57 votes

Daily Paul House Rules and Posting Guidelines

Below are the long form posting guidelines for the Daily Paul. Please review them and add any comments below. Here is a brief summary:

Purpose

  1. To keep the ideas and message of Peace, Sound Money and Liberty alive through discussion and practice.
  2. To serve as an open forum for the honest discussion of ideas and the search for truth.
  3. To share, practice and spread these ideas as far as possible in the world we live in. This site will thus remain in existence as long as there is a need for it, and as long as there are supporters willing to help keep it going.

Please note that this website is my private property. Participating here is a privilege, not a right, a difference fundamental to understanding the message of freedom. Though this site does not officially represent Dr. Paul, all here shall strive to follow the gentlemanly example he sets.

Rules

  1. No profane, disrespectful or divisive language
  2. Spell check and grammar check your work before posting, and refrain from excessive use of CAPITAL LETTERS
  3. Do not post the ENTIRE text of articles from other sites. This is copyright infringement, and could get you, me, and this site in trouble. (In fact, it already has!) Feel free to post a short intro, and then a link to the original article. Understanding fair use would be wise, also.
  4. Do not post racist, sexist, pornographic or otherwise obscene materials
  5. Do not engage in flame wars, personal attacks on other members, incite or encourage violence, post spam or advertisements.
  6. Do not bump your own thread to keep it on the front page, or post the same non-related comment on multiple threads to promote your website or event
  7. No Assholes
  8. If you have an idea, then you do it, not Michael Nystrom, not Ron Paul. You. Learn how and do it.
  9. Any powers not herein delegated are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People.

"Failure to follow these rules can result in banishment from the community."

-----------

LONG FORM Posting Guidelines

I set up this website/blog/forum in January 2007 as a place for Ron Paul supporters to communicate with each other during Ron Paul's 2008 presidential bid. That election ended, but the passionate community of supporters who believe in freedom, liberty, peace, and justice remained as strong as ever. No other candidate has as loyal and passionate a following as Dr. Paul has developed.

The ongoing purpose of this site has therefore become 1) to keep the ideas and message espoused by Dr. Paul alive, 2) to serve as an open forum for the honest discussion of ideas and the search for truth, and 3) to share, practice and spread these ideas as far and wide as possible in the world we live in. This site will thus remain in existence as long as there is a need for it, and as long as there are supporters willing to help keep it going.

This website is my private property. Participating here is a privilege, not a right. Understanding the difference between these concepts is fundamental to understanding the message of freedom and liberty.

The Daily Paul welcomes freedom lovers and students of Liberty everywhere! Anyone is initially granted the privilege (but not the right) to read and post to this site.

In order to post to this site, first you must become a member. All comers are welcome! Members must abide by a few simple rules:


1) Even though this site is not in any official way affiliated with Dr. Paul or any of his multiple organizations, by participating in this site you are still representing Dr. Paul in the eyes of the public.

Dr. Paul is a compassionate, humble, honest, fair and kindhearted human. Follow Dr. Paul’s lead. For a short introduction to what Dr. Paul is like, read this little article. This site is a place to practice creating the kind of world you want live in with your words. On this site, please don’t use profanity or other disrespectful or divisive language.


2) ALWAYS spell check and grammar check your work before posting. The new Firefox has a built in spell checker. Misspelled words get a red underline, and if you right click on them, you get some options from a built-in dictionary.


3) Do not post the text of entire articles from other sites. This is copyright infringement, and could get you, me, and this site into legal hot water! (In fact, it already has!) Feel free to post a brief commentary, and then a link to the original article.

YouTube videos and images cannot be embedded in the forum for copyright and security reasons. Feel free to link to them. Just copy and paste the address, and it will turn into a link automatically.

We are here to support each other, to help each other grow, examine our assumptions, and be more powerful advocates for Liberty in the outside world. We want to be welcoming to new comers to the site. Be the change you want to see in the world. In your world, it all begins with you.

In order for this website to continue functioning, members must agree to play by the rules and respect the community. Anyone who does not respect the community or the guidelines above is not welcome here. Any of the following are grounds to have your post/comment deleted without notice.

