Nipate

Forum => Kenya Discussion => Topic started by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 12:13:43 PM

Title: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 12:13:43 PM
This is zero decorum and this is 110% decorum

haha, Looks like Omorlo is starting to enjoy the  use of Archives, And it also Look like kevoo is going to face the wrath of a woman who was scolded by Tarimbo.

1. If you are discovering archives for the first time I can only say congratulations. I have been accessing and using archives even while you were a sperm in a Luo man before he implanted it your drunken malaya mama huko Gachie;
2. I had no idea vooke is Kevoo - thanks for the tip
3. You are free to sniff my underpants and declare me a woman. I guess your mother wont agree having tasted my uncircumcised Luo dick. But hey, if being a woman is such an insult, I guess you learned it when you saw how your mother was sodomized by men and decided it was the worst thing possible - to be a woman.

Get another brain cell.

Who between Omorlo and Mwanabiashara is at fault?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: RV Pundit on September 11, 2014, 12:19:16 PM
It really hard to moderate forums but also Nipate.com situation is not sustainable in long ran when site is blacklisted and banned. There are also folks we can do without. For instance Omollo contribute alot more in content...but the likes of MauMau fool can derail a thread by attacking him.

Mwanabiashara is just an internet troll least interested in debates and engagement. We do not need such characters.

Yes give a dog a fair hearing...but he remains a dog least interested in any intellectual engagement.

Ultimately it is who started the unwarranted attacks..Omollo or MauMau.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 12:28:08 PM
Negroes visit forums for all sorts of reasons and not all contribute equally to all things. Diversity is what made Nipate
Cold intellectual discourses should be left to poets and lecture halls.

That he was banned and Omorlo not is my mbeef yet from the content of their exchange both are probably equally harmful to the site. So, what prompted the ban?

Veritas used to be ODM at some point and Omorlo is. Muthee is Okoyu. This was a clear case of bias


Mwanabiashara is just an internet troll least interested in debates and engagement. We do not need such characters.

Yes give a dog a fair hearing.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: RV Pundit on September 11, 2014, 12:31:16 PM
We are not trying to replicate nipate.com. It exist now as internet toilet for all trolls.I think there people who just come to wind up folks..the good debates in nipate.com were conducted by very few people..vooke,kadame,terminator,omollo,ole and yours truly...under very difficult circumstances where fools and idiots do all within their powers to derail debates.

I can understand disagreement based on positions and principles...but we cannot tolerate somebody who just come here to wind up people and start online fights.

It really about who started it.

Veritas should develop procedures for dealing with internet trolls and fools. Maybe a 3 man committee review any discipline case and recommend action to veritas.

That way verita's nipate.org because the sitting room while those of you who want to go to public toilet once in a while can always check mkenya's nipate.com

Negroes visit forums for all sorts of reasons and not all contribute equally to all things. Diversity is what made Nipate
Cold intellectual discourses should be left to poets and lecture halls.

That he was banned and Omorlo not is my mbeef yet from the content of their exchange both are probably equally harmful to the site. So, what prompted the ban?

Veritas used to be ODM at some point and Omorlo is. Muthee is Okoyu. This was a clear case of bias

Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 12:36:20 PM
This is where it started

http://www.nipate.org/index.php?topic=219.0
Apparently, that is true, anybody who promise us to hold Jacon by the gonads in matharau way automatically become our favourite candidate.  Another requirement is for him to toe the line of community's choice of our defacto leader (mutongoria) ,  because we fully understand that together we put Jacon to the drainage ,apart the mad man get full mkeka.

So stop pretending and continue lining up your asses for Kabogo to semenize. Pesa Mashinani is on track and we shall reduce the ability of whatever thief you choose to tyrannize over tax payer funds. After we hit 70% of National revenue, we wont care what Mutongoria you choose or how many votes you steal to top up.

I'd say its a TIE between Omorlo and Mwanabiashara
But you have already concluded one of the parties as too useless for this forum...watch your bias
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: RV Pundit on September 11, 2014, 12:39:16 PM
Nope. Show me one thread where maumau or mwanabiashra has contribute anything intellectual. He did wind me up for no reason at all before he went for Omollo.

Heck the fool came in camouflage to hide his maumau self because clearly he cannot contribute anything intellectual...there is really no loss...he is back in nipate.com toilet...which is mashada...of our time.

RCB and Nipate.com worked well when serious folks were majority and a mashada fool wouldn't dare contribute...coz he'd be ignored or the floor wipped with him or her.

Now self-regulation fails when like nipate.com...the average IQ of the site is MASHADA.

This is where it started

http://www.nipate.org/index.php?topic=219.0
Apparently, that is true, anybody who promise us to hold Jacon by the gonads in matharau way automatically become our favourite candidate.  Another requirement is for him to toe the line of community's choice of our defacto leader (mutongoria) ,  because we fully understand that together we put Jacon to the drainage ,apart the mad man get full mkeka.

So stop pretending and continue lining up your asses for Kabogo to semenize. Pesa Mashinani is on track and we shall reduce the ability of whatever thief you choose to tyrannize over tax payer funds. After we hit 70% of National revenue, we wont care what Mutongoria you choose or how many votes you steal to top up.

I'd say its a TIE between Omorlo and Mwanabiashara
But you have already concluded one of the parties as too useless for this forum...watch your bias
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 12:43:52 PM
This is the deal,
When matusi start flying I lose respect for all them parties. You was wont to throwing matusi on .com so to you this may be hard to see. That aside, BOTH negroes are equally guilty of fighting and attacking each other

You have NO right whatsoever to judge content for its intellectual value

Nope. Show me one thread where maumau or mwanabiashra has contribute anything intellectual. He did wind me up for no reason at all before he went for Omollo.

Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: RV Pundit on September 11, 2014, 12:48:46 PM
I think you're very new to forums like this. What you are suggesting is we go back to Nipate.com. I can tell you RCB and Nipate.com before mashada fools invaded (kobia must have closed it)..was doing very well with self-regulation..there were quality after quality threads.

That self-moderation and self-regulation assumes lots of things. When like in Nipate.com...the fools like maumau, hulkapunda and nearly 90% of that site now...dominate a forum..it becomes an EYE SORE. You have to jump around trying to find a good thread.

MauMau fool doesn't belong here. He lows the IQ of this forum by many notches down.

This is the deal,
When matusi start flying I lose respect for all them parties. You was wont to throwing matusi on .com so to you this may be hard to see. That aside, BOTH negroes are equally guilty of fighting and attacking each other

You have NO right whatsoever to judge content for its intellectual value

Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 12:51:48 PM
To add to his abusive misogyny, he's been purposefully spamming this forum.

The guy's a malicious nutcase. He can have a fair hearing in court.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 12:53:43 PM
Summary and arbitrary banning of members is plain wrong. I don't care for you,Omorlo or Mwanabiashara but for FAIRNESS
What if you woke up banned?


I think you're very new to forums like this. What you are suggesting is we go back to Nipate.com. I can tell you RCB and Nipate.com before mashada fools invaded (kobia must have closed it)..was doing very well with self-regulation..there were quality after quality threads.

That self-moderation and self-regulation assumes lots of things. When like in Nipate.com...the fools like maumau, hulkapunda and nearly 90% of that site now...dominate a forum..it becomes an EYE SORE. You have to jump around trying to find a good thread.

MauMau fool doesn't belong here. He lows the IQ of this forum by many notches down.


Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 12:54:38 PM
He's a spammer and an abuser. What's wrong with you? Aren't you supposed to be a pastor?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 12:58:15 PM
27 posts and am straining to see spam
Omorlo was EQUALLY if not more vicious abusive and he lives

http://www.nipate.org/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=130

He's a spammer and an abuser. What's wrong with you? Aren't you supposed to be a pastor?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: RV Pundit on September 11, 2014, 12:58:54 PM
Yes he deserved a fair hearing if he wanted. But clearly after receiving the warning..he became abusive.
Summary and arbitrary banning of members is plain wrong. I don't care for you,Omorlo or Mwanabiashara but for FAIRNESS
What if you woke up banned?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 01:00:20 PM
For the record, I sent all parties a friendly reminder on decorum. This malicious spamming nutcase responded with misogynist abuse, not limited to what he posted waaa waaa back at nipate.com.

Vooke, if you're so terribly upset about his departure, then I suggest you hang back with abusive spamming low lives like your BFF Mwananananana banana PSYCHOPATH at your beloved forum.

We have little Kenyans reading this site.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: RV Pundit on September 11, 2014, 01:00:57 PM
You're lying coz MauMau first described Raila gonads being held and Omollo responded in Kind. Omollo is good contributor. MauMau can always have the public toilet called Nipate.com or even Mashada.


Omorlo was EQUALLY if not more vicious abusive and he lives

Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 01:03:58 PM
Make them warnings public otherwise its your word against theirs.

Am still with Nipate.com and I don't see how that is any of your problem..so with vooke there is no going 'back'. Are they mutually exclusive?
For the record, I sent all parties a friendly reminder on decorum. This malicious spamming nutcase responded with misogynist abuse, not limited to what he posted waaa waaa back at nipate.com.

