ilovefuzz.com

Truly the only worthwhile thing to have come out of this discussion.

repoman wrote:Nothing Puddysjacket said was something that should merit a ban. He was not the one resorting to ad hominem. You all purposely misconstrued his point in order to get offended at his words. He is not defending rapists or sexual assaulters. He was simply stating the tenet of due process, and you banned him for that, because he's not in your little circle jerk.

Weird, None of the things you mention as reasons for me banning were what I quoted when I banned him. I did not ban him for anything he was arguing. I banned him for using the term retarded and for being a piece of shit towards Louise by declining to engage with her because she was using foul language. Meanwhile he was responding promptly to every other tom, dick, and harry who were equally as passionate in the thread. There were other people in this thread arguing for due process and all that and I didn't ban them, so your argument isn't really standing here, sport. They were a disrespectful piece of trash.

If you have a problem with that or think he shouldn't be banned for such thing, tough cookies, bub. I'm not tolerating that behavior when I see it.

It's not about banning people. It's about ethics in music journalism.

edit: cheeky baby photo too big for mobile. Defeated by technology.