I was accused by Wookie of being "racist af" for opining the CP were guilty after studying the facts and evidence of the case which he clearly hadn't.
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...&postcount=195
I was also told to "go f'ck yourself" by cuepee which was also allowed and apparently didn't flout the "modicum of civility ground rules".

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...6&postcount=58

That's bad faith arguing. Goofy's claim that racism was "obvious from the start" based purely on the different races, the location and one of the killers being over 60 was also untrue and the equivalent of a stopped clock being right twice a day.

I was also consistently accused of actually denying racism despite posting this umpteen times over
False accusations of racism are again bad faith arguing and seeing as you're so chagrined at what you consider a lack of civility, I find it bemusing you let such things slide.

So again whatever mate, doesn't seem you're as impartial as you claim, so we leave it at that.

The problem you will have with Mod's is your very dishonest victim mentality.

I don't think the word "f*ck" is against forum rules, especially written like that.

And I DID NOT, tell you to 'go f*ck yourself".

What I said in proper context was a reply to what you said.

You were demanding I provide you some info. I stated I would if you would also provide some info I had requested. I said this won't be 'one way'. You came back and suggested you were not going to provide anything i requested and to that I said "if you are not going to give me what I request while demanding info to me my reply to that WOULD BE to say "go f*ck yourself".

That is my view to anyone. If you say to me "give me what I am asking for but I will give you nothing you ask for in return"... well to anyone who makes that demand I would tell them to "go f*ck themselves".

That you would cry to Mods about that as if a personal attack (which it is not) just shows you want bubble, safe space for your views.

You're contradicting yourself, earlier itt you said
You claimed as fact that the cp5 were innocent and exonerated, which is untrue they were never exonerated or found innocent. When invited to substantiate your response was
I couldn't gaf at what you told me to do, but it's hardly "a modicum of civility" which are"the ground rues".

So you've shown hypocrisy here.

The Central Park five were exonerated, what are you talking about.

Cite verbatim via the court sources where they were exonerated. As Cuepee said, substantiate. (won't hold my breath as we both know your untrue claim is well, untrue but I'll invite you to substantiate anyway just for chuckles)

Here ya go:

https://www.pbs.org/kenburns/the-cen...nd-exoneration

There's loads of CP5 stuff all over the place now. Why not put it in its own thread?

lmao what on earth is this?! "Yeah that uncivil comment that made me upset wasn't deleted by the previous mod, but you're saying this is a ground rule now, what an authoritarian you are"

I honestly don't even get what point or argument you're trying to make here other than incoherent rants against the new mods

I said cite verbatim via the court sources, not from a biased film maker. So cite verbatim via the court sources where the proclaim the CP5 to be exonerated...whenever you're ready. (Lucky I said I wouldn't hold my breath innit?) Again we both know your claim is untrue

Maybe if I punctuate my posts with "lololololol" and "hahahahahahahaha" I might seem more coherent to you? Seeing as we're talking about incoherent rants and all

Man, you really, really don’t like young black men, do you?

Not interested in your attempted deflection via false accusation but only if you can substantiate your false claim. Evidently you can't, despite the truth being easy to defend hence your deflection.

I think they're guilty because unlike you I've studied the evidence and unlike you am aware of the facts. Hence my confident challenge that you support your false claim via the court sources. Can you? Support your false claim via the court sources? Cuz all I'm getting is tumbleweeds from you so far

Honestly you are just a serial liar.

Because you need to feel like a victim you spin things into lies constantly when you know the truth does not support your position.

I was amongst those calling out anyone who said 'he was not exonerated' and stating 'they not only DO NOT need to be exonerated BUT there is NO MECHANISM for them to be exonerated as the charges were vacated and they face no current charges'.

You and another poster kept trying to spin that as if 'SEE THEY WERE NOT EXONERATED'.

I pointed out to and the other poster you have not been exonerated of the same crime, and cannot be since you are not charged. The CP5 are the same.

but you were committed to trying to use that as some type of proof they should not be considered innocent.

The FACT is just as you are considered innocent of any and all crimes happening in your city UNLESS you are charged, so to does the CP5 get that same default status. You hate that. You try to spin that. You think they need to PROVE themselves innocent and you think they need to get exonerated of a crime they are not charged with and that IS NOT how our systems work.

I don't say this often but you are horrible person and a worse liar. Debate and debate tough and fair and with gloves off and i am ok with that but STOP defaulting to constant lies whenever you feel like you are losing a debate.

Exoneration is not the right word to use for this IMO.

It is just my opinion as the broader definition of exoneration can definitely apply but generally exoneration would mean a 'finding'.

Their charges were 'vacated' and vacated is akin to them simply never being accused or charged.

They basically have the same status you and I have and enjoy. Not accused. Not charged.

But yes you can call the 'taking back' of the prior charges vindication for them and even exoneration, I guess, but exoneration is more generally used with being proven innocent or going to trial and getting a 'not guilty' verdict.

Just my two cents.

I stand corrected!

Posts on the CP5 have been moved here.

Yes, I don't know if it will go anywhere healthy. Still, it belongs in its own thread however thin its premise is.

Being paid 41 million dollar for wrongful convictions sounds like ample proof of exoneration, alongside with MrWookie's sources.

This post by corpus vile, needs to be moved here then too then otherwise his lie in that thread goes unreplied to and looks to be true.

Yay.

Hey, so, don't like burn me alive for this, but I recall that in the last thread some of the evidence CV posted that they were actually guilty seemed pretty persuasive.

Done.

Burning other posters alive is obviously against forum rules, unless people do it privately.

So, we're not doing one of these then?

Is this the Moderation of Moderation Discussion Thread Discussion Thread?