https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/08491b69ec3f3cd168829461ea0c346b9390753768dcf129aedc0220ae08b100.jpg
http://disq.us/p/2oylqf8
Oklahoma abortion bill is ‘extreme,’ ‘absurd,’ ‘ultra MAGA,’ White House says
A month ago we had a discussion regarding the use of Avatars as weapons https://theden.breakingnewsandreligion.online/2022/04/23/use-of-movie-images-is-not-against-the-rules/
- The Mods addressed three key points in this decision, see below:
“We discussed the comment deleted and have decided to restore it as it is not the same as the avatar in question and the verbiage is ambiguous enough.
This should not be a challenge to either of you to see how far you can push this”.
Closing as resolved… http://disq.us/p/2oiza5j
Based on this ruling it would seem that Moderate Mind is over the line here on all three counts.
There is nothing ambiguous in his comments, they are clearly a direct personal attack on a CM
The avatar in question is unquestionably my avatar.
And I think he is deliberately testing the electric fence here.
If his argument is that he removed the wording from my avatar and replaced it with his own then what is to stop me ( or anyone else ) from doing the same ?
Can I take his image and add any personal insult I see fit ?
( the image is the avatar, not the verbiage that you apply to it )