Also, you shouldn't have your comments set to approve only if you're going to complain about freedom of comment/speech on youtube fyi. >_< 1:35 (for reference.)
@Vilemk0 - The explanation for this is already provided and this particular video is actually not a bad example, since Craven has attempted to spam it several times using sock-puppets. The approval process is used to ensure that discussions stay on topic. Craven's is to squelch any opposition to his position - any at all. Those are two different standards.
@nascentatheist I understand, I was simply pointing out how others might see this conflicting action. Even if you do explain it, it's still youtube comments. You can always scan through and remove comments that are vulgar and off subject.
@Vilemk0 - Sure, but I don't really want to spend time cleaning out spam. I don't worry too much about how it's viewed by others. Even if there's a question, if I answer it and it's all good with that other person, it's cool. If not, that's cool, too. ;)
Craven is a serious idiot. I just looked at one of his presumed "rebuttals" to Thunderf00t, in which he takes T-f00t to task for his criticism of VenomFangX's claims about the formation of the Grand Canyon. He accuses T-f00t of nit-picking, based on his own rather peculiar interpretation of the comments of both T-f00t and Shawn. I'll be exposing him on that score, next.
@ChuckyJesus666 - Just FYI, this comment duped for some reason, so I removed the dupe. ;) And I do understand what you're saying. As a teacher, I work on that very thing.
@ChuckyJesus666 - I was willing to give the guy a chance. But after viewing about half a dozen videos and then getting the response that I did, well, it's clear that he's just another ignorant, arrogant, cowardly religionist.
Also, you shouldn't have your comments set to approve only if you're going to complain about freedom of comment/speech on youtube fyi. >_< 1:35 (for reference.)
Vilemk0 1 year ago
@Vilemk0 - The explanation for this is already provided and this particular video is actually not a bad example, since Craven has attempted to spam it several times using sock-puppets. The approval process is used to ensure that discussions stay on topic. Craven's is to squelch any opposition to his position - any at all. Those are two different standards.
nascentatheist 1 year ago
@nascentatheist I understand, I was simply pointing out how others might see this conflicting action. Even if you do explain it, it's still youtube comments. You can always scan through and remove comments that are vulgar and off subject.
Vilemk0 1 year ago
@Vilemk0 - Sure, but I don't really want to spend time cleaning out spam. I don't worry too much about how it's viewed by others. Even if there's a question, if I answer it and it's all good with that other person, it's cool. If not, that's cool, too. ;)
nascentatheist 1 year ago
@nascentatheist I understand.
Vilemk0 1 year ago
Craven is a serious idiot. I just looked at one of his presumed "rebuttals" to Thunderf00t, in which he takes T-f00t to task for his criticism of VenomFangX's claims about the formation of the Grand Canyon. He accuses T-f00t of nit-picking, based on his own rather peculiar interpretation of the comments of both T-f00t and Shawn. I'll be exposing him on that score, next.
nascentatheist 1 year ago
@nascentatheist Well, somebody needs to keep them honest....wait....they're not honest to start with!
ChuckyJesus666 1 year ago
@ChuckyJesus666 - Just FYI, this comment duped for some reason, so I removed the dupe. ;) And I do understand what you're saying. As a teacher, I work on that very thing.
nascentatheist 1 year ago
Well, regarding DaMagiCraven's behavior -- what do you expect from a pig, but a grunt?
ChuckyJesus666 1 year ago
@ChuckyJesus666 - I was willing to give the guy a chance. But after viewing about half a dozen videos and then getting the response that I did, well, it's clear that he's just another ignorant, arrogant, cowardly religionist.
nascentatheist 1 year ago