broke out of arkham

Pregnant!

Okay, I'm going to say this once.

13. Do not make public accusations of rule breaking and do not discuss certain blocks in the forum
To improve the mood in the forums, public discussions of the above are not allowed. Issues and questions regarding rule breaking and blocks should be addressed to the moderators (ways to contact mods are listed in the FAQ).

There's a good reason why this rule exists.  The reason is exactly what just happened.  There was a topic here.  However, 80% of the posts became questions of suspected rules violations within the thread, and later violations outside the thread.  I attempted initially to be courteous and address issues.  I attempted to suggest alternative methods by which complaints could be addressed.  That didn't work.  So here's the warning.

If you suspect someone of trolling or otherwise breaking the rules, there are three different methods that can be pursued to take action against them:
1: Go on IRC.  Find a moderator or forum moderator.  Talk to them.  Include links to the posts which you deem to be evidence of the problematic behavior in question.
2: Click the little "report" button on the post in question.  Please include a solid explanation of why you believe the post in question is in violation of the rules (Warning: Moderators HAVE issued blocks against people who have abused this function by blanket reporting every post they see.  If it becomes obvious that the person issuing the report is excessively not using discretion in determining if posts should be reported, that can constitute spam of the moderator report interface, and can result in a block.  Make sure you have a solid justification for reporting someone before issuing that report.  Otherwise, you're wasting moderator time which could be used to address actual instances of trolling.)
3: Send an email to the moderators (Actually, I'm not sure if the mod email is working, so consider this half a suggestion).

That's it.  Publicly accusing someone of breaking the rules is in itself a rules violation.  Don't do it.  The politics forum is for discussing world issues.  It's not for discussing the rules associated with the discussion of those issues.  Keep it that way.

[Self-edit]

*creates Pinwheel*

If you squint while you read, it makes sense!

Yeah... he wasn't actually perma-banned.

As such... closed-spam.

That's about a 3.5/10 moustache with a guy attached to it.  Nothing impressive there.

Antarctica!

*adds a verb to your statement*

Well, MW and Andromeda are technically headed on a collision course with one another as we speak.  Perhaps this round in MW is the theoretical scenario where it has done so!

> Justinian I wrote:

> I'm not stumbling to produce an answer at all, and my arguments are flawless. The flaw is with your insistence that political ideas be justified with these mysterious normative truths.

The strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must. Tired of the strong? Form a coalition and destroy them. That's my political philosophy.

My argument is forceful if enough people are willing to form a coalition and assert these liberties. If social conservatives won't reach a reasonable compromise, then their objectives must be accomplished with force. It's that simple.

So... you don't actually give a crap about if you're actually right on a universal basis?  So you're outright conceding that you are as bad as the social conservatives, and the only difference is that you're protecting your interest at the expense of social conservatives while social conservatives are protecting their interest at the expense of you?

So... can I just say you're both equally reprehensible and go home now?  At the point where your argument very clearly is not protecting any right which is universally valued as a priori, trying to remove rights which are considered a priori in order to protect the non a priori right, clearly recognizing that the interest in protecting that right is simply that it will benefit you... why should any of us buy into your philosophy?