Argument and enforcement

Who is like God arbour · Post by **Who is like God arbour** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 6:37 pm

no response

Who is like God arbour · Post by **Who is like God arbour** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 6:53 pm

no response

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:22 pm

Who is like God arbour wrote:

no response

I'll take that as a yes and as such this thread and the reason for it's existence has been answered now.

I'm going to ask the Adm. to lock this as it won't and cannot go any further...

Who is like God arbour · Post by **Who is like God arbour** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:29 pm

no response

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:33 pm

Who is like God arbour wrote:

*Snip*

You are now Spaming so stop it or I'll report it as well, you already made clear thst you do not want to participate anymore than I do so let's leave it at that...

One more post like this and you will be reported no more warnings, have a nice day...

Who is like God arbour · Post by **Who is like God arbour** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:33 pm

no response

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:36 pm

Reported!

Post by **Jedi Master Spock** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:48 pm

Who is like God arbour, if you have no response you wish to give PunkMaister, then it simply suffices to say that once, or even more simply, to not reply to him at all. Repeatedly posting "no response" serves no constructive purpose. If it continues, I will lock the thread - something I am generally loathe to do.

Who is like God arbour · Post by **Who is like God arbour** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:52 pm

Jedi Master Spock wrote:Who is like God arbour, if you have no response you wish to give PunkMaister, then it simply suffices to say that once, or even more simply, to not reply to him at all. Repeatedly posting "no response" serves no constructive purpose.

I have said it not only one or two times, I have said it three times.

But Punkmaister seemed not to have understood it because he still has expected me that I answer him.

Insofar I disagree.

It has had a constructive purpose to post "no response" repeatedly.

Now he has understood it - hopefully.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:00 pm

Who is like God arbour wrote:
Jedi Master Spock wrote:Who is like God arbour, if you have no response you wish to give PunkMaister, then it simply suffices to say that once, or even more simply, to not reply to him at all. Repeatedly posting "no response" serves no constructive purpose.
I have said it not only one or two times, I have said it three times.

But Punkmaister seemed not to have understood it because he still has expected me that I answer him.

Insofar I disagree.

It has had a constructive purpose to post "no response" repeatedly.

Now he has understood it - hopefully.

Then this thread and it's reason of being is at an end. And just FYI when you posted "No response" the 3rd time was just out of spite because I had warned you already that it was SPAM and not to do it anymore which you did because you are just a jerk, a jerk that got righteously warned anr rightfully so. Now don't do it anymore and go away...

Who is like God arbour · Post by **Who is like God arbour** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:38 am

I have also contacted Jedi Master Spock:

Who is like God arbour wrote:Punkmaister has announced that he wants to complain about me and wants that you close a thread.

I'm more than willing to continue that debate with sonofcnn. But not with Punkmaister. Mr. Orgahan has also posted in that thread and may be interessted to continue his debate with Punkmaister.

Insofar there shouldn't be a reason to close the thread. It's not a debate solely between Punkmaister and me.

I think that my reasons to refuse to answer Punkmaister are made clear. He does not answer any questions and does not read what was written.

From my point of view, no interventions of you are necessary. But it's at you to decide what you will do.

Sincerely
WILGA

Regardless what Punkmaister is saying, this is not his thread. Who wants to continue that debate can do it.

I assume that's the reason why Jedi Master Spock, after reading my message, has changed his mind and, although he has had already announced his intention to close that thread, has in fact edited his post and has not closed this thread.

Mr. Oragahn, if you want to continue your debate with PunkMaister, feel free to do it.

Narsil, if you have a few choice words for PunkMaister, feel free to say them.

Sonofccn, if you want to continue that debate, I'd be willing.

And everyone else, if you want to participate in that debate, you are welcome.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:16 am

No those are not the reasons this however are:.

Jedi Master Spock wrote:
PunkMaister wrote:He is posting the same thing over and over like here: http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 8006#18006
So plz lock it...
I strongly considered locking it, but ultimately did not. Let me know if he continues posting "no response" repeatedly after having been warned.

The reason it was not locked is because you ceased and desisted on SPAMMING but only after you got literally yanked by the ears by Jedi Master Spock because you continued despite my warning that I would report you as evidenced here:
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 8005#18005

and here:

http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 8006#18006

Case closed...

BTW: And Jedi Master Spock never edited his post warning you either...

Post by **Jedi Master Spock** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:40 pm

I did indeed edit my post (several times, in fact) but very quickly, and before any replies were made to it. I considered locking the thread, and the very first version of my post said so; I did not lock the thread because the PunkMaister-Who is like God arbour vein was not the only part of discussion active, and - as I said - I am loathe to shut down threads unless absolutely necessary.

So, to encourage that thread to proceed to constructive discussion, I've split this portion of it, and locking it to discourage the continuation of less constructive discussion.