'll get started anyway, won't it? [s] Cain wrote on 20:11, 15th Apr 2004: and since when has the sinner stopped peo...

[s] Plette wrote on 20:38, 15th Apr 2004: Also, it's not really fair for you to use your knowledge as an admin (and thus knowledge of people's other accounts) to make points like that, I think. I know you didn't name names, but it still has a ring of "bwahahahaha, I know all your secrets." Or perhap...

[s] Cain wrote on 19:54, 15th Apr 2004: [s] Pilmour Boy wrote on 19:49, 15th Apr 2004: [i] Do you mean when they started the thread? Or messages on the threads. i mean when they started the threads. [/i] It's probably because most people who are just starting out posting don't start new threads (unl...

[s] Plette wrote on 18:37, 15th Apr 2004: But what if the person wanted to submit the issue for discussion without their usual "sinner persona" clouding the way the issue was received? For example, let's say someone who is typically very conservative posts an article on gay marriage. If the person h...

[s] Biitchboy wrote on 16:04, 15th Apr 2004: I don't understand why certain threads have not been allowed to be started by unregistered users, e.g. the one about turning straight, and the one about the seal culling. What could possibly be wrong about them? Because there was no reason for them to be ...

[s]Midget wrote on 11:17, 15th Apr 2004:
The Graeme Butler Cup should definitely go to Preston, and not anyone else.


[i] Will this post be deleted?
[/i]


No complaint about the post has been received as of now.

The values for Unregistered users posts are different to those for registered users. You might want to take a look at the Sinner Guide section on moderation and also see Oli's post on the previous thread about this.

[s]Midget wrote on 15:57, 14th Apr 2004:
Although I did think my 'this is reilly getting annoying' a few threads later was genius.



I thought that that was far too funny to edit.

[s] Pender Native wrote on 12:37, 14th Apr 2004: [s] Pilmour Boy wrote on 12:24, 14th Apr 2004: [i] That would make sense, as the traditional definition of "celibate" was unmarried. So a preiest is celibate whereas someone who is going for a cervical smear the next day is abstinent? Thanks for the e...

That would make sense, as the traditional definition of "celibate" was unmarried.

If people think I went too far in editing the original post, then I'm sorry. Midget and I had been talking earlier, and in the context of that discussion I took it as something more than perhaps it was. If I came across it now, I probably wouldn't take the same course of action but what's done is do...

I wouldn't really say that informing people about ABC is really promoting abstinence.

How can it be when as an integeral part there is the distribution and promotion of contraception?

I didn't know that there was a difference either.

I have never said I was going to be promoting celibacy. All I have ever said is what all sexual health organisations say, that the best ways of preventing pregnancy and STIs are, in order: A) Abstinence. This is of course the only 100% effective way but has rather a large downside and not many peopl...

Amanda, if there were to be a thread on homosexuality, the same sort of comment was made, and the person who it was about asked for it to be removed, would you disagree?