You have the gall to take discomfort with any mention of the alleged death of someones ''son'', but in the same breadth will implicate the same person as the cause of anothers recent death? - is this an example of TTR's ''minimal standard of decency''?
I am asking a question which logically follows from her posting, not gratuitously bringing up things like digging up bones of a deceased son or daughter which some of our non-flame members with children may find highly objectionable and inconceivable to think about being subjected to if they were in the same shoes.
Regardless of what you or anyone else thinks about the propriety of flaming people for having the misfortune of suffering through the death of a child, I am heretofore proclaiming it as "off limits" in this board, primarily based on the complaints and feedback I have gotten about it from other members.
It's not an undue burden on an otherwise free speech board and adds nothing of substance to discussions to allow someone to bring up the rotting corpse of a child in every successive post. Take it and live with it or leave it and go post somewhere else if you can't. Your choice.
**** YOU and all of this numbo jumbo chapter long of 'board etiquette' bullshit that you 'serious internet board management' wankers seem to find necessary. You don't appear to have any active non-flame board members, in case that very obvious reality escaped your notice. They've gone. Much like the majority of your administration team and what remains is you quote warring across the board with that spamming piece of dingo dung who calls herself "cASSkur''. My reference to her ''rotting corpse of a child'', that which I use sparingly, is not what your ''members'' or those of us sincerely entrenched in informative debate, find highly objectionable and inconceivable; it's your acceptance of unintelligent, pitifully redundant, unattractive hags like cASSkur, shitting up YOUR message board with their stomach turning little offerings.