Engaging in flame wars or personal attacks on other members, racist or sexist remarks, posting obscene materials, inciting or encouraging violent or illegal acts, posting spam, bumping your own thread to keep it on the front page, posting the same non-related comment on multiple threads to promote your website or event (This is considered spam. The forums are a place for discussion, not advertising), blatant advertising and/or EXCESSIVE USE OF CAPITAL LETTERS is prohibited. If you cannot consistently spell or check your grammar, you may also be banned.

Repeated offenses will result in the termination of your account. As I stated at the beginning, participation in this site is a privilege, not a right. Ultimately, anything that I, as owner and Executive of the Daily Paul, decide reflects poorly on Dr. Paul and/or sullies the good and peaceful name of Ron Paul, the Daily Paul or said supporters is not welcome here. At the end of the day, the Daily Paul is my house. I set it up to honor, respect and promote Ron Paul and the principles of freedom and Liberty. Play fair and you're welcome to stay. Abuse what is offered and you will be banished.

Thank you for your understanding and welcome aboard a magical journey!

Michael Nystrom
Founder & Editor
www.dailypaul.com




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Just would like to point out

Just would like to point out that Emperor Mathew has repeatedly broke rule # 7. Just wondering how many times someone can break this rule before they are sent to exile. Thanks!

Dear Michael, here is an amazing example

of what cognitive infiltration looks like, from whatever source, for whatever reason.

http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/3282640

Is it false that free speech has the purpose of assuring information vital to survival is understood and shared? If it is, then I'm a troll. If its not, we have exposed what I describe as an infiltrator.

Again, I qualify that "for whatever reason", in the interests of developing citizens capacity to know and define constitutional intent through a logical capacity to filter out the chafe.

What is the value of knowing another human being has no agenda and really does stand completely for restoration of constitutional government?

Critical thinking is what created this viewpoint. The unaccountable crowds attempting to defeat solid argument for years demonstrated the infiltration because their tactics became obvious in their repetition. I then put myself in the shoes of those directing an army of techno wen forum infiltrators.

A few simple rules became obvious. I've seen lags in assimilation of position over a day or 2 that indicates the infiltrator I'm exchanging with makes a consultation, which then directs their position. Others are called in to provide flanking distractions and fill pages with contrary nonsense.
After that I noticed that it was very easy to predict exactly what the infiltrator would never agree to, support, admit etc. Prolonged questioning got me banned from complicit boards when I did this on very controversial issues.

Therein is the logic of getting down to the root definition of the purpose of free speech as a tool for unity. Any American that loves the constitution, understands its role in protecting us, will have no problem accepting that free speech has the purpose of assuring that information needed for survival is shared and understood. They may look at you like, "Of course, how could anyone think otherwise", but they will agree.

Compare that to the "patriots" in the forum arguing against Article V, working to mislead and make Americans afraid of their constitution, using it, and working to confound or confuse fundamental human agreement relating to communication and survival.

Thank you!

Chris

THX for the place to demo this fact, show people what it looks like and what critical thinking can do relating to motivational apprehension.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

Thank you MN and DP

for putting up with me, I'm even a pain-in-the-butt to myself at times.

Thanks for giving us a second home.

Americans Disabled From Knowing/Using Their Constitution-TEST

Dear Michael Nystrom,

I am doing something different at your forum.  Thank you BTW!  It is indeed one of the best and fairest I've seen, and I have a huge amount of experience on web forums in the last 15 years.

I am wondering if there was any thought to the rules; or if there is openness to securing constitutional intent needed to restore constitutional government; against the social effect on cognition by false groups of people pretending to be sincere Americans?

There is a very serious problem with cognitive infiltration all over the web in forums.  I'm sure you know of the Cass Sunstein advisement to The current administration relating to the infiltration of social activist groups.  

http://open.salon.com/blog/dennis_loo/2010/01/20/cognitive_i...

Infiltration here is far less here than web forums owned by infiltration, and a large percentage are.  It is easy to see when the site admin takes the side of the infiltrating opposition in the same style of posting. I've seen that far too much. Here it is much more subtle and has more trappings of what is promoted as "normal political view".

America's future is at stake, and I find there is no where to defend it effectively on the web.  This forum probably represents the best that can be found for constitutional defense discussion. I'm wondering if "restoration of constitutional government" is unconditional as a dedication?

