| REVIEWER | REPLY |
 | CanadaSucks
(50)
05/02/2008 | Professional victimhood. There are more offensive cards in the deck. Some pics you'll like, some you won't. Not eveyone shares respect for fairy tales. |
 | magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | Any serious thoughts? |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | Read GTH's review (which is what we're supposed to be discussing). |
 | lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | "Anybody have thoughts on that?"
Maybe you are making lots of money by the controversy? You can use the controversy to increase the number of adds? You can use the controversy to prove the cyber world that RIA is totally free speech, even to the point of blasphemy? Are we all playing into your hands? |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | We are commenting on GTH's post regarding the CS's blasphemous picture. You bring in the profile page of an old member right after two of my comments. Why the diversion? |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | Uh, LM, this conversation isn't about you, remember? Interesting reaction though. |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | I think the AryanDan comparison is a good one. We didn't ban him or force him to change his user name, as repulsive and offensive as it (and he) was. You'll note however that only two folks "trusted" him and neither of those folks were regulars on the site. Many times I believe that it's preferable to have offensive stuff kept out in the open so that it can be derided and ostracized by cooler heads. And this is exactly what's happening here - there seems to be a pretty broad cross section of the RIA community condemning CS for his actions - libs, repubs, Christians, atheists. It seems to me, this is exactly the way a community is supposed to work. Anybody have thoughts on that? |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | wait, wait, don't tell me....
I am the reincarnation of aryandan....
Unbelievable. |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | http://www.rateitall.com/aryandan |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | Can we now go back to GTH's review of CS's blasphemous action? |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | I don't know that. Any good hacker can mimic my IP address and pump my votes. I would appreciate any and all members who read this to please, stop voting on any of my reviews, past or present. You can leave a comment if you wish, but please, no votes. Thank you. |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | No worries LM, as long as it's not coming from your IP address, you have nothing to worry about. |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | Kudos to Mrs Morovan. I respect that, and I'm glad she's not your pet or slave. |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | Please, notice that there are helpful votes increasing on my account without me posting any new reviews. I have nothing to do with it. |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | LOL, I will now have to censor my wife's rights? Thanks, but no thanks. She is my wife, not my pet or slave. And she will not come back even if I asked her to, because she was OFFENDED by the action taken against her. |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | There isn't a limit of one account per household. However, accounts whose sole activity is to give unnatural numbers of helpful votes to another member are at the same IP address, for obvious reasons, deleted. Your wife is welcome to participate - I'd have to ask that given the somewhat dodgy history around mysterious secondary accounts pumping up your helpful totals, that you ask her not to vote your comments helpful. |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | That is a LIE. My wife has agreed with many of my posts and expresses her agreement with helpful votes. Nothing illegal or unethical there. My fault was, I didn't know there was a limit of only one account per household. You deleted her account and suspended mine for a few days. I learned my lesson. You make it sound as if it was a felony for my wife to support me. But that is water under the bridge. Why is it now that you bring up issues not related with the current situation. It is YOU who are bringing it up again, not me. Do I have to give up my right to defend myself against a false accusation as a condition to continue being a member of RIA? |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | LM, shortly after you joined the site for the first time I removed a bogus account with the same IP address as yours whose sole activity was to give you hundreds of helpful votes. Was that part of this same conspiracy as well? Can't we focus on the more interesting issue, and frankly more serious issue of free speech vs. censorship vs. limits to civility? I'm tired of discussing your bogus helpful votes, and I think you've agreed not to do it anymore, right? |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | magellan, CS's picture is not anti religious, it is blasphemous not because of the image itself, but because of the mockery it makes of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. You say it is not correlated with my incident? Are you sure? Do you really think it is a coincidence that I was among the first to scream against CS's picture and immediately the issue of me creating a false account and pump my voting came up? I don't think so. There is more to this than meets the eye. Now I am more convinced than ever that there is a concerted effort to boot me off the site, because I have touched the "untouchable?". There is no need to divert the attention from the real issues here. |
| magellan
(177)
04/27/2008 | It's offensive. CS has put himself squarely in the unthinking zealot camp, and has lost a lot respect from the sites' moderates in the process. I don't even read his sh*t anymore. But I'm not going to censor anti religious imagery, because then I'd have to censor pro religious imagery. Do you know I've had a number of Jewish people who have complained to me about all the over the top Jesus imagery that's been cropping up recently? My response? Deal with it. They're free to express their positions. And so is CS, even if his position is loutish and offensive. And LM, CS' poor judgment is no way correlated to your decision to give yourself help votes - it's silly and sad that you are trying to link the two. |
 | Donovan
(140)
04/27/2008 | For the record, I think it is very offensive! |
| lmorovan
(19)
04/27/2008 | I think nothing will be done about it. it's too late. Any action at this time would be an admission of admin that they did wrong in not taking the picture down when first reported. Problem is, even if admin admits it, would there be reasons to believe other "funny" things may happen here with admin's knowledge and complicity? Thank you GTH for taking a stand. |
 | MissPackRat4Jesus
(42)
04/26/2008 | To GenghisTheHun (regarding the "funny" vote): It seems to be a select few that have every one of their reviews marked "funny", regardless of the content. You can tell who the favorites are on this site. I used to have a lot of respect for RIA, as it was run very straightforward and respectably. Now, it's like those popularity contests you'd find in any junior high school. I think it's time that people started acting like adults around here. There have been suggestions made by various reviewers on how to solve some of these issues, but so far they seem to have fallen on deaf ears. |
 | fitman
(51)
04/26/2008 | Damned if I know... ;-) |
 | GenghisTheHun
(179)
04/26/2008 | That's true fitman. Offensive words are forbidden, but not offensive pictures. Why is that? |
| fitman
(51)
04/25/2008 | I just tried to post a 'test' comment including George Carlin's seven forbidden words, and it disappeared into (the files of the inquisition?). |
 | louiethe20th
(81)
04/25/2008 | Very good post Genghis. |
| GenghisTheHun
(179)
04/25/2008 | Hey, I tried to insert asterisks in the "colorful" language, but the program still won't take my comment. I guess that limitations on taste and language do exist on the site. Perhaps the standard should be extended to blasphemous pictures. |
| GenghisTheHun
(179)
04/25/2008 | I wanted to use stronger language, but the system CENSORED me. I am shocked, SHOCKED, that this limitation on FREE speech exists on this site. Hilarious! |
| GenghisTheHun
(179)
04/25/2008 | Well, whoever he is, he doesn't have the balls to send me an e-mail to let me know his identity. Rank coward! |
| fitman
(51)
04/25/2008 | It Ain't Me Babe |
| GenghisTheHun
(179)
04/25/2008 | OK, thanks. |
| GenghisTheHun
(179)
04/25/2008 | Is it you? |
| fitman
(51)
04/25/2008 | Might even be the same putz who rates nearly all mine 'funny'. Difference is, I consider the source and don't give a tinker's "Damn!" |
| GenghisTheHun
(179)
04/25/2008 | I would like to know who was the nutless wonder who gave me a funny on this post? |
 | Wiseguy
(124)
04/25/2008 | great post |
