jman for mod! the people have spoken

Seems fine to me

This will be a big win for French BBV imo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBKk1McBLxM

Le plus grand gagner dans le monde! Tellement de gagner!

Cinquante/Cinquante

i dont click random utoob links either

people could learn a lot from me

Next lebel ads, please no ban for evading profanity filter

einbert's message is similar to youareallfaggits? just opposite sides of the fence?

Please tell us more about how experienced you are with the culture of the Politics forum, ye who has more posts bitching about the forum moderation than actual posts in it.

Newbies don't count with this point.

You just aren't very with it are you?

Not responding to a pm in 20 minutes doesn’t make one a bad person.

In my book not voting or voting for unwinnable canidates makes one a bad person. To stretch my insanity even further I think people who purposefully try to get out jury duty without a truely legitimate reason are bad people.

I think being too lazy to vote is a key ingredient to a bad person pie. There is so little asked of us in terms of our time to support this country who has been a lottery win for many of us. Those in that group are indebted to vote every election to they die.

For those who found themselves with a horrible lot in America they need to vote in hopes of creating change for themselves and future generations.

Any excuse as to why one might not vote already had a solution. I would add part of this requisite I feel EVERY American citizen owes the country and more importantly each other is to spend enough time to be learned and knowledgeable on major issues and canidates.

The democrats would do well to bring in compulsory voting.

Even if the unwinnable candidate is a better choice, or even a significantly better choice, then those with broad popular support?


What if someone doesn't vote, but engages in extensive action to effect political change, such as writing books. Are they still a bad person?

So voting for Grassely's or Putin's opponents makes one a bad person? It's still wrong even if you're​ only referring to US presidential elections. There are also plenty of good reasons not to vote at all, even apathy or laziness.

I'd rather have a low-information voter who doesn't care not vote than feel they need to vote and make a decision based on some criteria like they read Hillary is behind an international child sex trafficking ring funded by Soros, or that Trump promised he's going to save their job at the Harley plant, or because he wanted to troll some people in the politics section on an internet poker forum he runs. Much better to admit ignorance and apathy and not vote at all.

This is my position too.

New politics rule

So siblings, grandparents and cousins are fair game. Is there a loophole then for saying someone is married to his sister and/or cousin? Or does that fall under the significant other/spouse prohibition?

Quit being a nit. It's obvious that the rule's intention covers those cases too.

Someone made a post calling another posters son a rapist. Some other people hit “notify moderator” on that post. I deleted the portion fo the post calling the posters son a rapist and added the rule. If someone posts calling someone’s grandparent a rapist, and somebody else hit’s notify post so it is flagged to me, I have no problem deleting that as well, and adding additions on to the rule as necessary. Let’s call it covered up to the 6th degree of consanguinity. Acceptable?

Fine. Your second cousin once removed is a whore

Fair.

Meh, if you can't stand your fake relatives being called names by fake people on the internet perhaps you should stick to candy crush.