boulderkid303 Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Rayver when you post the video, put a side link to this topic, and then people will understand why you did not mention it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushrat Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 QUOTE (chromecarz00 @ Dec 11 2007, 10:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>For Rayver's review thread hookah...would it be a problem if he reffered to it as the "unspeakable" vendor? i know that sounds funny but its not. that way new people aren't tricked into going there and giving him business from a place where hes banned and the old veterans can go if they want and not go if they want. either way nobody gets business and people know where its from.anyone?Give it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushrat Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 QUOTE (gaia.plateau @ Dec 11 2007, 11:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Am I the only one that thinks making "you know who" a taboo to speak about will only incite and encourage interest in his company, thusly supporting it?Only if you people keep hammering away at somthing that has actually already been done.As I'd said before, this isn't actually open to discussion. Was merely supplying, at users request, the reasoning behind the decision.I think the point has been made, the reasons have been given, and it's time to get back to business. Like people who continue to post non-reviews in review sections after only about 30 people have been suspended for the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushrat Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 QUOTE (mushrat @ Dec 11 2007, 12:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>QUOTE (gaia.plateau @ Dec 11 2007, 11:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Am I the only one that thinks making "you know who" a taboo to speak about will only incite and encourage interest in his company, thusly supporting it?Only if you people keep hammering away at somthing that has actually already been done.As I'd said before, this isn't actually open to discussion. Was merely supplying, at users request, the reasoning behind the decision.I think the point has been made, the reasons have been given, and it's time to get back to business. Like people who continue to post non-reviews in review sections after only about 30 people have been suspended for the same thing.Update: we found the porn poster, they jumped on a members computer when they weren't looking. All is cool now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts