[bolobaby]

OK, I've been around FR for a few years and I'm pretty darn conservative. I agree with yanking speculative and/or inciteful remarks by lefties who are just trying to cause trouble.

BUT...

It seems to me that his second remark was a factual correction of some sort. As a true conservative, I want the facts. I'd look at a correction like that and think "ok, someone here is wrong." Then I'd do some quick research and figure out what the truth really was.

I haven't looked at this matter, so I don't know where the truth lies, but it does disturb me that the reply was yanked. Any attempt to set facts straight should be given consideration unless it is a blatant misinformation. I look at that post and it doesn't seem like blatant misinformation.

Am I wrong to feel this way?

[Sloth]

It seems to me that his second remark was a factual correction of some sort.

Jim can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my impression that new trolls are often banned in some manner that automatically deletes ALL their replies, not just ones that are out of line (quicker than having to look through every post they made).

[Tall_Texan]

Whenever somebody's account is pulled, all their posts (both objectionable and not objectionable) are pulled.

I think his account was pulled as a suspected troll (we gets soooo many). Therefore, all his posts were removed whether they had merit or not.

As to the one "factual correction", it still misses the point that the budget of the State of Vermont is roughly equivalent to a Chicago suburb, using his own figures.

[sauropod]

"Am I wrong to feel this way?"

No.

[Lead Moderator]

No, probably not wrong to feel that way, although I think you are missing what went down here. It wasn't that post which got the dude nuked. It was all of his posts, taken together. It was clear from them taken in aggregate that he was here to troll (I particularly liked the post which denounced any claim the founding of the US had to liberty to be null and void because slavery existed- I guess we need to repudiate all the wisdom of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle as well).

When a newbie is trolling, they get nuked. It removes all of their posts. And looking at the Abuse log, I see that the post you are mentioning wasn't one of the ones the moderator listed as evidence of the trolling.

[The Westerner]

"It seems to me that his second remark was a factual correction of some sort. As a true conservative, I want the facts. I'd look at a correction like that and think "ok, someone here is wrong." Then I'd do some quick research and figure out what the truth really was.

I haven't looked at this matter, so I don't know where the truth lies, but it does disturb me that the reply was yanked. Any attempt to set facts straight should be given consideration unless it is a blatant misinformation. I look at that post and it doesn't seem like blatant misinformation. "

What you say.

[tutstar]

If facts were misquoted in an article it would be due to the error of the author, not an error by a FR poster or FR itself.
I'm sure there are articles on the other sites which have inaccuracies in them as well. It is the nature of the beast. At least some of us have figured out we can't trust the 'propaganda machine', uh, media to spoon feed us.
Anyone who has followed the threads on Terri Schiavo knows well that news articles can be full of inaccuracies. This is but one example.