.
.
Just would like to understand the rules.
Is it really OK to refer to someone as a Kid Sniffer which is clearly an attempt to paint someone with a pedophilia brush.
Can we use the same brush to paint someone that likes to walk into dressing rooms where they know there will be naked and semi-naked teenagers?
Does the application apply both ways?
.
.
.
.WW
It’s another call-out thread is why. 
Nope, didn’t call you out at all.
I asked the Mod’s if there were/are standards regarding implications of pedophilia.
If there are,m then if you are one trying to make that implication then that would be addressed in the future if there are standards to be applied (such as false serious claims, trolling, etc.) if they say there are no standards pertaining to that subject then there will be no need an other future actions.
.
.
.
.WW
Yes it is!
Libs made these rules. Libs have decided that it is okay to imply that someone is a racists, Nazi, fascist, white supremacist, homophobe, misogynist. You are automatically presumed to be guilty of any hateful thing that the libs say you are. So yes, we can assume that Joe is a pedophile.
The last time y’all were too hesitant to say my name, I recall being told that if/when the Kid Sniffer becomes the provided candidate for libs, the mods and I will revisit what is and is not allowed.
Libs sound worried again now that he’s looking to have a chance at winning the primary. I know why… lol
.
.
I don’t plan on responding to posts as this is a question to the Mod’s and hopefully they will provide such guidance on implications pf pedophilia.
If not and they just close the thread, we’ll I guess that is an answer.
.
.
.
.WW
Are you opposed to responding to this?
Libs made these rules. Libs have decided that it is okay to imply that someone is a racists, Nazi, fascist, white supremacist, homophobe, misogynist. You are automatically presumed to be guilty of any hateful thing that the libs say you are. So yes, we can assume that Joe is a pedophile.
He should stop joking about it himself, then.
