Banned for asking why are

[faux-pas]

unfounded accusations allowed
now come on, is this right?

[legendis.god]

no its wrong.



� did that help ?

[Gormless]

I think they are fine but only if accompanied by AB-quality-approved proof.

[faux-pas]

AB-quality-approved proof.

that would be rumour and gossip then would it?

[ummmm]

No it's wrong.....

Are both the no/on.knowledge names banned?

[Gormless]

You're learning, faux-pas.

[legendis.god]

Well trigg i do find sally james sexually stimulating , and noel edmonds mildly nauseating.



� DID THAT HELP ?

[craft1948]

can I post on here or is gormless watching?

[faux-pas]

so i can make a random accusation without the fear of any reprisal can i?

[B00]

sperma...um..thingy (forgot rest of your name, sorry).

I owe you an apology, just before the thread you're talking about got pulled I made a post on it. I basically told both you and Gourmander off for the horrible accusation against Legend. I misread your question and wrongly assumed you were accusing Legend as well.

Again sorry :-)

[Gormless]

According to this thread, if you WEREN'T accusing legend, it's ok to come back and have another go.

[legendis.god]

and thank you to you boo.

i was at lunch and missed that

[faux-pas]

apology accepted BOO i read what you posted and read it again because i was troubled to understand what you meant

[daniela31]

spermatids post was very confusing, but I was having a go at gourmander. He was the one stiring things up and accusing leg of beating his wife and bringing other names in to ask them if it was true or not.

gourmander should be the one banned.

Spermathingy was noknowledge in diguise and the ED knew this.
That's why he was banned.

[Gourmander]

He was at lunch...hunched over the computer...dribbling away at the mention of his name...

[Gourmander]

Daniela, the other names can prove beyond all doubt what he did to his wife. No one can live with the facts on here!!

[legendis.god]

and they just keep trollin trollin trollin.

[Sachs]

Faux,
like daniella, I read that post as stirring. Why was it banned? Did the Ed agree? Wish I could remember it word for word, but the tone of the post was'nt nice, which is why I commented on the thread. Others must have thought the same to get it banned.