Vooke, if you're so terribly upset about his departure, then I suggest you hang back with abusive spamming low lives like your BFF Mwananananana banana PSYCHOPATH at your beloved forum.

We have little Kenyans reading this site.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 01:05:14 PM
I did publicise it.

http://www.nipate.org/index.php?topic=240.0

...I won't tolerate....
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 01:10:54 PM
Warn them on the offensive post. At that the time of your vague warning both negroes had hurled expletives at each other so how do we know Mwanabiashara ignored your warning while Omorlo towed the line?

And whatever Muthee said on Nipate came AFTER the ban so it is irrelevant

I did publicise it.

http://www.nipate.org/index.php?topic=240.0

...I won't tolerate....
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 01:11:14 PM
RVP, I honestly do not want to waste you and members precious debating time on purposeful trolls. They get a warning, if they respond abusively, out.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 01:12:21 PM
Vooke, screw your head on. He's a spammer. I should sue him.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 01:15:37 PM
Here's the last message he sent me:

Re: Watch your mouth
« Sent to: veritas on: Today at 10:47:21 AM » ReplyQuoteDelete
am not even going to justify your dictatorship and nonsense with a private message, just fucking keep off me you fucking little tyrant, did you even take time to read the conversation between me and Omollo, or simply because you and Omollo goes far you can bring your retarded backdoor favoritism to me. Fool.

Here's the message he sent me after I sent him a friendly reminder. This isn't just offensive, his malicious intent from the get go warrants a lawsuit.

Do you support spamming my site? Answer me.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 01:20:57 PM
I almost forgot, these are Negroes....profuse apologies for wasting my time and yours over the scum of Africa. They need another 500K years of pure Darwinian evilution

[/quote]
Here's the last message he sent me:

Re: Watch your mouth
« Sent to: veritas on: Today at 10:47:21 AM » ReplyQuoteDelete
am not even going to justify your dictatorship and nonsense with a private message, just fucking keep off me you fucking little tyrant, did you even take time to read the conversation between me and Omollo, or simply because you and Omollo goes far you can bring your retarded backdoor favoritism to me. Fool.

Here's the message he sent me after I sent him a friendly reminder. This isn't just offensive, his malicious intent from the get go warrants a lawsuit.

Do you support spamming my site? Answer me.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 01:23:45 PM
What's your problem?

Answer the question.

Do you support malicious intent i.e. spamming on my site?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 01:29:31 PM
No I don't
But you need to need not only to be fair but to appear to be FAIR. All we had going was a vague warning and a negro ranting elsewhere over a ban. My two cents, give erring members some public hearing & warning

My problem is summary bans which reek of unfairness
What's your problem?

Answer the question.

Do you support malicious intent i.e. spamming on my site?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants on September 11, 2014, 02:13:08 PM
vooke,

I understand where you are coming from.  The unfettered freedom of .com.  Yet, alongside condom selling cyberbots with penis enlargement bonuses, we all agree some real contributors will not be missed.

I believe that as long as those whistling through their backside remain a distinct minority, they should be left alone.  The tipping point happens when they are 49%.  They overwhelm the 51%.  Because contributing nonsense is effortless.

I think you don't need everything from nipate as someone mentions.  Some things belong in the outhouse.  You'll see them when you go to relieve yourself.  But you don't bring them to the living room.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 02:44:08 PM
Termie,
Am not a liberal and am sure you know that.
I just need a semblance of fairness. It gets worse with time and I had to make a point at the earliest. We need objectivity not oestrogen whims. How do you warn two negroes over cussing, they ignore you and then you kick one out? Omorlo now in my estimation is untouchable.

Ridiculing public figures is part of Kenian Negro. Pundit tried but failed to popularize 'screwball'. Calling Nungi an FGM priest is no different from calling Rayirla mwenda wazimu.

Veritas shared the response she got from Mwanabiashara. What had she PMd him? Is that what prompted him to hit out at her?
vooke,

I understand where you are coming from.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 02:51:37 PM
I agree the whole thing doesn't sit well...

Decorum: I thought we agreed to keep at a minimum of moderation, even refused to ban some words. I think Veritas should not have interfered in that fight between those two in the first place. If it was hazing, in the sense that a mob or so had formed, veritas should have given a PUBLIC warning, right ON that thread, not via PM. That way everyone can see what's going on. Its also safe for her because she doesnt read Swahili very well and may have missed a provocative slur that has led to the one she's giving a warning about. That way, others can help so that fairness is maintained.