There are infiltrators, and not just a few. The problem is, no one really knows who they are and what their modus operandi is.  I've found maybe 50% of active posters are not what they appear to be in most forums with significant traffic. What I've developed is a absolutely logical, lawful, common sense way to filter out the infiltrators AND, form unity in sincere Americans who are here to try and understand what is needed to restore constitutional government.

If we are to ever restore constitutional government, we Americans who are working to see that done must agree on the purposes of the constitution as it carries a contract between us for a republican form of government. The principles of the republic are also constitutional intent which is what controls Article V.

First a comprehensive view of the informational environment we are all working in needs to be established for simplifying and making more universal language defining constitutional intent which can only be "of and for the people".

In summary, the factions in this struggle for America, that are against the Declaration of Independence and the 1787 Constitution that carries its intent, have, for over a century, utilized the most potent media tools available, to restructure western conceptual language use. Also, academia is manipulated along with the world of publishing.

All should know of the "Dumbing Down" documented by the Reese commission and Norman Dodd.

In addition there has been a dynamic effort since 1980 to teach, covertly, the use of cognitive distortions as acceptable linguistic tools for communication which is participated in as critical thinking, when it is not.  More than one generation is currently involved.

The below are used by cognitive therapists for evaluation and application of cognitive therapy. When a group uses these covertly with the intent to mislead within known political paradigms, a confusing, never ending discussion can be created which keeps useless information for restoration of constitutional government clogging the first page of the forum.

COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS

1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories. If things are less than perfect self is viewed as failure.

2. Over generalization: Single event is viewed as continuous failure.

3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.

4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.

5. Mind reading: One absolutely concludes that others are reacting positively or negatively without investigating reality.

6. Fortune Telling: Based on previous 5 distortions, anticipation of negative or positive outcome of situations is established

7. Catastrophizing: Exaggerated importance of self's failures and others successes.

8. Emotional reasoning: One feels as though emotional state IS reality of situation. ie.

9. "Should" statements: Self imposed rules about behavior creating guilt at self inability to adhere and anger at others in their inability to conform to self's rules.

10. Labeling: Instead of understanding errors over generalization is applied.

11. Personalization: Thinking that the actions or statements of others are a reaction to you.

12. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.

THE EFFECT:
Topics fundamental to restoration of constitutional intent that become a designated dumping ground by the infiltration for measured amounts of false agreement that confound the viewer with seemingly valid points of view which mean . . . nothing. Total unaccountability is the one thing which is consistent.

EXPOSING INFILTRATOR INTENT BY DEFAULT:
A vital question which exposes the true intent is never answered by an infiltrator IF the infiltrator will empower group unity by adhering to the constitutional principle of the request to accept the absolute. Simple logic is use with absolutes in order to make agreement which is natural law.
In this case, "If you are a real American, THEN you will have no problem with accepting that the purpose of free speech is to assure information needed for survival is shared and understood". In order to filter the infiltrators, which I contend is going to be required for real Americans to demonstrate to themselves, that they actually do agree on such a fundamental notion, AND are ready to proceed with constitutional restoration.

A MEDICAL FACT OF THE MIND:
Another consideration is medical and psychological related to the different hemispheres of the brain and their independent operations.  There is good evidence showing that with speaking and listening, the cognitive processes exclusive to the left brain are always utilized to some extent.

However, the is the distinct possibility by inference, that with reading and writing, MAY be done without cognitive processes evaluating the information.

What I propose is a method by moderators, initiated by complaint, wherein accountability to constitutional principles is assured by the owner of the private property because there is unconditional support for the effort to restore constitutional government. I believe a thread could be started to test or verify the real Americans here IF the principles and methods I'm suggesting are approved.

I can show, in many ways, that such an action is justified. The one remaining question is, "How badly do the real Americans here feel the need to break completely from the party politics and simplify things, out of that confused and manipulated box, into an environment which is simple enough for children to understand while also showing the way to enforce the law of the land within the extension of the right to "alter or abolish"."

A TEST OF THIS FORUM:

This is not an attack upon or complaint about this specific poster, it is an example of what I've seen for the last 11 years of intense internet forum activism, that you can link to in your own forum evidencing exactly what I say exists as a serious barrier to restoration of constitutional government.

