Should sparks be banned

freetime · **Posted:** Sun Jun 21, 2009 11:31 am

I think Sparks has been the target of such insults far more than the instigator.

But again, it is up to the Admin to decide that after reviewing the posts.

Screech · **Joined:** Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:57 pm **Posts:** 1751

happy jack · **Joined:** Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:32 am **Posts:** 3789

BigWhiteGuy wrote:

He's a pain-in-the-ass, but everything has a purpose.

I agree.
Every village needs an idiot.

freetime · **Posted:** Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:49 pm

I guess we'll eventually see what the Admin thinks.

Screech · **Joined:** Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:57 pm **Posts:** 1751

comedian · **Joined:** Sat Aug 09, 2008 5:15 am **Posts:** 3630

LoisLane wrote:

freetime wrote:

Here's exactly what the Admin said in the Hammond forum in August 2008 about his criteria for banning members. Does it fit Sparks?

- Threads whose sole purpose is to attack or harass another member are not permitted. This includes those threads, which pretend to be discussing some harmless topic, but in reality their intent is to harass or threaten another member. Those who start or participate in these threads will be banned and the threads will be deleted.

- Members who relentlessly attack and harass other members.

- Members whose primary purpose is to disrupt the forum.

Pretty simple. Be civil or be gone.

YES

Ditto. He is the most heinous poster.

censorthis · **Joined:** Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:09 pm **Posts:** 643

Screech wrote:

I suppose with edge's voluntary departure,

Wishful thinking screech....the OLT ain't going anywhere. He's too mean, hateful, and bored and derives too much pleasure from disrupting this board to voluntarily give it up.
I remember his dramatic voluntary departure from the other board. The OLT was a serial deleter and his little butty had gotten the boot for the same thing, so the OLT said a little goodbye before he was given his walking papers. He was looking for a little "oh please OLT, don't go". What he got was a hilarious chorus of "good riddance".

Screech · **Joined:** Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:57 pm **Posts:** 1751

sparks · **Joined:** Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:17 pm **Posts:** 3800

LoisLane wrote:

freetime wrote:

Here's exactly what the Admin said in the Hammond forum in August 2008 about his criteria for banning members. Does it fit Sparks?

- Threads whose sole purpose is to attack or harass another member are not permitted. This includes those threads, which pretend to be discussing some harmless topic, but in reality their intent is to harass or threaten another member. Those who start or participate in these threads will be banned and the threads will be deleted.

- Members who relentlessly attack and harass other members.

- Members whose primary purpose is to disrupt the forum.

Pretty simple. Be civil or be gone.

YES

Still waiting to be served with that lawsuit,alpha bitch.

Freedom Fighter · **Joined:** Sat Aug 16, 2008 8:13 am **Posts:** 475

sparks wrote:

LoisLane wrote:

freetime wrote:

Here's exactly what the Admin said in the Hammond forum in August 2008 about his criteria for banning members. Does it fit Sparks?

- Threads whose sole purpose is to attack or harass another member are not permitted. This includes those threads, which pretend to be discussing some harmless topic, but in reality their intent is to harass or threaten another member. Those who start or participate in these threads will be banned and the threads will be deleted.

- Members who relentlessly attack and harass other members.

- Members whose primary purpose is to disrupt the forum.

Pretty simple. Be civil or be gone.

YES

Still waiting to be served with that lawsuit,alpha bitch.

Methinks this more than meets the prerequisite for banishment.

censorthis · **Joined:** Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:09 pm **Posts:** 643

sparks wrote:

LoisLane wrote:

freetime wrote:

Here's exactly what the Admin said in the Hammond forum in August 2008 about his criteria for banning members. Does it fit Sparks?

- Threads whose sole purpose is to attack or harass another member are not permitted. This includes those threads, which pretend to be discussing some harmless topic, but in reality their intent is to harass or threaten another member. Those who start or participate in these threads will be banned and the threads will be deleted.

- Members who relentlessly attack and harass other members.

- Members whose primary purpose is to disrupt the forum.

Pretty simple. Be civil or be gone.

YES

Still waiting to be served with that lawsuit,alpha bitch.

It won't be long now.

LoisLane · **Joined:** Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am **Posts:** 1641

sparks wrote:

LoisLane wrote:

freetime wrote:

Here's exactly what the Admin said in the Hammond forum in August 2008 about his criteria for banning members. Does it fit Sparks?

- Threads whose sole purpose is to attack or harass another member are not permitted. This includes those threads, which pretend to be discussing some harmless topic, but in reality their intent is to harass or threaten another member. Those who start or participate in these threads will be banned and the threads will be deleted.

- Members who relentlessly attack and harass other members.

- Members whose primary purpose is to disrupt the forum.

Pretty simple. Be civil or be gone.

YES

Still waiting to be served with that lawsuit,alpha bitch.

Go ahead...make my day.

chuckmo48 · **Posted:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:30 pm

Typical neos... get rid of those they do not agree with.

censorthis · **Joined:** Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:09 pm **Posts:** 643

chuckmo48 wrote:

Typical neos... get rid of those they do not agree with.

In addition to woeful spelling skills, chuckblow has some memory issues. In the history of all these boards, NO ONE comes close to bjqueen60438, markh/mhc/deepthroat/hermannmuenster/catholicparent/joeydoves/admin/et.al., & sparks when it comes to tattling and the begging, pleading, cajoling, & threatening to administrators to ban posters. NO ONE else comes close. It should be noted that all 3 (or >9 if you count all of the markh characters) of these bums are far left-wing, weak, spineless, liberal pussies.

Northwest Indiana Discussion

Should sparks be banned

Who is online