Mwanabiashara is obviously silly to respond via PM the way he did, but with due respect, I think in future a different approach should be followed. Small mistakes can harm a budding forum.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: mya88 on September 11, 2014, 03:05:04 PM
I agree the whole thing doesn't sit well...

Decorum: I thought we agreed to keep at a minimum of moderation, even refused to ban some words. I think Veritas should not have interfered in that fight between those two in the first place. If it was hazing, in the sense that a mob or so had formed, veritas should have given a PUBLIC warning, right ON that thread, not via PM. That way everyone can see what's going on. Its also safe for her because she doesnt read Swahili very well and may have missed a provocative slur that has led to the one she's giving a warning about. That way, others can help so that fairness is maintained.

Mwanabiashara is obviously silly to respond via PM the way he did, but with due respect, I think in future a different approach should be followed. Small mistakes can harm a budding forum.

Kababe

I agree with you. vooke has a right to demand answers especially where issues of unfairness arise so I dont understand why veri takes it personal that he does. While MauMau probably deserve the ban (from what I can tell), Veri also should not appear to be exchanging unpleasantries with forum members just to start warning them when the conversation goes down south (I am not saying that is the case here). As a matter of fact we dont have to be reminded in every thread that I started this blade bla de bal or I wount tolerate this bla de blade . Just come up with forum rules and stick them on the front of the forum, that way you have a point of refernecs when sending a warning. Right now its like we are making rules as we go along, very difficult to follow. Lastly, warnings and bans should be made public for all to see and self moderation as much as possible should continue to be the modus operandi of .org.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 03:20:18 PM
I'm sorry that my actions shocked dear members.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Mr Mansfield. on September 11, 2014, 03:28:32 PM
I think this is reason why majority dot com residents are finding it hard to relocate,veritas you are very mean,selfish and impulsive,
omollo posts so much trash than anybody else on this site and dot com,grow up woman,and you even go ahead to abuse and degrade mwanabiashara,sura kiatu wewe,lock your site for yourself,pundit and omollo and you won't find anybody knocking the door,

Without Prejudice.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 03:30:29 PM
I think this is reason why majority dot com residents are finding it hard to relocate,veritas you are very mean,selfish and impulsive,
omollo posts so much trash than anybody else on this site and dot com,grow up woman,and you even go ahead to abuse and degrade mwanabiashara,sura kiatu wewe,lock your site for yourself,pundit and omollo and you won't find anybody knocking the door,

Without Prejudice.
Eish, stop insulting her. Mwanabiashara insulted her via PM. That's why she banned him. Omollo's slurs in that exchange were in Swahili, she didnt see them, she only saw Mwanabiashara's. I believe if she had she would have stayed away or issued a reminder on that thread for every one. Give her a break, she's here she's listening to members. She's learning. This is a new site. Tuliza boss.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 03:31:38 PM
I have a duty to protect forum members from trash. You wouldn't ever understand.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: RV Pundit on September 11, 2014, 03:40:44 PM
Why are you still here.
I think this is reason why majority dot com residents are finding it hard to relocate,veritas you are very mean,selfish and impulsive,
omollo posts so much trash than anybody else on this site and dot com,grow up woman,and you even go ahead to abuse and degrade mwanabiashara,sura kiatu wewe,lock your site for yourself,pundit and omollo and you won't find anybody knocking the door,

Without Prejudice.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 03:45:34 PM
I have a duty to protect forum members from trash. You wouldn't ever understand.
Veri, though, seriously, I know you are acting from your past experience being hounded out of nipate by a mob of misogynists, but DO NOT take up the big brother/big sista role. People here are big gals and boys. When hazing is going on, it will be obvious to everyone, dont jump in when some two people are going at it. Dont be a big bro/sista, be a referee.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 04:18:43 PM
I agree the whole thing doesn't sit well...

Decorum: I thought we agreed to keep at a minimum of moderation, even refused to ban some words. I think Veritas should not have interfered in that fight between those two in the first place. If it was hazing, in the sense that a mob or so had formed, veritas should have given a PUBLIC warning, right ON that thread, not via PM. That way everyone can see what's going on. Its also safe for her because she doesnt read Swahili very well and may have missed a provocative slur that has led to the one she's giving a warning about. That way, others can help so that fairness is maintained.

Mwanabiashara is obviously silly to respond via PM the way he did, but with due respect, I think in future a different approach should be followed. Small mistakes can harm a budding forum.
I will never accuse you of being impartial. That we settled along time ago. But when you allege that I provoked Mrs. Mwanabiashara, you provoke me a new. It is out of respect for the decorum I will not enrich your Swahili vocabulary. I hope you desist from displaying your tribal bias.

