General Discussion

stone space

(6,498 posts)

38. Personal insults aside, the phrase "what SOF was promoting in the 80's"...

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 10:33 AM

Feb 2016

...does not even appear in the OP.

LOL, you really are that dense.
It's right there in your thread, try actually reading what you cut and paste

That's purely your own construction, and a construction which so far you seem quite unwilling to explain, despite the fact that you used the phrase as your reason for voting "yes".

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A question on acceptable sources at DU. Is this source acceptable? [View all] stone space Feb 2016 OP

Odd reading habits you have there... ileus Feb 2016 #1

I don't understand. stone space Feb 2016 #2

Of course you don't, GGJohn Feb 2016 #12

Good thing that you arived here to explain it, then. Please proceed. stone space Feb 2016 #15

Why? GGJohn Feb 2016 #17

So you don't understand, either, huh? stone space Feb 2016 #19

Except I do understand what was said, GGJohn Feb 2016 #20

It depends MohRokTah Feb 2016 #3

This is the use being made at the link. stone space Feb 2016 #4

Had I been on the jury, I would have voted to hide. MohRokTah Feb 2016 #6

Dear God, why? ON EDIT: Never mind, it's the Gungeon. I'm not surprised. Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2016 #5

Your OP was juried, 3-4 Mosby Feb 2016 #7

So when the alert and threadjack in the gungeon failed... Lizzie Poppet Feb 2016 #8

Feel free to make yourself the very first "yes" vote. stone space Feb 2016 #10

I just did pintobean Feb 2016 #11

Here's a link to the OP in question. stone space Feb 2016 #13

I'm not concerned pintobean Feb 2016 #16

Oh, so it's merely asking the question that has you so concerned. stone space Feb 2016 #21

This thread is nothing more than flamebait, GGJohn Feb 2016 #23

It's a simple question on appropriate sources for DU. stone space Feb 2016 #29

I'm not upset, GGJohn Feb 2016 #34

Again, amused. pintobean Feb 2016 #30

How is "the gun forum" different from other forums here on DU? stone space Feb 2016 #36

Your freakout was your alert and this thread. eom. GGJohn Feb 2016 #18

Everything is acceptable on DU these days. kwassa Feb 2016 #9

I voted yes, GGJohn Feb 2016 #14

What exactly was Soldier of Fortune promoting in the 1980s? stone space Feb 2016 #22

Are you that dense? GGJohn Feb 2016 #24

You specifically cited it as your reason for voting "yes". stone space Feb 2016 #25

Again, as usual, you're wrong. GGJohn Feb 2016 #27

This is the second time that you have referred to "what SOF was promoting in the 80's". stone space Feb 2016 #33

LOL, you really are that dense. GGJohn Feb 2016 #35

Personal insults aside, the phrase "what SOF was promoting in the 80's"... stone space Feb 2016 #38

If you haven't figured it out by now, GGJohn Feb 2016 #41

Aparently, you haven't figured it out, either. stone space Feb 2016 #42

Ok, you go with that. GGJohn Feb 2016 #43

You've given me no other choice. stone space Feb 2016 #46

Soldier of Fortune is a racist rag. EOM Hoyt Feb 2016 #31

Which has nothing to do with the link he cited. GGJohn Feb 2016 #32

Soldier of Fortune definitely is. I suppose The Turner Diaries is also acceptable to most gunners. Hoyt Feb 2016 #39

Thank you Hoyt, GGJohn Feb 2016 #40

How so? What exactly is your point? stone space Feb 2016 #47

I can't figure out if you're really this dense, or are just playing games? GGJohn Feb 2016 #50

OK, to sum your position up: it's OK to link to professional killers about guns muriel_volestrangler Feb 2016 #55

It has everything to do with the question of acceptable sources on DU. stone space Feb 2016 #45

Well, considering that RT, Sputnik News, GGJohn Feb 2016 #51

I wouldn't use it... SidDithers Feb 2016 #26

I'm sure it is among racist gun fanciers. Hoyt Feb 2016 #28

I think all sources should be accepted bigwillq Feb 2016 #37

If true and factual why not? Chuuku Davis Feb 2016 #54

Eeewwwww.... No. hunter Feb 2016 #44

It's been a bit since you posted and I was wondering... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #48

I don't know about sources sarisataka Feb 2016 #49

2 well earned hides and a time out to boot. GGJohn Feb 2016 #52

Post removed Post removed Feb 2016 #57

Wow, as usual, right over your head "professor". GGJohn Feb 2016 #58

Soldier of Fortune USED to be a lot of fun to read jmowreader Feb 2016 #53

The Dark Side of "Soldier of Fortune" Magazine: Contract Killers and Mercenaries for Hire SecularMotion Feb 2016 #56

Under very few exceptions would I find that to be acceptable. NCTraveler Feb 2016 #59

See you in April pintobean Feb 2016 #60

Well, he did last a couple of days longer than I thought he would. GGJohn Feb 2016 #61