Thanks for sending the original post, (you know who you are).
The following opinion you all may file in the "for what it's worth" bin...
As I said to my friend in email, Bleep's post was definitely in [u]extremely[/b] poor taste. Worthy of deletion? Iiiiiiiii-dunno. A tough call. For a sarcastic observation/commentary about Bill's efforts (and the entire silentlambs agenda) it was OUT THERE... a stretch, to say the least.
I know there are former abuse victims that lurk/post here. Offending them (or anyone) shouldn't be one of the goals of posting, but that goal should be balanced with a need for people to extend to others the right to express themselves.
Now, I don't know Bleep. WAIT A MINUTE!!... that didn't come out right!
What I mean is, I don't know the poster that posts as Bleep. *whew!* He's a watchtower apologist on the level of You Know, right? Then one simply must take whatever Bleep says with a grain of salt.
'Course, deleting his post works, too. All I know is that if it had been me and I was a mod, I wouldn't have done anything. Maybe it's a good thing that I'm not a mod, eh?
===========
>> What Bleep wrote was descriptive pornography meant to shock and insult.
Alchemist,
I'm glad I read it myself since now I can say that my viewpoint is different from yours. I saw descriptive wording but nothing I'd liken to pornography.
And maybe I'm giving him a little too much credit (since I don't normally read Bleep ), but I don't think his intent was to shock or insult. I think he was making a statement about Bill and the fact that Bill has been on TV so much lately. I could be wrong, tho.