Review the exchange and look at me with a straight female Kikuyu face and repeat that I provoked Mrs. Mwanabiashara.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 04:23:34 PM
I agree the whole thing doesn't sit well...

Decorum: I thought we agreed to keep at a minimum of moderation, even refused to ban some words. I think Veritas should not have interfered in that fight between those two in the first place. If it was hazing, in the sense that a mob or so had formed, veritas should have given a PUBLIC warning, right ON that thread, not via PM. That way everyone can see what's going on. Its also safe for her because she doesnt read Swahili very well and may have missed a provocative slur that has led to the one she's giving a warning about. That way, others can help so that fairness is maintained.

Mwanabiashara is obviously silly to respond via PM the way he did, but with due respect, I think in future a different approach should be followed. Small mistakes can harm a budding forum.
I will never accuse you of being impartial. That we settled along time ago. But when you allege that I provoked Mrs. Mwanabiashara, you provoke me a new. It is out of respect for the decorum I will not enrich your Swahili vocabulary. I hope you desist from displaying your tribal bias.

Review the exchange and look at me with a straight female Kikuyu face and repeat that I provoked Mrs. Mwanabiashara.

I am not accusing you of provoking mwanabiashara, i happen to know he's a tribalist with a lot of matusi in his back-pack. That wasnt my meaning. What I meant was that you BOTH exchanged words. Veritas should therefore have not interfered. The reference I am making about a provocative Swahili slur is simply something that occurs to me after this whole saga may be likely to happen if veritas warns people in private instead of in public.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Georgesoros on September 11, 2014, 04:26:44 PM
Veritas and Mods,
Good job. He needs to be in the blue chair in the corner till he grows up, otherwise there are other sites that he can practice his vocabulary.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 04:28:24 PM
Why are you still here.
He gone back and predictably started invective against .org with the usual lies.

Pundit, where were these bastards when we started .com?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 04:28:38 PM
Kababe, thanks for the defense. I read, speak and write swahili. I wrote speeches for politicians.

I studied in detail what went down when I got a moderator alert. I carefully studied ALL of his posts. Coupled with the fact his IP matches a spammer. I asked Omollo to refrain and he responded kindly. This chap on the otherhand.. I hate having to do what I did but it was for the greater good. I hope you understand.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 04:32:13 PM
kababe,
has it occurred to you that Veritas withheld whatever led to Mwanabiashara's response?
Justice demands she disclose everything not just the unsavory parts which may have been out of context(wapi Nuff Sed?)

Veritas is is extremely condescending to purport to act in the interest of the members by taking unilateral extreme measures. It presumes we are stupid negroes who can't tell what is good for ourselves.

Tomorrow, vooke and his sermons will be shown the door without much ado. You need to respect or at least pretend to respect members who take they time to join your forum. It is hard work I agree but without members, all that would be nothing

Calling Mwanabiashara a spammer WITHOUT proof shows that it was personal between you.

We are demanding fairness not begging for it. And while at it, quit reminding negroes they can always go back to Nipate.com. Why does it hurt you that Nipate is still half-dead?

Eish, stop insulting her. Mwanabiashara insulted her via PM. That's why she banned him. Omollo's slurs in that exchange were in Swahili, she didnt see them, she only saw Mwanabiashara's. I believe if she had she would have stayed away or issued a reminder on that thread for every one. Give her a break, she's here she's listening to members. She's learning. This is a new site. Tuliza boss.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 04:33:31 PM
I am not accusing you of provoking mwanabiashara, i happen to know he's a tribalist with a lot of matusi in his back-pack. That wasnt my meaning. What I meant was that you BOTH exchanged words. Veritas should therefore have not interfered. The reference I am making about a provocative Swahili slur is simply something that occurs to me after this whole saga may be likely to happen if veritas warns people in private instead of in public.
Rather hard to accept considering I am the one who released on him in Swahili ONLY after he provoked me. So you are basically saying if Veritas had read Swahili and understood me, then she should have been more understanding of Mrs. Mwanabiashara.

