Alla. Do you know what Kao edited?
I don't ask to be a pain in the ***, I ask because it doesn't appear that you do.
I'd have no problem with editing my follow up posts, which were clearly over the line, and more me just being a petty *** than anything. I understand your point of view there completely.
The edited post in question was this:
Nah, I'm going with the kiddie **** thing!
Clearly in jest, clearly not implicating in the slightest that I thought Kao was a pedophile.
As you know, being a lawyer and all, satire isn't libel. First ammendment protection would clearly apply, just as it does when "Saturday Night Live" does a sketch about someone. Can I sue Kao for editing to "I'm an idiot"? I'm clearly not an idot, but people might think so after an authority figure edits as such!
See, that's clearly satire. If Kao honestly thought I was implying that he actually was a pedophile, I'll appologise immediately.
Legal hyperbole aside, you run a great site, and have bent over backward to accomidate me and other posters who never gave you a dime and with the exception of Kao your staff has been easily the best I've seen on a forum.
We all know I probably won't stop posting here, but in all honesty, I think Kao was inconsistent with the actions of every other site admin in the past.
I see and understand your point of view, however, and it certainly has much merit. Thank's for taking the time.
____________________________
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.