This link is the last reply to a poster I can show exhibits behavior completely consistent with what is described above.

http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/3276732

One can read up in the thread to see elements in use of the cognitive distortions I describe. Note, in the OP of that thread there are links to 2 previous threads which were part of the design of this introduction of this way of purifying the effort to restore constitutional government. A fairly clean line of unaccountable criticism and rejection with no accountability is present in those as well. Albeit, many are sincere but so mislead and misinformed that their capacity to accept that which is new but useful and functional to restoration is seriously compromised. For now, their sincerity should be questioned in this anonymous online environment, in the unconditional interest of restoration of constitutional government. By accepting a very simple existent instinctual agreement, natural law, regarding our need to share information, anyone becomes verified as a sincere American seeking restoration of constitutional government.
NOTE: This is necessarily an escalating process as we approach the actual tools for restoring constitutional government. Those participating will really understand how we can restore constitutional government and we are not dependent on any entity for it. The agreement is us, working to enforce by creating unity, and when it is widespread, the entire political environment will begin a permanent change.

Vette

You still don't get it.
I do not have to be accountable to your obsessions. No one does. This IS The United States, after all.

Above Vette attempts to minimize the purpose of free speech to an individual obsession and does it with a sense of entitlement. He attempts to state that citizens have no duty to themselves through upholding the principals of the republic by knowing their purpose, what they are

Or reject something being forced down our throat.

Emotional reasoning is being used to attempt rejection of the purpose of free speech in an effort to minimize.

Do you really want us to go back to being a Republic? I do.

In the first quote above, he states no one has to be accountable to the principles of the republic. Implying it simply takes care of itself which the infiltrators of gov making it unconstitutional would love everyone to think. Vette then states "I do". If so, why is Vette not addressing the simple purpose of free speech? I contend that if he does not, he should loose all credibility relating to lawful, constitutional government. I do not how that would be done except those that do signify to one another their acceptance of the purpose of a prime constitutional right.

In a Constitutional Republic all we have to be accountable to is ourselves.

Again Vette tries to imply that we can all forget about the threat to the constitution, which defines the republic, after minimizing the principles by stating they are an individuals obsession. In a republic, we are first accountable to understanding and defending the republic, then we have one.

Vette will say I'm misinterpreting, but the evidence collectively is too dense here that Vette IS against the constitution. He also failed to answer the direct question of intention, "Why are you here?".

The forum is dedicated to the restoration of constitutional government. My position is completely constitutional in that unconditional effort and no one has been able to show it otherwise.

This is NOT rocket science.

Below Vette comments on free speech, but . . . can this be real without responding to what it's purpose is?

Ask a 2nd amendment rights activist if people who do not know the purpose of a gun should be using one.

Because free speech means we're supposed to be informed by (someone who is keeping track of these things?) and we never need worry again that the Government is lying to us. Because (your upgraded) free speech means the HAVE to tell us.

"and we never need worry" is "all or nothing thinking applied to minimize the point that we all have a responsibility to know and uphold the principles of the republic.

The real question, completely evaded, actually by everyone, YES, not one poster commented upon the notion of preparing for Article V, and what it does to the security and functionality of Article V. Clearly, simply in standing for the purity of the purpose of our rights prior to attempting a general Article V convention; preparatory amendment does to the political and psychological environment which an Article 5 convention is held in; something which assures constitutional intent under Lincolns description of 1859, "the people are the rightful masters of the congress and the courts". Nobody has addressed the totality of that, and it's implications are profound by constitutional standards.

Those three amendments in preparation, could on their own, eventually deal with all of the issues that people would like addressed, without a general Article V following preparation for it.

This is a request to start a discussion with you upon the subject of "How acceptable accountability to constitutional intent, serving restoration of constitutional government" might be created here at this forum.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

Advertisement question

In regards to rule #5, I have a liberty activism project that I would like the community to know about. I am the author of the new Ron Paul biography for youth,Meet Ron Paul. The activism project is the goal of putting a copy in every school library by having RP's supporters buy a copy and donate it to their local schools. This is the real message I want to get out.

It would be great if I could post on the Daily Paul and I have a post ready. However, it has a link to buy the book, a link to give a preview of the illustrations and a link to a Tom Woods blog about our project.