There is nothing like somebody provoking a fight in the school yard then have his tribeswomen say BOTH did it. The beneficiary in such as case is the bully who started it. I don't buy your explanation and in fact consider the whole of it tribal subterfuge.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Georgesoros on September 11, 2014, 04:33:46 PM
As far as I know, this site is for grown ups, not juveniles who wear pants all the way to their knees.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 04:40:08 PM
I am not accusing you of provoking mwanabiashara, i happen to know he's a tribalist with a lot of matusi in his back-pack. That wasnt my meaning. What I meant was that you BOTH exchanged words. Veritas should therefore have not interfered. The reference I am making about a provocative Swahili slur is simply something that occurs to me after this whole saga may be likely to happen if veritas warns people in private instead of in public.
Rather hard to accept considering I am the one who released on him in Swahili ONLY after he provoked me. So you are basically saying if Veritas had read Swahili and understood me, then she should have been more understanding of Mrs. Mwanabiashara.
Yes, I think she would've because regardless of who starts a fight, eventually if slurs are exchanged, as a mod must be fair and warn both, with particular emphasis on the provacateur. Otherwise, if both say things that re not according to "decorum", then it LOOKS like one gets the ultimate boot without an explanation, it looks partisan, even if it is not. Hence, such things should be aired out publicly.

It occcurred to me Veritas may very well miss a slur in Swahili. Such would be avoided if PMs are replaced with public notices especially before banning.

Quote
There is nothing like somebody provoking a fight in the school yard then have his tribeswomen say BOTH did it. The beneficiary in such as case is the bully who started it. I don't buy your explanation and in fact consider the whole of it tribal subterfuge.
Omollo, I dont know why you insist that I am Kikuyu. I really am a proud Gusii woman, but if you'd rather believe I'm Kikuyu, that's fine too. People on nipate have accused me of being Luo in the past. I don't mind either designation.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 04:55:44 PM
Google don't pick up on swahili slurs. But I asked Omollo not to say that slur and he responded kindly.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 04:57:32 PM
Google don't pick up on swahili slurs. But I asked Omollo not to say that slur and he responded kindly.
Good to note.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Georgesoros on September 11, 2014, 05:08:17 PM
I think we need a "council of the Spear" whose job is to decide on possible action when a complaint is brought up. This will spread evenly the blame instead of leaving it to one person.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 05:12:19 PM
Can you please elaborate more on this "Council of the Spear" what's the formation? What's the process? Please explain.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: mya88 on September 11, 2014, 05:22:17 PM
kababe,
has it occurred to you that Veritas withheld whatever led to Mwanabiashara's response?
Justice demands she disclose everything not just the unsavory parts which may have been out of context(wapi Nuff Sed?)

Veritas is is extremely condescending to purport to act in the interest of the members by taking unilateral extreme measures. It presumes we are stupid negroes who can't tell what is good for ourselves.

Tomorrow, vooke and his sermons will be shown the door without much ado. You need to respect or at least pretend to respect members who take they time to join your forum. It is hard work I agree but without members, all that would be nothing

Calling Mwanabiashara a spammer WITHOUT proof shows that it was personal between you.

We are demanding fairness not begging for it. And while at it, quit reminding negroes they can always go back to Nipate.com. Why does it hurt you that Nipate is still half-dead?

Eish, stop insulting her. Mwanabiashara insulted her via PM. That's why she banned him. Omollo's slurs in that exchange were in Swahili, she didnt see them, she only saw Mwanabiashara's. I believe if she had she would have stayed away or issued a reminder on that thread for every one. Give her a break, she's here she's listening to members. She's learning. This is a new site. Tuliza boss.

vooke

With all due respect, I think you are trying to milk this out for what its worth. If you must have proof, read maumaus whole passage at .com. Veri inquired of his decorum as she did Omollo. He responded the way he did and thus the ban, which might have been a bit harsh....a first warning would have been sent before a complete ban. We are all in agreement of admin resisting from unilateral extreme measures and reminding disenting opinions of where they should or should not go back to.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Georgesoros on September 11, 2014, 05:24:36 PM
Someone files a complaint of "nudity" with Veritas. She refers it to the council, based on rules and regulations, the council decides whether it is a valid complaint or not and votes. The outcome is communicated on the forum to all members. Council members are made public but voting is not. Can be improved.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 05:27:32 PM
Love it! Thanks Parker! Nominations are up.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 05:43:51 PM
mya88,
after reading the PM Mwanabiahara shared, I lost some sympathy for him. But you will note he was responding to something Veritas said and it may have been offensive. Am sure you would be interested to know what he responded to with such vitriol. If it was harmless, it serves to magnify his sins. If Veritas fired a deadly salvo, then the negro may have been justified. She further calls him a spammer. Read through his 27 threads and you find this is not so.


