>>6288>What are the rules
Among other things, don't derail threads
Huh, I dont see that in the policy page. Wonder why that is.
What constitutes a derail? Is it derailing to take a discussion past OP's intent/ability to argue? Is it a derail if OP has no salient argument? What about scope? Is it derailing if I as about red dot sites in a eifle thread? Should I reserve questions about red dot sites for red dot threads, and ar questions about ar threads?
Whoopsie, the big bad atf gonna catch me for my opsec
Don't be a fucktard and win fucktarded prizes.
You put the shit into one thread. Keep it there. Anything else is a waste of effort because either A) he won't change or B) he has to go through a little extra effort to see what the fuck it is.
And most importantly C) Everyone wins. YOU GET WHAT THE FUCK YOU ACTUALLY WANT JESUS CHRIST AND EVERYBODY FUCKING WINS!
>>6291>he wont change
Is that a tacit admission that not-nigel is held to a sifferent standard than Nigel?
Cuz that would be untoward. That would suggest that who one 'is' has sway as much as what one says. Mlpol is alleged to not weigh decisions on personality or anything.
It further suggeats that the 'problem' element is the person who draws issue with Nigel.
Is this really the hill you want to die on?
I'm a mental health enthusiast.
I'll be as judgemental as I damn well please because I'm not staff in any way shape or form.
If that changes somehow for some reason the answer is as an Anon that is my personal opinion of the current situation.
Nigel has issues and so do you. I wouldn't trust myself with that kind of administrative control over Anons so in any case I'd leave it be to handle clear cut actions in odd time areas.
It's just a pop-up with a message/warning. Not a big deal faggot.
Just do as told and keep shitposting. It has no merit to open a thread.
So, your user-generated advise is that I disregard moderator actions and then proceed.
That seems actionable. Tks ^_^
Why does this term keep popping up on this board?