@hojuruku: Once again, I have to insist that you honor our submission rules. Every major claim must be sourced. Another way of putting that is research posts must not make any claims that aren't supported by linked evidence. You write:
bigbrothersbigsisters.com.au dating site for gay men and little boys
gave a character reference for one of their own homosexual board members done for sodomizing little Thai boys and child porn
who was a gay crown prosecutor
who helped remove the gay panic defense that allows children who kill gay men trying to rape them avoid jail for lawful self-defense.
This law is needed when we have gay judges saying it's all the child's fault
That's five unsourced claims in just paragraph three. There are many more in this post as well. If you don't want to present carefully sourced research, that's fine -- but it has to go in v/pizzagatewhatever, not here. I'm going to give this the edit flair to see if you can clean this up today. Maybe others can help you identify and find links for the other unsourced claims peppered throughout this post.
Going forward, please stop ignoring Rule 2! This is the sixth submission you've made since @kevdude unbanned you a week ago that ignored our submission guidelines:
You've slapped me man. Killed the post from trending by flagging it when it wasn't broken. You may as well deleted it now and I'll just do it again and again the same story same facts. I'll do a Part #1 and Part #2 post at the same time.
This is the same kind of tactics we are getting legally in Australia and Alex Jones is getting. False Allegations in a lawsuit - bad press based on the false claims - the damage is done. I bet half the people that were going to read this aren't going to read this because you flagged it as disputed when all you say isn't proven is right there in the OP with sources.
This is interference. I'm sorry. Damn /v/pizzagate/. Where should I go next?
view the rest of the comments →
Vindicator ago
@hojuruku: Once again, I have to insist that you honor our submission rules. Every major claim must be sourced. Another way of putting that is research posts must not make any claims that aren't supported by linked evidence. You write:
That's five unsourced claims in just paragraph three. There are many more in this post as well. If you don't want to present carefully sourced research, that's fine -- but it has to go in v/pizzagatewhatever, not here. I'm going to give this the edit flair to see if you can clean this up today. Maybe others can help you identify and find links for the other unsourced claims peppered throughout this post.
Going forward, please stop ignoring Rule 2! This is the sixth submission you've made since @kevdude unbanned you a week ago that ignored our submission guidelines:
hojuruku ago
You've slapped me man. Killed the post from trending by flagging it when it wasn't broken. You may as well deleted it now and I'll just do it again and again the same story same facts. I'll do a Part #1 and Part #2 post at the same time.
This is the same kind of tactics we are getting legally in Australia and Alex Jones is getting. False Allegations in a lawsuit - bad press based on the false claims - the damage is done. I bet half the people that were going to read this aren't going to read this because you flagged it as disputed when all you say isn't proven is right there in the OP with sources.
This is interference. I'm sorry. Damn /v/pizzagate/. Where should I go next?