Smitty's last post was Feb 25th, should we put his face on a milk carton?

[StCapps]

I let this go long ago,

People who let things go long ago, don't go on-and-on-and-on-and-on-and-on about how they are over it. You can tell they are over it when they STFU about "it."

Ever hear the phrase, "me thinks thou dost protest too much?"

I am simply correcting the record. I'm not the one continuing to impose punishments on certain users a year later. Just because I don't want to post on a leash, that doesn't mean I'm not over it, it simply means that Hash isn't over it, hence the leash. If Hash was really over it, there would be no leash, he would just live and let live, no leashes required.

If he wants to announce publicly, that no one posts on a leash, and everyone posts under the same rules, finally after all this time, I am perfectly willing to accept his change of heart. But so far, it's crickets, just as I predicted.

See Hash said before that there were no rules, and it's free speech zone, in public statements repeatedly, and then he decides to make up rules on the fly, tell no one about them, and then only punished certain people for breaking them, while letting others he liked get off scott-free for the same "offences".

So you know, taking Hash's word for it this time, if he ever gets around to making a public statement, is obviously risky, but I'll throw up one last hail mary in this thread.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, sayonara MHF. The ball is in Hash's court, and so far, all I hear is crickets on his end, which is as predicted.

[Montegriffo]

I'd forgotten how much Capps likes to repeat himself over and over again.
Anyway, welcome back (to one thread at least).

[SuburbanFarmer]

I'd forgotten how much Capps likes to repeat himself over and over again.
Anyway, welcome back (to one thread at least).

It’s all coming back to me now

[Kath]

I am simply correcting the record. I'm not the one continuing to impose punishments on certain users a year later. Just because I don't want to post on a leash, that doesn't mean I'm not over it, it simply means that Hash isn't over it, hence the leash. If Hash was really over it, there would be no leash, he would just live and let live, no leashes required.

Dear ole' Occam says you're full of shit. Take a screenshot of the email/PM where he says he has a special, secret-set of rules on MHF for you and if you violate one of these super-secret rules, you're going to be banned.

Otherwise, it didn't happen.

Or, keep competing with DSL for biggest forum drama queen.

[StCapps]

I am simply correcting the record. I'm not the one continuing to impose punishments on certain users a year later. Just because I don't want to post on a leash, that doesn't mean I'm not over it, it simply means that Hash isn't over it, hence the leash. If Hash was really over it, there would be no leash, he would just live and let live, no leashes required.

Dear ole' Occam says you're full of shit. Take a screenshot of the email/PM where he says he has a special, secret-set of rules on MHF for you and if you violate one of these super-secret rules, you're going to be banned.

Otherwise, it didn't happen.

Or, keep competing with DSL for biggest forum drama queen.

Those emails were sent in private, if Hash gives me permission to post them, I will. Otherwise, I will respect his right to privacy, it's not for me to disclose at this juncture, the best I can do is paraphrase. If you send me a PM, I will not show anyone your PM, unless you give me permission to do so, I'm cool like that, I might paraphrase it, but I'm not going to go copying and pasting your PMs to any other users, including Smitty.

If I fail to convince you because you haven't seen the rules he sent me in private, than you can choose to think that I am liar, see if I give shit. Like I said, simply correcting the record.

[Kath]

Like I said, simply correcting the record.

I'll take Hash's word over yours, unless proven otherwise.

[StCapps]

Like I said, simply correcting the record.

I'll take Hash's word over yours, unless proven otherwise.

Well aware, and don't care. Believe who you want to believe, that is your prerogative. If you want to put misplaced trust in Martin Hash, I for one cannot, and will not, stop you. I am simply providing my version of what happened, take it or leave it.

Also, should note, that Hash is counting on that reaction, hence why he sent me the rules in private and made no public declaration. He's afraid people will believe me about the leash, so he takes advantage of the fact that I'm not going to be an asshole and post his PMs or emails for all to see, without his permission, and just plays innocent.

[SuburbanFarmer]

‘I can’t show you the emails that prove he’s guilty, until he says it’s ok’.

Sounds familiar, Comey.

[Montegriffo]

I'm waiting for Wikileaks to publish the missing emails.

[StCapps]

‘I can’t show you the emails that prove he’s guilty, until he says it’s ok’.

Sounds familiar, Comey.

Hell if you just go back and read the hockey talk war threads, the evidence is all there anyway, no need for private emails to show Martin Hash said there was no rules, free speech and all that shit, but then I end up getting banned for calling out his bullshit in a thread of his, after the war had already ended. Clearly he made up rules on the fly and imposed them on me, despite Smitty doing the same thing and not getting banned for it.

In private, when I asked Hash about that double standard, his response was, I like Smitty. I shit you not.