I do not want to break your rules and understand if you can not bend them for me. However, in the book I do mention the Daily Paul as a website people go to for news about Ron Paul and discussion of related issues...so in a way it is indirectly advertising this page.

Let me know if you would be OK with this post or if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Mat Blankenship

Get your Ron Paul biography for kids here... http://lionsofliberty.com/meetronpaul/

Spam

I recently posted "Rand Paul: One person can make a difference" in the DP Liberty Forum. My post related to Rand's filibuster so I commented on many other posts relating to his filibuster and included links to my related post. As a result, I received a few complaints from DP members who said I was violating the rules against spam. So I read the rules again and they define spam as "posting the same non-related comment on multiple threads to promote your website or event."

The comments that a few DP members labeled as spam didn't fit the DP definition of spam because my comments specifically related to the thread I was commenting on, as did the link to my post. So I'm going to continue linking to my posts that relate to the threads I'm commenting on. However, I want to retain my privilege to participate at DP, so please let me know if I'm misunderstanding the rules against spam. Thank you.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

Michael Nystrom's picture

You are misunderstanding - please don't do it

Thank you for addressing this.

I have seen the comments that you have mentioned here, and I also also thought they were spammy.

You put up a thread. Fine. That is what the DP is for.

To post another link to your thread in a comment that is essentially advertising your previous post is spam. Especially if it is done repeatedly, and in a premeditated manner, as your comments seem to have been done.

The comment I recall went something like,

"That is humorous. For another take on the topic, see my topic here..."

This is a form of advertising for your post. We don't need that here. Every post has an equal opportunity to be seen. Imagine if everyone starts advertising their posts in comments? It would render the site useless.

Sorry that wasn't in the original definition. I thought that would be obvious, though I haven't looked at the rules lately. I would prefer that common sense prevails, as I really don't want to have posting guidelines that are the length of the IRS tax code!

Thank you for asking.

All art is only done by the individual. The individual is all you ever have, and all schools only serve to classify their members as failures. E.H.

trying to figure out a way to reach you directly

This seems to be the best I can do.

I am about to super bump my latest post. Really there are just many comments that I wish to address/respond to. I dont normally like doing it but the subject is extremely interesting to me.

That being said, I would rather your explicit give me the go ahead than to just do it. If you would rather me not, please say the word, and I will comply in whatever way is most beneficial to the community.

Séamusín

Double post.

Please delete.

Séamusín

The comment you cite...

did not say much about the humorous thread pertaining Rand's filibuster, but my comment was related to Rand's filibuster as specified by the rules. The other comments you define as spam had considerably more text specifically relating to the thread. But you're the boss so thanks for clarifying that links to my posts are spam even if they're related to the threads.

I'm going to comply with your request but would like to make one more point. You said "imagine if everyone starts advertising their posts in their comments". Well, I've noticed that many members have comments with links in the footers, and these links are in every comment whether or not they're related to the thread. I don't want what others are doing defined as spam, but what's the difference between links in footers and what I'm doing?

I certainly don't believe a forum for libertarian ideas needs something like the IRS code to explain the rules, but there does seem to be a bias in the way you enforce the rules. Thanks for listening.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

Michael Nystrom's picture

I don't remember the exact comment

There were so many. I know there were a lot. I don't recall the exact content of the one.

If you want to put a link to your post in your signature line, that is fine. I don't have a problem with that.

All art is only done by the individual. The individual is all you ever have, and all schools only serve to classify their members as failures. E.H.

Thank you very much...

for the prompt response. You've offered a very reasonable compromise and I accept it.

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

Banishment from DP

Do those who violate the rules get a warning?

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

sorry to hear about the lawsuit

.

photoshopwiz's picture

+

Northstar proposed that this be adopted for the DP ;>

I am working on a sign for my farm/nursery/home

Submitted by cultivator on Thu, 03/04/2010
Let me know what you think, what should I add? exclude?

