• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

Bent Sailor

Members
  • Content count

    10,885
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

56 Kiss-ass

About Bent Sailor

Profile Information

  • Location
    Lake Macquarie
  • Interests
    Sailing
    Software Development
    A Good Yarn with Mates
  1. too early to talk about AR15s eh lads?

    As the belittlement is not directed to mentally challenged people or about their mental deficiencies - yes, it is believed by most folks to be fine that way. And I call it an over-abundance of political correctness about a word regardless of context. I also have my suspicions about your truly having a principled stand against the use of potentially offensive words due to your eager participation in a forum in which people are regularly called cunts, dicks, bitches, twats, assholes, faggots, and so on without your "principles" causing you to call people out for that. I look forward to your crusade against such language here proving me wrong... or the absence of such confirming my suspicions.
  2. Still don't believe it.

    Well, on the upside Bob Perry's old PDF's can be accessed just fine. Which means it's something about new PDF file attachments and/or both of our accounts...
  3. Drip Drip Drip

    Q: How do you make a Dog drool? A: Bing bing bong Russians.
  4. Still don't believe it.

    Which of @Hillary's many threads do you think will epitomise his next rage-quit? I'm thinking he's got a little ways to go before reaching his YooHoo moment with this sock... but only a little.
  5. too early to talk about AR15s eh lads?

    Um, no Chum. It's not doubling down. It's the source of the "full retard" comment. It's not about criticising or insulting mentally challenged people. It's about insulting people that act like them for the purposes of getting a specific reaction from an audience. Just watch the movie, have a few laughs, and concede you went off half-cocked. You're getting a little ridiculous with this angle.
  6. Poof goes your conspiracy

    If they called her "cankles" well we beat them to it...... And now warbird is fantasising about Happy Jack's fat feet. You guys just get weirder and weirder.
  7. That's quite a stretch even for you, Dog. Do you warm up in the mornings before launching into your online twaddle or do you just run the risk of injuriously pulling your muscle?
  8. Still don't believe it.

    There is that... apparently we're all fucked. Damn, does that mean the old Bob Perry CA Cruiser design PDF's are now inaccessible?
  9. Just Another High School Shooting

    I copied her verbatim, so not quite how I would have worded it. For me, it'd be worded more along the following: When someone kills a large number of children using a military weapon, do you rush to the Internet to defend the rights of people to own that weapon?
  10. Just Another High School Shooting

    FWIW, I don't subscribe to Sloop's definition of gun nutter. Primarily because MBL is a gun nutter and doesn't own any guns. He's simply a wannabe from Queensland, Australia with a hard-on for attacking Muslims and a fetish for firearms (or is that the other way around). To me, a gun nutter is someone who's reasoning precludes any acceptance that licensing, registration, and restrictions on the ownership firearms decrease homicide and, in particular, mass murder of the random & target kind. The entire of the first world serves as evidence for this, with the USA serving as proof of the negative and places like Canada & Australia the positive. I also consider those that consider protected access to a singular form of tool to be a right morally equal to free speech, privacy, and due process to be nutters. Wouldn't matter to me if that tool is hammers, hot rods, or firearms. Edit: I could easily go with the definition posted by a mother from the school that got shot up When someone kills a large number of children using a military weapon, do you rush to the Internet to defend the rights of the weapon? When someone kills a large number of children using a military weapon, is your first thought that you hope there will be evidence of mental illness? (credit given if its your second thought with your first thought being please let is be a Muslim) When someone kills a large number of children using a military weapon, do you run out to buy more military weapons? When someone kills a large number of children using a military weapon, are you pre-armed with poorly sourced, easily debunked alternative facts in defense of your arsenal? When someone kills a large number of children using a military weapon, do you spend time correcting the terminology people use in describing the weapon? When someone kills a large number of children using a military weapon, do you like to bring up how the long dead founding fathers support your views? (Do you object to a standing army as strenuously as they would? Can you name any of them?)
  11. Still don't believe it.

    @B.J. Porter & @d'ranger - does this work? I decided this should be private - Sailing Anarchy Forums.pdf Edit: Tested from an incognito window.... nope. Apparently we cannot attach PDF files for forum reading anymore? Best I can do at short notice below. Sure there are better hosting options but it's Monday morning, so time poor and all that. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/02/18/happyjacksshame/
  12. Drip Drip Drip

    Whataboutism, deflection, minimisation, justification, and a few outright falsehoods they think will not get called on are all tools for a shyster defending a client in court. They are also considered count as, and tend to be just as ineffective as, a defence in the forums.
  13. US v Microsoft

    No. The US government should levy increasing penalties against Microsoft until they comply with the law of the nation in which they are based. As you point out, they can get the data "with a click". There is no need for sending in officers to foreign soil for this. Who said anything about enforcing laws abroad. Microsoft is in the US under US jurisdiction and has the capability in the US of complying with US court orders. The enforcement of US law would occur locally for local breaches of the law. Both sides are "right", but only one side has an argument "relevant" to whether Microsoft should comply with US law.
  14. Answer to the thread title: No. Clinton did not hire Steele. Clinton did not talk to Steele. Clinton did not direct Steele to release information. No amount of pseudo-legalistic waffle is going to change that. Happy Jack’s desperation is palpable.