Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:12:38, just to let you know, I think your post is so dumb that I'm going to report it to Jeff. So if he deletes it, it's because he agrees with me.
I doubt any witness or resident would disagree with OP. Didn't you read the post from the poor guy working the coffee shop across the street? If this event is allowed next year, he'd preferer the loss of income and close, rather than risk getting hurt, or worse.
+1. Jeff was so obsessed yesterday with who is in the zoo vs who is out that he deleted completely fine posts by people out of the zoo...and the "funny" thing is that the shooting took place right outside of the zoo! This was an example of arbitrary decisions by an often benevolent dictator.
Anonymous wrote:I think the point is that the post from the person who worked at Starbucks has not been deleted, because they appear to be directly reporting what they were an eyewitness to.
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Were you being racist, OP? I think maybe you were being racist.
I described what I saw. And others did the same. There was zero race discussion until someone played the race card to justify the shooter. So, nope, I wasn't being racist. Jeff was.
Everyone is free to go read the thread about the shooting and see what happened. Several posters were making uninformed posts about events inside the zoo. These posters had also indicated, either in those messages or previous messages, that they had not been in the zoo. Other posters who said they were in the zoo, posted conflicting statements. As it happens, I have sources of news other than DCUM and the second group of messages were consistent with my other sources. Therefore, I asked that posters not engage in uninformed speculation. The OP of this thread responded that she had been 500 (feet or yards, I don't remember) from the gate and asked if that qualified her to comment. I said, "yes", she could comment on what she saw, but she could only comment on what happened inside the zoo if she had been inside the zoo. It turns out that she was outside the zoo and freaked out at my response.
The OP of this thread then posted a series of posts attacking me, much like her post here. I did not remove messages describing events that were posted by people that appear to be witnesses to those events. As a review of the thread will show, those posts still exist.
Nice try, Mr. Steele. We all know that not only are you deleting posts on this topic willy-nilly, you are, in fact, actually the shooter yourself. It's probably somehow part of your scheme for DCPS rezoning. Your every-six-year pattern of zoo bloodshed will come to an end, someday; at least, so one must hope.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:12:38, just to let you know, I think your post is so dumb that I'm going to report it to Jeff. So if he deletes it, it's because he agrees with me.
I doubt any witness or resident would disagree with OP. Didn't you read the post from the poor guy working the coffee shop across the street? If this event is allowed next year, he'd preferer the loss of income and close, rather than risk getting hurt, or worse.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Were you being racist, OP? I think maybe you were being racist.
I described what I saw. And others did the same. There was zero race discussion until someone played the race card to justify the shooter. So, nope, I wasn't being racist. Jeff was.
Everyone is free to go read the thread about the shooting and see what happened. Several posters were making uninformed posts about events inside the zoo. These posters had also indicated, either in those messages or previous messages, that they had not been in the zoo. Other posters who said they were in the zoo, posted conflicting statements. As it happens, I have sources of news other than DCUM and the second group of messages were consistent with my other sources. Therefore, I asked that posters not engage in uninformed speculation. The OP of this thread responded that she had been 500 (feet or yards, I don't remember) from the gate and asked if that qualified her to comment. I said, "yes", she could comment on what she saw, but she could only comment on what happened inside the zoo if she had been inside the zoo. It turns out that she was outside the zoo and freaked out at my response.
The OP of this thread then posted a series of posts attacking me, much like her post here. I did not remove messages describing events that were posted by people that appear to be witnesses to those events. As a review of the thread will show, those posts still exist.
Anonymous wrote:12:38, just to let you know, I think your post is so dumb that I'm going to report it to Jeff. So if he deletes it, it's because he agrees with me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Were you being racist, OP? I think maybe you were being racist.
I described what I saw. And others did the same. There was zero race discussion until someone played the race card to justify the shooter. So, nope, I wasn't being racist. Jeff was.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Were you being racist, OP? I think maybe you were being racist.
I described what I saw. And others did the same. There was zero race discussion until someone played the race card to justify the shooter. So, nope, I wasn't being racist. Jeff was.
Anonymous wrote:My guess is that Jeff is trying to keep the threads organized and the discussions focused? You know.. MODERATE?! Some crazies can take it downhill and off track with a quickness.