If you really meant that, you would have done as I have here.


Now let me see...

Troll - the meaning of an Internet troll is broader than your definition. The one meaning that is in agreement is that they post using language or subject matter with the intent to wind people up. I like Wikipedia's definition:

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Censor (verb) - To make deletions or changes (as in text - often by a censor).

Censure (verb) - To criticize harshly; reprove.

Now, it is true I criticised harshly the posters text and I standby my belief that he acted as a troll (I also used a wink icon), but I fail to see how you can justifiably say that I tried to censor him (that is impossible without admin access to the site). He is entitled to his opinion, but I am also entitled to mine and I believe he used flippant or offensive language to get his point across.

I fail to see how you can justify that I suggested that he shouldn't have posted his opinion. So although I used the wrong spelling, I assumed the correct word. You, however, suggested something that is impossible for me to do (edit his posts).


How's this for a pointless thread folks?

Well, it certainly sounds fun - now I'll have to think up an answer. Meanwhile it's time for coffee.

My OED defines "to censor" as "to ban unacceptable parts of (a book, film, etc).", which is slightly different from yours.

In any case, I was using this in a wider sense - obviously only an admin can physically edit someone else's post - to mean you were saying he should not have posted his opinion at all, which if you like is "attempted censorship" .

By the definition of "troll" from Wikipedia which you quote, you were accusing him of being disruptive, which implies he should not have posted.

Anyway, enough already.

http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/images/troll.jpg

I'll go along with that.


I was accusing him of being a troll, I never suggested or implied that he shouldn't post. The only thing he might consider is they way he puts his points of view across; but at the end of the day that is up to him. I neither wish to, nor can't stop him posting how he wishes.

And you used to get on so well

Detecting an off topic row building, I'd suggest people just quote it here, then we need not ruin other threads.

... as long as you don't import football into another thread

Bill1, just ignore, or just take it to the free for all thread!

He is now on ignore as you already have gathered from my edited post.

Oh please NO!

Keep ALL football on the one thread so I can ignore PLEASE!

I'm not sure which is the more boring, football or the moaning about it!

FOOTBALL - definitely!

I wouldn't be so sure about that

Have I missed some event of earth shattering importance ?

Or am I just too old to appreciate the nuances of computer speak .

Defiantly too old... ...but should your frail cronilogially challenged mind be getting the better of you, this thread was spawned from this one! Link: Yet again the law is being an ***!

You certainly have a way with words , though I do have sympathy with the sentiment .
Maybe I should get my quill out and construct an old fashioned letter of resigned incompetence .

I'm sorry! I wuz beein silly

I wouldn't call sat watching a TV an activity; more a pastime.