That said, am glad members have contributed on this thread because it shows my concerns was not petty. Trust me my intention is to IMPROVE this place not make noise
vooke

With all due respect, I think you are trying to milk this out for what its worth. If you must have proof, read maumaus whole passage at .com. Veri inquired of his decorum as she did Omollo. He responded the way he did and thus the ban, which might have been a bit harsh....a first warning would have been sent before a complete ban. We are all in agreement of admin resisting from unilateral extreme measures and reminding disenting opinions of where they should or should not go back to.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 05:51:59 PM
His IP matches a spammer. For the record, this is what I private messaged him (the only private message):

Quote
I'm relieving you of your moderator duties with a warning for abusing forum members. Calling others "b!tch" and what not is unacceptable.

I came to this decision:

1. Spamming.
2. Complaint.
3. The fact he purposefully provoked members (not just Omollo) in his posts.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: mya88 on September 11, 2014, 05:57:38 PM
mya88,
after reading the PM Mwanabiahara shared, I lost some sympathy for him. But you will note he was responding to something Veritas said and it may have been offensive. Am sure you would be interested to know what he responded to with such vitriol. If it was harmless, it serves to magnify his sins. If Veritas fired a deadly salvo, then the negro may have been justified. She further calls him a spammer. Read through his 27 threads and you find this is not so.


That said, am glad members have contributed on this thread because it shows my concerns was not petty. Trust me my intention is to IMPROVE this place not make noise

vooke

I know you mean well. As veri has disclosed the reason for his responses. That matches what maumau wrote on .com. There is room for improvement and I think admin and members are making concerted efforts to improve.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 06:17:59 PM
Thank you Veritas, but you do understand some negroes may be browsing off public places. So his IP may be tagged spam. That is not convincing

Whenever you receive a complaint against somebody, it is quite possible the accuser is biased and out to punish the perpetrator. So acting on the basis of a complaint WITHOUT checking it out is open to abuse

And of course if two negroes are fighting and one gets a warning of rudeness, it is quite possible he may think the other party was not warned....Prisoner's Dillemma or something. In fact I suspect this is what rattled him. That's why I insist on public warning to both parties at the same time

His IP matches a spammer. For the record, this is what I private messaged him (the only private message):

Quote
I'm relieving you of your moderator duties with a warning for abusing forum members. Calling others "b!tch" and what not is unacceptable.

I came to this decision:

1. Spamming.
2. Complaint.
3. The fact he purposefully provoked members (not just Omollo) in his posts.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 06:19:59 PM
Yes, I think she would've because regardless of who starts a fight, eventually if slurs are exchanged, as a mod must be fair and warn both, with particular emphasis on the provacateur. Otherwise, if both say things that re not according to "decorum", then it LOOKS like one gets the ultimate boot without an explanation, it looks partisan, even if it is not. Hence, such things should be aired out publicly.

It occcurred to me Veritas may very well miss a slur in Swahili. Such would be avoided if PMs are replaced with public notices especially before banning.
1. Mrs. Biashara (we have no idea what business) got what she deserved;
2. If a drunk person enters a room full of peaceful people and proceeds to attack the first (Pundit) and then moves to the next (Omollo), I see no reason why Omollo and Pundit should follow the drunkard out on expulsion just because they were unfortunate to be the drunkard's victims;
3. You claim to be a lawyer and for the second time I want to doubt that - unless you are a Grade C- student. Provocation is a major factor in determining culpability. In many cases provocation is all that is required to turn a murder charge to manslaughter or unlawful killing - depending on the jurisdiction.

4. No serious lawyer would advocate for equity and equivalence between the provoker and the provoked - unless she is defending one. Thus your stance betrayed a bias which in my book indicates you are a nyooba adherent - your ethnicity notwithstanding.

5. Mrs. Biashara (the business of which we still have no idea) was sufficiently informed by Veritas and is welcome to launch an appeal against her exclusion. I will of course oppose the appeal in principle. She has not appealed instead has gone out there to bad-mouth .org and Veritas - even suggesting Veritas is my spouse.

6. I have never seen your opposition to the constant harassment I undergo - not least the use of woman as an insult. Instead I noticed you giggling loudly when vooke suggested that I was his "punching bag" which he would miss at .com. That betrayed your sympathies and I immediately withdrew all goodwill I had shown you.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 06:28:33 PM
Omollo, why are you falsely accusing me? I have never so much as bothered with your fights with vooke. Giggling? Anyone who knows me and vooke know we fight every month. The idea that I take his side shows you are simply intent on seeing things your way. You admit you both gave out slurs, everyone here agrees you both should've been warned--if indeed warning was required--and I now understand you were indeed both warned, so apparently its not just me.  Veritas felt the same way. You are talking about my tribe, my profession and all that, and now making up false claims about me. You are not charged with murder, you hurled unnecessary expletives at another member, who had done the same to you, lets cease with the dramatics.

