You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.

And for the last time ethics do not require court cases. I am not arguing legalities. I am arguing ethics. You do not get to demand proof for an opinion you made up for someone., nor do I have to prove an opinion that is not mine.

You have failed to provide the required proof long enough.

Until you can provide it and until you can drop you 12 year old AOLer bullshit (sorry child – you never provided proof that I am who you accuse me of being. Having a sock puppet posting and using my own information doe not count either) this ‘discussion’ is over.

Have a good day/night.

PS: When you engage someone in a debate, certain ground rules are laid down. I laid down the rules – you failed to follow them and have now chosen to hide behind a rather flimsy excuse. I do not give a flying fuck whose web site this is nor do I give a flying fuck who wrote the article. They are not the ones in this debate – they have no say. Nor do you.

You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.

And for the last time ethics do not require court cases. I am not arguing legalities. I am arguing ethics. You do not get to demand proof for an opinion you made up for someone., nor do I have to prove an opinion that is not mine.

1. Your prepubescent AOLer attitude will not be tolerated. when you have grown past this infantile need of yours to make false accusations and falsely link a person’s pseudonym to a person you dislike in an attempt to discredit the person you are having a hard time actually debating with. it is a tactic that belongs in a grammar school – keep it there.

2. The comment of mine that you originally responded to contained nothing concerning ethics – thus our debate is not about ethics. If you wish to debate further concerning that original comment you WILL find a court case. If you cannot, you WILL move on as at this point all you are doing is attempting to dodge around the requirement of the debate.

Deal with it kiddo. when you respond to me and engage me in debate – the article means nothing anymore. You are debating with me – not the author of the article nor with the web master here. I have set the rules for this debate and did so only a few responses in. It is YOU attempting to dodge and control this …. Hell it isn’t really a debate anymore.

Child – go back to school. when you have graduated – then come back and post. Until then – I am just going to ignore you. Your bullshit will simply keep on going and you will simply keep attempting to bring in an extra bit – which will not help you anyway.

You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.

And for the last time ethics do not require court cases. I am not arguing legalities. I am arguing ethics. You do not get to demand proof for an opinion you made up for someone., nor do I have to prove an opinion that is not mine.

By the by – I see you are back to using that old AOLer tactic of attempting to link a person to a Screen/User Name which has no relevance to them whatsoever.

Congratulations! You have proven that you are little more than a child – if not in physical fact then your mind is at least that immature.

I do believe it is time for me to add in a new rule to this discussion Dearie (which is – so you know child – a term I use to refer to mindless twits or persons that have earned my hatred. You are the former): When you have grown up enough to leave behind this immature and childish need to try and link a person to a Screen/User Name based on little more than vapor … Then you can come back and try to continue this little discussion.

One that has NEVER been about Ethics Dearie – My responses have only contained such since YOU decided this was somehow going to go down a different road.

what is the matter? Having trouble finding that court case I have required you to find?

I run the RAGE Fighting Championships in that Boxing arena high above the sim, and I have never had any trouble with griefers at all. I will add that my first company I set up in Baku was a security company as well…so you’d think I would have been a prime target for abuse. lol. Anyways…I only hope the sim does not get polluted with lame clubs and horribly ugly stores now that the historic memorial park has been taken down.

Ethics is the SOLE basis of this discussion. YOU just don’t want it to. You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.

I was telling the little hypocrite/coward/naive child that his view concerning a user of Second Life being able to send in an abuse report for content that they find on a PUBLIC ACCESS simulator has no Ethical nor Legal Precedent.

How you were able to leap from my essentially telling someone that their entire viewpoint is total and utter bullshit, lacking even the most basic criteria to truly support it – to saying that ethics are not present at all in Second Life is beyond me.

Oh wait – was it perhaps the fact that I decided to throw in the truth concerning just about every single human being and Ethics into the mix?

Get a fucking grip. Once again – another internet twit who only reads what they want. Sorry X Dearie … You lose this time around. Go back to school and relearn how to comprehend what you read instead of looking for what is not directly stated or implied.