NPR tweets the Declaration of Independence, morons freak out

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:
Man, you can't make this stuff up. 

Yes, yes you can.  

Snopes said, you can.... you can make this whole thing up, out of whole cloth. 
Here >> http://www.snopes.com/2017/07/06/nprs-de...ce-tweets/

But of course, you libs won't let facts/Snopes get in your way of denigrating (falsely). 

Tell me where Snopes is wrong, MB.  

What a joke.... had to wait for a 'clearance/waiver' to nuke your (false) OP, on this site.  (My first/last .  Good riddance)

[Guest]

@savannahskol said:

@MaroonBells said:
Man, you can't make this stuff up. 

Yes, yes you can.  

Snopes said, you can.... you can make this whole thing up, out of whole cloth. 
Here >> http://www.snopes.com/2017/07/06/nprs-de...ce-tweets/

But of course, you libs won't let facts/Snopes get in your way of denigrating (falsely). 

Tell me where Snopes is wrong, MB.  

What a joke.... had to wait for a 'clearance/waiver' to nuke your (false) OP, on this site.  (My first/last .  Good riddance)

You had to wait for clearance?  You were signed up on the 10th, as soon as you requested to be, and you didn't post until the 14th.  Why would you need to take a shot at the site?

[Guest]

@savannahskol said:

@MaroonBells said:
Man, you can't make this stuff up. 

Yes, yes you can.  

Snopes said, you can.... you can make this whole thing up, out of whole cloth. 
Here >> http://www.snopes.com/2017/07/06/nprs-de...ce-tweets/

But of course, you libs won't let facts/Snopes get in your way of denigrating (falsely). 

Tell me where Snopes is wrong, MB.  

What a joke.... had to wait for a 'clearance/waiver' to nuke your (false) OP, on this site.  (My first/last .  Good riddance)

Dude, I've read this at least three times now and I can't figure out what point your'e trying to make. 

[Guest]

@JimmyinSD said:

@savannahskol said:

@MaroonBells said:
Man, you can't make this stuff up. 

Yes, yes you can.  

Snopes said, you can.... you can make this whole thing up, out of whole cloth. 
Here >> http://www.snopes.com/2017/07/06/nprs-de...ce-tweets/

But of course, you libs won't let facts/Snopes get in your way of denigrating (falsely). 

Tell me where Snopes is wrong, MB.  

What a joke.... had to wait for a 'clearance/waiver' to nuke your (false) OP, on this site.  (My first/last .  Good riddance)

You had to wait for clearance?  You were signed up on the 10th, as soon as you requested to be, and you didn't post until the 14th.  Why would you need to take a shot at the site?

Fair enough, Jimmy, & I'll splain, since we're NE SD home fries.  Huge respect, for you.  

Well, yes I had to wait for 'clearance'.  When I wanted to respond to this post (on the 10th, as you say) on my monthly foray perusal over here... I had to (re) submit/sign up (again)/ to receive permission for ability to post... I guess due to another format change. I guess as one of the (many) "founders" here... "reapplying for posting privileges" rubbed me the wrong way, even if it turned out to be a short wait.  

I didn't check 'later' in that day (the 10th)... as I had other things to do.  And found time 4 days later, to respond to this OP, as I then had been granted  "clearance" to post.  

If'n you hadn't already surmised... NOT A FAN of Mike's/Mod's decision to create "sensitive topics" awhile (and a few format changes ago) back. 
That decision was a total 180 from this boards original mission. 
It may/may not be the proper way to run a chat-board... time will tell. 

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:

@savannahskol said:

@MaroonBells said:
Man, you can't make this stuff up. 

Yes, yes you can.  

Snopes said, you can.... you can make this whole thing up, out of whole cloth. 
Here >> http://www.snopes.com/2017/07/06/nprs-de...ce-tweets/

But of course, you libs won't let facts/Snopes get in your way of denigrating (falsely). 

Tell me where Snopes is wrong, MB.  

