|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 Reply to 赛昆 |
 |
芦笛
[博客]
[个人文集]
论坛管理员
.gif)
加入时间: 2004/02/14
文章: 31805
经验值: 519217
|
|
|
作者：芦笛 在 众议院 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
Reply to 赛昆
Thanks for the reply. Sorry I can only write in English.
“1.马在老奸坛已经多次犯"必删"坛规，芦爷也曾呼吁坛方不要袒护。”
Exactly. But the authority of the forum was not the current one. If you remember correctly, it was 07 who had not taken any measure until I appealed.
It is very clever for you to use old ruler’s misdeeds to attack the current forum. Payful!
“在那边，这一要求得到了实现。”
Good, I am glad to hear that. Sadly, your definition of “violation of the rules” is entirely different from others’. As far as I know, MBM was murdered silently because of a poster which contains no personal attack at all. Rather, it is a rational article refuting Zheng Yi’s opinions. The poster, I believe, is still here in this forum. Please show us which rule he has violated.
Worst of all, MBM was secretly murdered. After the assassination, no bulletin was made to inform anyone including MBM himself. So much so that he tried a few times in vain to post up articles, without realizing he had been killed! Name but one similar scandal that has happened throughout the internet, please.
“传说叶公好龙，怎么芦公也好龙？记得在老奸坛末期，尹进用化名讲故事都应马的要求而删，而据俺从"low life corner"得知，这种东西芦爷也写过嘛。您芦马二位，算不算“站内特权阶级”？”
Please give evidence to support your accusation. Otherwise, apologize for libelling.
“2.刚才跟您说对俺对老偷的态度，不过为了说明俺对反民运人士的态度。“坦克车”一事，算俺赶着吃饭没说清楚。实子先生转过来的帖子里，俺驳的是坦先生那句“不许批判的民运就是伪民运”。此后所说的关于“拥共分子”的话，应该另起一段。”
So what’s wrong with “不许批判的民运就是伪民运”? Do you still believe those “freedom warriors” allow others to criticize them? If I remember correctly, you have made yourself very clear that only certain people handpicked by you are allowed to criticize that “movement”. Those who are suspected to be “pro-CCP” are not allowed.
“3."龟缩"违规了吧？ “
Of course not. This issue was clarified ages ago. The consensus is that using the existing phrases (cheng yu) like Qian Luu Ji Qiong etc, does not violate the rule.
“4.如“鲁老恶夫”所言，只有无理加懦弱者，才靠漫骂和造谣(楼上提到的随马，芦爷也说指责过他们造谣吧？)。”
Indeed. You have just showed us how to 造谣 most vividly in the first paragraph of your poster.
“俺在老奸坛从未需要什么“保护”，在新川也是如此。芦爷如果认为俺在新川靠版主保护而胡乱骂人，请明示。”
So why did you attack me here while I was expelled to Boxun? Why did you criticize my article a few days ago in a place where I am not welcome and I rarely visit?
“倒是俺以前见到过，这里的某些人(马是其中之一)在“刺刀保护下”出言骂人而不受惩罚。 “
First of all, please define the time. Can you tell us when this happened, before or after this forum is rebuilt?
Before this forum was rebuilt, yeah, the so-called “banzhu group” and their favourites “刺刀保护下出言骂人而不受惩罚”。 They even made a secret rule that nobody was allowed to “attack” them. The worst cases were 13 and 16, while they were free to insult writers at will, they used their 刺刀 to deprive the victims of their rights to counterattack or defend themselves. I trust you have witnessed all this and I guess that was why you raised this issue. Unfortunately, you got the wrong place, because those guilty ones have left for XHC. So you’d better go back and complain to them.
If your accusation covers the present time, then give evidence or apologize for libelling.
“5.上次来看见版主挂牌，怎么又不挂了？”
Is this your business?
“6.论坛间的事，是芦爷挑起的，不要多说了吧？这在新川是违规帖，俺如果在这被删了，在那边也上不了(上次就被删了一个)。 “
造谣 again. When and how I 挑起论坛间的事? I only suggest you stop criticizing others in a place where they do not go.
I fully understand why “这在新川是违规帖”. It is only a natural response from thieves and robbers who sabotaged this website after a through robbery in front of the whole world.
“谢谢”。
You are welcome. Next time, try to be a decent man and stop 造谣. Many thanks!
作者：芦笛 在 众议院 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
