The difference between SSL and SSC?

**Daquan13** · 17th October 2008, 03:21

Originally Posted by Jehosaphat

Take care not to get banned...that mod warned me to avoid taliking about SSP and SSC.

Can't understand why you faced so many problems there, TalB and Daquan13. I've had rows with a few forumers, but never have I been subjected to such derision.

Just one more thing and I'll stop;

The previous posts in this thread are pretty much self-expanitory.

Because they just didn't like us. That part didn't bother me. They were always stereotyping me and poking fun at everything I did or said to the point where I just hated them with a pure passion!!!

I blew up at them, started blasting them out on the forum and threatened to report their posts. Jasoncraphouse didn't like that and suspended me.

When I told him that I decided that I refused to consider coming back and why, he banned me from the forum. He wanted me to come back to him grubbling and crawling on my knees and just beg for his forgiveness to be reinstated, but if one of those shit stains complained about me once, I'd be banned. I was having none of it. I basically told him what he can do with that forum.

It's the stuff that happened later and that had escelatated, to the point where I just did not like that forum any more. Hence why I chose not to go back. Enough was enough.

**TalB** · 18th October 2008, 01:26

Originally Posted by Jehosaphat

Take care not to get banned...that mod warned me to avoid taliking about SSP and SSC.

Can't understand why you faced so many problems there, TalB and Daquan13. I've had rows with a few forumers, but never have I been subjected to such derision.

I have already made my statement on this a while ago. It's not that I have anything against others that want to disagree with me, it was those who have actually attacked for taking a different side from them. It was more like they were like fanatics and extermists rather than just some simple bandwagoner and yesmen in that they were looking for those who weren't on their side and acted as if they were pointing a gun at me to either agree with me or die. Some of them didn't like it when I used facts to disproove them on their statements. Most of them had responded with either some blanket statement that was already mentioned by either the politicians or developers, while others just got very defensive or tried to dodge the question. They felt as if my questions on their attitude was a humilation and hurting their acts of fanaticisim on projects, so they demanded a ban all b/c they couldn't answer it as quickly as I could. Some of them were against bringing up some projects or other issues up for a debate, b/c they were afraid that they would have nothing to rebuttle with other than what they started with. As for the statement on Joe the Plumber, I am not for the status quo of taxaition based on income, which he is. I had actually heard what he mentioned, and he claims that the progressive tax motives are a punishment to who he claims are climbing up the social ladder, which I don't believe. I am tired of the rich getting away with so many tax breaks making those with a lower income pay more. Therefore, your reference of using that on me is wrong on all levels.

**Infinito** · 12th November 2008, 06:54

I've heard that there is a new forum called skyscraper archive. I heard that it is new. I joined it and it seems pretty cool. Thought I might just say it.
But, hey, come join!

**l'eau** · 12th November 2008, 13:27

let me guess.it's your own site

**TalB** · 26th November 2008, 02:36

Honestly, I see those over at SSP and SSC as being fanatics when it comes to projects. Also, they don't seem to like those such as myself who can disproove their statements with actual facts where they are just throwing talking points that I can easily refute. These are people who believe that it's the weapon that makes them stronger when in fact that isn't always true. Eventually, they will come to a point where even their own weapons can't save them. The truth is that it's not the weapons that makes the person stronger, it's the one who uses them. An example of someone who had to learn it the hard way was King Phillip II, who was the king of Spain, when having the Spanish Armada against England's Queen Elizabeth I in 1588. Before then, Spain was said to have the most powerfull navy at the time especially when they have sailed to numerous corners of the globe in conquering lands. Many of thought that trying to fight the armada was asking for a tombstone b/c of how powerfull they were. However, the fleet was not prepared for the English Channel, and their ships were too big for a body of water with such a low depth for them. Although the English fleet had smaller ships, it was easier to get by and with the cannon, they didn't even have to board the enemy fleet but just fire from their own. Some of those who helped fight for England in that battle included explorers such as Sir Walter Raleigh and Sir Franciss Drake managing the fleets. As Elizabeth walked out on the cliffs of Dover, she saw the armada on fire in the humiliating defeat on Spain. It showed that even the greatest had their demise. How it relates to my point is that some just can't seem to take it when someone can find a way to poke holes in their statements by finding facts and other stats that disproove theirs' when they don't even come up with anything to back them except for repititions. Also, the reference of the Spanish Armada is to show that even the greatest can just be human at sometimes in that nobody is invincible and there will always be a clink somewhere in that armor.