More Holland Sentinel Censorship

"it is common sense a rodent problem will develop."

You have a thing for our furry friends lately?

I've owned pet rats, on and off since I was about 20 years old.... so yes. Also have a pet chinchilla, which is a cool pet.

so now you insinuate beastiality, Bonds? what is it with you and deviant sex...? looking for more "friends"? lonely without Ian?

"so now you insinuate beastiality, Bonds? what is it with you and deviant sex...? looking for more "friends"? lonely without Ian? "

Only in your weird, sad mind. WTF?

bonds77 wrote:

You have a thing for our furry friends lately?

bonds77 wrote:

Only in your weird, sad mind. WTF?

your words Bonds - not mine... the words came from YOUR mind - not mine. but nice try anyhow...

don't be worried - Ian will be back here soon enough.. then you can have your "puppy" back in your lap.... you'll be fine til then

That never crossed my mind....but ok- you, on the other hand..how do you feel about hamsters?

You can feel better now that you've defended your messiah, Galt

bonds77 wrote:

You can feel better now that you've defended your messiah, Galt

Seriously, what is wrong with you? I answered your question respectfully, and then you come back with this? I myself consider your "furry friend" statement somewhat bizarre as well, but I just let it slide off my back. You should try that as well.

BTW, I've gotten in some pretty heated disagreements with BD in the past. Now we just avoid those topics for the most part. I think you are mistaking him considering me a "messiah" with him simply disliking you. The smart money is on the later.

So, I see the user poising as "RKING", a past Holland Sentinel IT admin, has disappeared back into the woodwork. Or following the thread here, one of the alleged Sentinel Ratmasters, lord of all Gatehouse IT rodents in the holland area, has scurried off.
Why am I not surprised?

That's "latter".

Ian isn't any more my "lapdog" than BD is your follower.

I had simply noticed that you've been mentioning rats a lot lately. Simple as that.

Bonds:

Mentioning rats and the thread title go hand in hand. I imagine I could have used cockroaches as the analogy as well. In fact, a better one since rats can learn and have some redeeming qualities as pets.

Ian is called your lapdog because no matter who counters you, he always seems to be on your defense. He even will abandon his own positions to run to your support. I'm not sure I think he is your lapdog, maybe he just feels outnumbered here and finds comfort with you.

BD was commenting on your comment, one of which I took the same way, but chose not to engage you. BD had no reason to defend me, nor did I need it. He also doesn't jump into every thread nor give up his values to appeal to you. My impression of BD is he just doesn't agree with your set of values. The fact we both feel that way may give you that impression of mutual admiration, but I'm sure we came to the conclusion independently.

In any case, why can't you just debate the facts and why the need for all the personal attacks? We both agree the Bush administration had a lot to be desired so is it so hard to fathom the Obama administration may have continued and increased the lie? Or will you know paint me as "fringe" since I think the Dems and Repubs have sold our country out?

But back on topic, tell me, why are you so defensive with the Sentinel? It is not a left or right thing as our admin impostor seems to want to make it, it is a right or wrong. The fact the Sentinel may hold the same positions as you, should be independent of their ethical behavior, or lack there of.

A free and open press is a wondrous thing for a community. The Sentinel fills that defacto role in Holland. Is wanting it to be reality, instead of words, such a crime?

Your expectations, regardless of the issue, Galt, are nothing short of enormous. It doesn't matter what the issue is. The thing is, you want it NOW, not little by little, not one issue at a time.

As far as BD goes- you may not want to see it, but you hold me to a completely different standard than your SMT buddies. Rarely do you weigh in if they say something stupid- shoot- on your LAST POST you asked me why the personal attacks-ignoring BD's personal attacks. Add that to your portrayal of me as scum, trash, and vermin- well, there is your answer.

The Sentinel board is gone. You can choose to live in the past, or the here and now.

Your idea of gov't NOT doing a good job is not fringe. In fact, it's rather mainstream, and I agree with that. For the most part, they haven't been very successful at pleasing the public, and have mismanaged OUR money.

Bonds:

I think if people's expectations where enormous, this would be a better country. It is accepting the half ass, the incomplete or the "it's not my department" that hurts this country. Will I or anyone that expects better always be pleased? Of course not, but to not expect it is to give in to a life of mediocrity.

My issue with you is you simply are sloppy. Sloppy in your education on this country, sloppy in your political choices and sloppy paying attention to a thread.

This thread was about the Holland Sentinel online editorial section which is very much in the here and now.

Plenty I don't agree with on with BD, but he appears able to learn and change his position. That is enough for me to respect a man. Hopefully I can do the same as BD.

I am not BD's policeman either. If he choses to attack you, it is his choice. You can counter him the same way I countered you.

You say the idea of government not doing a good job is something you agree with and is not fringe. If that is true, why do always try to marginalize those that support third parties? Be it Goose, me or anyone elses choices.

Man those Galts are arrogant ass's.

Somehow I trust Bonds far more than I trust you.

No kidding.

If you weren't sloppy, dude, you would be able to answer the questions. You'd fess up or have an answer as to why you lean hard on one person, and free pass to another. BD DOESN'T MAKE ARGUMENTS, so for you to even say that is rediculous.

From an earlier post by me:

"I'm confused by your methods and goals, Galt. I thought you had alluded to being a business owner and capitalist. If you are, in fact that, then you should understand the right of that business to shut down your/others comments if they don't want them there."

You followed up with a rant about journalistic ethics. Maybe you just have a problem with comprehension.

You are talking about moderation of a forum. It has little to do with news or otherwise, and here you are 9 months later still whining about it. WOULD YOU ALLOW THIS IN YOUR business or not? Would you allow an angry, uptight person that never spent a dime with you deface you in public? If so, let's open up your site. It is NOT the same as allowing free comments on an editorial page. It's the internet. Different.

Let's call a spade a spade: you didn't get what you wanted, you were defeated, and you still have an opportunity to get the last word. I've met plenty of your kind.

Frankly, you're naive to trust anyone on a anonymous forum like this. Can't you make your own mind up or do you need to be lead by someone?

I think it is you who has the problem with comprehension... this thread is about the Holland Sentinel comment (editorial) section, not the old forum. And as to journalistic ethics, you either have them or you don't.

Now, as to the forum, one of the same alleged rats popped up, and that brought it back, but again the focus is the comment section.

Can you please repeat the questions you say I didn't answer. I didn't see any in your last post.

BTW, nobody defaced the Sentinel in the comment section, it was the sexual harassment story on the Holland ADA.

WOULD YOU ALLOW THIS IN YOUR business or not?

If my business was a newspaper, where I deal in the public trust, I sure as hell would be very careful how I interfere with the editorial section, be it print or be it virtual.

Sometimes it says alot more when questions aren't answered/ignored.

Mongoose wrote:

RKing, I don't know if you are the R. King that I know personally, but if you are him and/or you work at the Sentinel, why are the comments and thoughts of your readers not important enough to keep?
Certainly you don't expect all comments to be in keeping with the management of the paper. If when ever there is a dissenting comment, it is deleted, why have a comments section in the first place.
Just asking.

The only RK here is "Crash" himself