RE: 128 rules of slavery?

RE: 128 rules of slavery? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

bandit25 -> RE: 128 rules of slavery? (6/18/2006 4:35:10 AM)
As I said, Brosco, I had only assumed that...no, I didn't look at the original post. Even with the caveat understood, everyone is free to comment any way they see fit. Although this is a stretch and I freely acknowledge that, look at book reviewers. They comment all the time on the author's work. Well, that is their job after all...lol. Again, I think people are commenting more on the choice of the title...or perhaps, that the title makes it sound as though these, and only these, are the rules that slaves must follow. Just my opinion.

Brosco -> RE: 128 rules of slavery? (6/18/2006 4:41:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bandit25 As I said, Brosco, I had only assumed that...no, I didn't look at the original post. Even with the caveat understood, everyone is free to comment any way they see fit. Although this is a stretch and I freely acknowledge that, look at book reviewers. They comment all the time on the author's work. Well, that is their job after all...lol. Again, I think people are commenting more on the choice of the title...or perhaps, that the title makes it sound as though these, and only these, are the rules that slaves must follow. Just my opinion. Then perhaps you should step back a couple of posts and comment on my opinion of it, instead of commenting on my opinion about the way another addressed the topic. Brosco

bandit25 -> RE: 128 rules of slavery? (6/18/2006 4:52:50 AM)
Perhaps, however, what struck me was how negative your post (the one I commented on) was. Which is why I commented on it rather than on the earlier one...that's all. I'm not trying to get into a pissing match with you. I was simply expressing my opinion that I don't think all the posts should be taken seriously.

Brosco -> RE: 128 rules of slavery? (6/18/2006 5:03:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bandit25 Perhaps, however, what struck me was how negative your post (the one I commented on) was. Which is why I commented on it rather than on the earlier one...that's all. rofllll he said because she said because I said because... damn.. i lost my train of thought :) Instead of seeing the thread as a whole, you posted on one comment - fair enough... then pehaps at least look at the very negative post I was responding to for a bit more of an idea. One post taken completely out of context can easily be twisted to mean what you want. If ya wanna fight with me.. go ahead, but have something of substance to attack and to attack with. Until then... peace Brosco

bandit25 -> RE: 128 rules of slavery? (6/18/2006 5:10:19 AM)
Yup...I had to keep going back...it was getting into a he said/she said thingy. Nah, I don't want to fight (which is why I edited my last post). Yes, I did see that some of the posts were, well, maybe not positive and the one you responded to did admit that it was dripping with sarcasm. I truly wasn't trying to twist what you said. As far as substance to attack? Ok, maybe not...but substance to attack with? Well, I think I have to disagee there. It's the net. People feel free to say whatever they want, whenever they want. Anyone posting should understand that...and I mean anyone anywhere.

twicehappy -> RE: 128 rules of slavery? (6/18/2006 5:14:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brosco This was a different situation. A person put up a website with his serious opinion. It is brought here for serious discussion. Brosco, hate to do this to you because sometimes you do get hit a little hard on these boards but it was not meant to be totally serious though some serious commentary was expected. The opening line was; "I just ran across this looking for something else online and my only thought was"WACKO" so i had to come back and share, read these 128 rules for a slave and let's hear the commentary please. Some of them(a few) are actually well thought out, but some of them......... "

stef -> RE: 128 rules of slavery? (6/18/2006 11:26:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brosco If you actually look at the original site you will find it was very clearly marked as copyright and that reproduction of even single parts were prohibited. The parts posted here were a violation. The only allowed copies were for personal use. You can post limited excerpts under Fair Use for purposes of comment or criticism, and with the exception of the original poster, that's what people are doing here. The author's claim that not even single parts of his work can be reproduced without his permission is baseless and unenforceable as long as fair use applies. He might as well have said 'only redheads with blue eyes may tapdance in June,' it's equally meaningless and equally unenforceable. ~stef

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

2.734375E-02