The rules should never be changed with the express purpose of targeting any specific account(s).
Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Attempting to dodge the question of PRINCIPLES by feebly rushing-to-disqualify my sincere questions, clumsily painting me as "a friend of thine enemy" is nothing but a naked ad hominem attack.
The rules should never be changed with the express purpose of targeting any specific account(s).
Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Do you stand by your PRINCIPLES or do you just change the rules because someone made contradictory statements?
With this precedent, should we start freezing the accounts of "abusive" "spammers" like those with negative rep and marked with 3+ blacklists? Why not? Haven't they also been branded as "untrustworthy"?
Isn't it "the community's" responsibility to FREEZE all accounts of "evil" and or "undesirable" and or "untrustworthy" individuals?
Isn't it "the community's" responsibility to FREEZE all accounts of people who insist on COHERENT PRINCIPLES (because only an evil person would insist on such a thing)?
Perhaps anarchy already exists and "THE COMMUNITY" is merely the highest manifestation of organized crime. – special thanks to @thoughts-in-time
ZOMBIEBASICTRAINING
+proHUMAN +proFAMILY
Your scathing critique is requested.