What a joke.... had to wait for a 'clearance/waiver' to nuke your (false) OP, on this site.  (My first/last .  Good riddance)

Dude, I've read this at least three times now and I can't figure out what point your'e trying to make. 

Bullspit. 

Snopes nuked (and you know it)  your OP, & I merely exposed/highlighted it. Read it (my Snopes link) again.  
4'th times a charm.  

I'll review it line/by line, if'n you want me to.  Glad to. 

[Guest]

@savannahskol said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@savannahskol said:

@MaroonBells said:
Man, you can't make this stuff up. 

Yes, yes you can.  

Snopes said, you can.... you can make this whole thing up, out of whole cloth. 
Here >> http://www.snopes.com/2017/07/06/nprs-de...ce-tweets/

But of course, you libs won't let facts/Snopes get in your way of denigrating (falsely). 

Tell me where Snopes is wrong, MB.  

What a joke.... had to wait for a 'clearance/waiver' to nuke your (false) OP, on this site.  (My first/last .  Good riddance)

You had to wait for clearance?  You were signed up on the 10th, as soon as you requested to be, and you didn't post until the 14th.  Why would you need to take a shot at the site?

Fair enough, Jimmy, & I'll splain, since we're NE SD home fries.  Huge respect, for you.  

Well, yes I had to wait for 'clearance'.  When I wanted to respond to this post (on the 10th, as you say) on my monthly foray perusal over here... I had to (re) submit/sign up (again)/ to receive permission for ability to post... I guess due to another format change. I guess as one of the (many) "founders" here... "reapplying for posting privileges" rubbed me the wrong way, even if it turned out to be a short wait.  

I didn't check 'later' in that day (the 10th)... as I had other things to do.  And found time 4 days later, to respond to this OP, as I then had been granted  "clearance" to post.  

If'n you hadn't already surmised... NOT A FAN of Mike's/Mod's decision to create "sensitive topics" awhile (and a few format changes ago) back. 
That decision was a total 180 from this boards original mission. 
It may/may not be the proper way to run a chat-board... time will tell. 

A lot changed from some peoples original plans for the board,  it had to as we had a ton of people come over and the dream objective of self moderation quickly went from a practical goal to a fairy tale.  Several of the more active posters, some of who left for thr other board, worked behind the scenes to try and be able to save politics and other more incendiary topics but still be able to maintain minimal moderation for the board in general.  It was a pretty much unanimous decision that these topics aren't for everyone and this the need for the separate board,  the way Mike has built these changes into this software and board are about as close to ideal as we think could be done.

If you are happier over at another site,  so be it,  but rest assured if you take the same approach over there as was attempted here,  you will see the same failure as your membership expands,  unless you just make it so uncomfortable for opposing views that you end up crushing non conforming view points.  But good luck.

[Guest]

lmao these topics arent for everyone .

The old politics forum was subscription based - and you couldn't read it unless yoh subscribed.  

[Guest]

@A1Janitor said:
lmao these topics arent for everyone .

The old politics forum was subscription based - and you couldn't read it unless yoh subscribed.  

And they didn't have the moderation abilities that we now have here.   Those not able to have a respectful discussion now be can removed from ST without being taken off the board entirely.  It's not about what the individual may want,  it's about what is in the best interest of the board as a whole.

[Guest]

lol sonthey dodnt have the ability to remove people from the politcal threads from the old site only?

Lol best interest of the board.  Which changes apparently when you limit the discussion on whats the best interest of the board to a select few.  

You are entitled to your opinions obviously.  Doesn't mean you are allowed to change the facts. 

[Guest]

I can remove you from the ST topics and you would still be able to take part in the other threads,  that is something the mods couldnt do before we set the board up to require a request to enter.

as far as best interest of the board,  it was a group of well respected posters from both sides of the political spectrum that were in the discussion, this wasnt about limiting the discussion as much as it was limiting the juvenile responses, and assholes.

"son"?  really,  you want to have a reasonable discussion and start in a demeaning manner?