Thanks,

cultivator

Please Notice : Posted Herein : Private Property
No Trust Passing Under Penalty of Prostitution
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Entering this private property is an agreement to
abide by all guidelines set by the private property
owner(s). Guidelines are subject to change at owner
will & whim. Drive really slow - seriously. Do not
disturb the peace. Conduct your social or business
matters in a timely and professional manner. No
dying on premises allowed. If you, your pet, your
child or your guest makes any messes - you clean
it up. If you, your pet, your child or your guest
breaks anything - you just bought it, you better fix
it like new, or you best compensate appropriately for
the damages. If you hurt yourself it’s your own fault
(really) - so pay attention. This is a Farm & Nursery
and sometimes it’s dirty and/or smelly. No smoking
unless it’s green (and you may be required to share).
If you cause any problems at all - whatsoever - the
property owner(s) reserves all lefts and will deal with
the issue on a personal basis without the aid of any
“authorities”. Government employees, contractors,
agents, and wannabes shall not pass the gate without
prior permission to be granted only by the private
property owner(s) in writing via postal mail services:
ABC123XYZ Farm c/o Unlikely to Happen Department
358 S Underlook Dr, Near Portland, Oregon (zip exempt).
Pack out what you pack in. No Cell phones allowed.
Enjoy your visit and be nice. Have a wonderful day.

___

: love, peace, and prosperity ~ always ~ to lisa and fanofwalt :

The "Anything Goes" Thread

The "Anything Goes" Thread, Con't.

"Profane" is an interesting and educational word

#1) "No profane, disrespectful or divisive language"

"Profane"

1.characterized by irreverence or contempt for God or sacred principles or things; irreligious.
2.not devoted to holy or religious purposes; unconsecrated; secular (opposed to sacred).
3.unholy; heathen; pagan: profane rites.
4.not initiated into religious rites or mysteries, as persons.
5.common or vulgar.

Being common and vulgar; reveling in our common nature is what profane people do.

Is it common and vulgar to address the issue? Is it disrespectful to confront a profane persons methodology? Divisive? There is a paradox here, and the last thing I want is to divide people. They divide themselves through profanity, through common and vulgar behavior, and I find it profane to try and exalt oneself above others; disrespectful.

bump

.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Pay special attention to

#7,lol!

Gold standard: because man can not be trusted to control his greed

Yes...

Subjective?

When Fascism goes to sleep, it checks under the bed for Ron Paul!

Everyone should read these posting guidelines

.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Michael

How come this post
http://www.dailypaul.com/256620/control-the-internetexecutiv...

dropped off the front page within the first hour early this morning, despite having more votes than any post in the 'top recent topics', at the time. The posted information is most concerning, if accurate, and has ramifications for all of us.

"Hell is empty, and all the devils are here" (Shakespeare)
RP 2012~ Intellectual Revolution.

Close account?

Yes Michael, this is a wonderful site which has informed so very many to the clause of liberty. But freely, I am unable to find the "close your account, or deactivate". Can you help?

Peace.

Denise B's picture

Thank you Michael

for creating such a great pro-liberty forum! I wasn't sure where else I could post this, so I'm putting it here. Thank you so much also to both you and the mods for responding positively to my humble request to keep the front page articles all about Ron and Tampa this week. You guys really do a great job here and without a doubt, have played a role in the Ron Paul Revolution. Hope you're here for years to come. :)

I posted a comment which was

simply "bumping for great luck" on yesterday's post regarding an update with the law suit for the delegates and when tried to go back to that original posting, I got access denied?? Plus, there was some sentence supposedly from Bernanke?? and then the big access denied. I don't get it. It just seems really strange. I don't think posting "bumping for great luck" should be any type of problem. Clarification would be appreciated.

betty

bigmikedude's picture

The whole post was unpublished (403)

The headline (and much of the post) was misleading as if the suit had been settled and it has not been. It wasn't your comment Betty.

For future reference, questions like this are best posted in the Mod Box (little red cube in right hand column) . We check there more often. This post may drop off the list and we may not see questions posted here for a while.

How can I post a picture that is not a website link?

.

Joη's picture

it needs to become a link

upload it somewhere, see
http://www.dailypaul.com/linking-your-media

"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it." | Up for a game?

How can I delete my posts?

How can I delete my posts?

Ooops!

My bad.

Let's see if I can still post....

How many -

votes are needed before you remove a comment? There is one today under the Audit the Fed postings that is disrespectful and just plain mean to a Paul supporter that made a video.