General Complaints Thread... - Page 78

😆

But my blog can be checked out, I don't have po*n/objectionable literature on it?

However, if posting ANY kind of blog links is forbidden, I guess I'll change my siggy.

Though I don't understand. Why ban blog links? Work on IF is no more safe, I've been plagiriarized a million times, despite using nocopy and members only codes. How else will I reach out to my readers? PMing is a curse here, and you know that.

-Vee

This was posted before the rule was declared. Check your facts before complaining. Also, this is the complaint box for plagiarism. What you asked doesn't regard plagiarism in any way.

That doesn't qualify as sarcasm, honey. Calling you somebody with brains does.Let me explain -For example there is a law that a person who has commited aso and so crime, when proved guilty is liable to be in jail for a year. Now lets suppose that the law has been amended and NOW, you're supposed to be in jail for TWO years, instead of one. Would you actually be as foolish as to think that you could possibly wind up all the people sent to jail as directed by this law and make them stay in jail for another year. If that is what you think, then I hope you never become the chief justice of the Supreme Court in India.Likewise, asking people to edit their posts after this new rule was declared is ludriculous. You can check any of Rafa's (arisai)posts AFTER the rule was introduced. There will be no inclusion of blog links in them.Like I said - check your facts before complaining about my friends.But its okay, I understand. I can forgive you and your stupidity. Being shut in a room with nothing but virtual friends for company does that to you, I suppose. As somebody wiser to you, I suggest you sit down and start using common sense. It will help everybody, I'm pretty sure.


I said chief justice of India, as it would be under his orders all the people in the hypothetical situation would be rounded up. Magistrates and judges in the district and high court cannot issue orders like that.

A law is a law, whether on IF or here. I was merely presenting that situation on a grander scale, so you could understand my point of view

After having said that - I call for peace. I bear you no ill. I still think you should have Pm'ed the mods, as opposed to posting on a thread meant for plagiarism.

We both hate plagiarism and plagiarisers, so there should be no reason for both of us to be arguing.

-V

I think the rule stated that we are not allowed to post blog links to OBJECTIONABLE LITERATURE. Check out ALL the posts on my blog? I doubt I have objectionable literature on it. Trust me, I don't do po*n. Its not my style.

As for the rest of it - there was absolutely NO NEED to levy accusations at people like that. The mods do a pretty decent job of policing the forum. They have a life beyond this forum and its rules. A little respect for that, maybe?

-Vee

That doesn't qualify as sarcasm, honey. Calling you somebody with brains does.Let me explain -For example there is a law that a person who has commited aso and so crime, when proved guilty is liable to be in jail for a year. Now lets suppose that the law has been amended and NOW, you're supposed to be in jail for TWO years, instead of one. Would you actually be as foolish as to think that you could possibly wind up all the people sent to jail as directed by this law and make them stay in jail for another year. If that is what you think, then I hope you never become the chief justice of the Supreme Court in India.Likewise, asking people to edit their posts after this new rule was declared is ludriculous. You can check any of Rafa's (arisai)posts AFTER the rule was introduced. There will be no inclusion of blog links in them.Like I said - check your facts before complaining about my friends.But its okay, I understand. I can forgive you and your stupidity. Being shut in a room with nothing but virtual friends for company does that to you, I suppose. As somebody wiser to you, I suggest you sit down and start using common sense. It will help everybody, I'm pretty sure.


I said chief justice of India, as it would be under his orders all the people in the hypothetical situation would be rounded up. Magistrates and judges in the district and high court cannot issue orders like that.

A law is a law, whether on IF or here. I was merely presenting that situation on a grander scale, so you could understand my point of view

After having said that - I call for peace. I bear you no ill. I still think you should have Pm'ed the mods, as opposed to posting on a thread meant for plagiarism.

We both hate plagiarism and plagiarisers, so there should be no reason for both of us to be arguing.

-V

I think the rule stated that we are not allowed to post blog links to OBJECTIONABLE LITERATURE. Check out ALL the posts on my blog? I doubt I have objectionable literature on it. Trust me, I don't do po*n. Its not my style.

As for the rest of it - there was absolutely NO NEED to levy accusations at people like that. The mods do a pretty decent job of policing the forum. They have a life beyond this forum and its rules. A little respect for that, maybe?

-Vee

Actually the rule is that you can't have ANY blog links anywhere on IF. I myself only came across it in another thread and I asked Angel-Jot about it.

I haven't removed old blog links but I don't post them on anymore.

I can understand where both of you are coming from but without having seeing that thread I myself wouldn't have seen that particular rule either. Maybe it needs to be posted up more clearly. A lot of authors still have their blog links up and I'm sure it's more to do with the fact that they still have not seen this particular rule.

now EVERYTHING can be asked here?

sorry, my sense of humour is really out of the world. In the alien way, if you know what I mean...

you don't? no? Okay then.