BF2S Forums Free Speech: Farmer/Businessowner Incendiary sign torched twice

Remember that Top Gear episode where they drove around the South with signs on their cars saying "NASCAR SUCKS" and "Man Love rules OK" and they ended up getting assaulted at a petrol station.

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2010-06-21 07:18:38)

aside from debate of free speech, the use of the gasoline is not very effective, it's costly, and increases your chances of getting caught. A can of black paint is probably the best way to go.


After 9/11, I remember passing a house (to/from work). The homeowner covered the front of the house with a huge white canvas, with the skills of a first grader, they spray painted "Bush Get Those Bastards!" God damn rednecks, I feel ya buddy, we all do, but in the process tone it down a bit

Last edited by loubot (2010-06-21 09:29:54)

mikkel wrote:

ATG wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Stellar concept there, ATG. Fighting an abundance of low-quality threads by trawling around to find subjects for an abundance of low-quality threads of our own to post. That'll solve the problem.

The solution is easy. Shut yer yap.

Ever notice how those that contribute the least complain the most?

Pack of rabid dogs is all ye are.

Considering the quality of your threads, I'm not surprised that you're taking this personally. You really are missing the mark here, ATG. It's about quality, not quantity.

I'll say it nicely here, the sincere part you got via pm;

I don't see one recent thread from you in DSt so why would anybody care about what you conbsider to be quality?


If you think you are capable of better prove it, otherwise as I said, shut yer yap about other peoples threads.

True, but who gives a fuck what he thinks about OP's or how many somebody else makes?

He should comment on the topic, or stay out of the thread, as you know being an adminster of justice when the rules are violated.

ghettoperson wrote:

I give a fuck, because he has a valid point, as does Spark and the others who've raised this. Just because we don't churn out twenty paranoid threads a week about how Obama/illegal immigrants/corporations are out to get us, doesn't mean we're somehow less useful members.

In the past hundreds of threads Harmor's made, I can only think of one - and that was yesterday or the day before - that had some thought behind it other that copy pasting an article from Drudge.

O look ghetto is getting angry about something petty.*

*personal attack

mikkel wrote:

ATG wrote:

So, make some threads or shut yer yaps.

Stellar concept there, ATG. Fighting an abundance of low-quality threads by trawling around to find subjects for an abundance of low-quality threads of our own to post. That'll solve the problem.

The solution is easy. Shut yer yap.

I'll try again. I think it's reasonable for a member to call an OP to task for essentially being a news aggregator. Conversely, once said person makes that dive, it's reasonable for others to call him to task for complaining about it if they think he isn't making much of an effort to improve things himself. I know I've done both here and there.

But it becomes a problem when it completely derails the original topic, as was done here. The easy solution is to close it or just let it fade into inactivity. Sometimes it's feasible to perform the more time-consuming task of excising all irrelevant posts. Ideally, the thread is voluntarily re-railed by its participants.

In this thread's case, I think all that can be said has been said.

(edit: and yes, I do see the irony in closing a 'free speech' thread ; will reopen if requested enough)

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-06-21 12:29:28)

lol how typical.

Mitch wrote:

what if someone was in there? pets? equipment?

I guess he'd get even more publicity...

ghettoperson wrote:

It does say it was an empty farm house. Presumably it was fairly obviously abandoned, otherwise they wouldn't had an issue with burning his house down as well.

Or they only had time to burn down one thing at the moment.

ghettoperson wrote:

I know we live in a fucked up world, but I'd prefer to think that people aren't going to burn a family alive over a political sign. Outside of Africa anyway...

So would I, but Mitch's point is valid:

Mitch wrote:

what if someone was in there? pets? equipment?

I doubt the arsonist lingered long enough to make a sweep of the building.