Also, I NEVER suggested that you should be banned. I suggested that banning should not have happened at all, especially in private.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 06:38:36 PM
Calling a thousand men women won't change nothing

Yes, I think she would've because regardless of who starts a fight, eventually if slurs are exchanged, as a mod must be fair and warn both, with particular emphasis on the provacateur. Otherwise, if both say things that re not according to "decorum", then it LOOKS like one gets the ultimate boot without an explanation, it looks partisan, even if it is not. Hence, such things should be aired out publicly.

It occcurred to me Veritas may very well miss a slur in Swahili. Such would be avoided if PMs are replaced with public notices especially before banning.
1. Mrs. Biashara (we have no idea what business) got what she deserved;
2. If a drunk person enters a room full of peaceful people and proceeds to attack the first (Pundit) and then moves to the next (Omollo), I see no reason why Omollo and Pundit should follow the drunkard out on expulsion just because they were unfortunate to be the drunkard's victims;
3. You claim to be a lawyer and for the second time I want to doubt that - unless you are a Grade C- student. Provocation is a major factor in determining culpability. In many cases provocation is all that is required to turn a murder charge to manslaughter or unlawful killing - depending on the jurisdiction.

4. No serious lawyer would advocate for equity and equivalence between the provoker and the provoked - unless she is defending one. Thus your stance betrayed a bias which in my book indicates you are a nyooba adherent - your ethnicity notwithstanding.

5. Mrs. Biashara (the business of which we still have no idea) was sufficiently informed by Veritas and is welcome to launch an appeal against her exclusion. I will of course oppose the appeal in principle. She has not appealed instead has gone out there to bad-mouth .org and Veritas - even suggesting Veritas is my spouse.

6. I have never seen your opposition to the constant harassment I undergo - not least the use of woman as an insult. Instead I noticed you giggling loudly when vooke suggested that I was his "punching bag" which he would miss at .com. That betrayed your sympathies and I immediately withdrew all goodwill I had shown you.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 06:39:42 PM
Omollo, why are you falsely accusing me? I have never so much as bothered with your fights with vooke. Giggling? Anyone who knows me and vooke know we fight every month. The idea that I take his side shows you are simply intent on seeing things your way. You admit you both gave out slurs, everyone here agrees you both should've been warned and I now understand you were indeed both warned, so apparently its not just me.  Veritas felt the same way. You are talking about my tribe, my profession and all that, and now making up false claims about me. You are not charged with murder, you hurled unnecessary expletives at another member, who had done the same to you, lets cease with the dramatics.
1. Please desist from speaking for other people. "Everybody"? Who is "everybody"? Did you carry out a vote?
2. Your ululation when vooke called me a punching bag is still here on record. I can direct you if your lawyer memory somehow fails you;
3. I have made no admission of the kind you suggest;
4.
a. Your tribe: You came out as Nyooba but then stated that you are a Kisii;
b. Your profession: When you purport to adjudicate in matter drawing on your profession, I have a right to question it;
c. False claims: Please document the "false" claims and demonstrate the falsehood

5. Finally you come out clearly to state what you have been denying: You bias in the matter. Responding to expletives can only be "unnecessary" in the eyes of the advocate for the ravisher;
6. The principle of provocation (as a defense) is not limited to murder (as you probably managed to read, if ever!)
3.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 06:42:05 PM
False claims: I was giggling/ululating at something you and vooke said to each other. Please provide the evidence.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 06:43:39 PM
Calling a thousand men women won't change nothing
I heard that "defense" in a case in UK where some white supremacists who had called an Asian Pakki insisted that the insult had not changed the man. I wondered whether insults are supposed to change people or have a completely different objective.

If somebody called vooke a copper teethed pot bellied bla bla, would it change him? Of course not.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 06:44:09 PM
kadame,
don't waste your breath on a negro who firmly believes that Kifacki genocided 10,000 jarluos in a day in Kisumu over PEV and only (s)he has evidence
Omollo, why are you falsely accusing me? I have never so much as bothered with your fights with vooke. Giggling? Anyone who knows me and vooke know we fight every month. The idea that I take his side shows you are simply intent on seeing things your way. You admit you both gave out slurs, everyone here agrees you both should've been warned and I now understand you were indeed both warned, so apparently its not just me.  Veritas felt the same way. You are talking about my tribe, my profession and all that, and now making up false claims about me. You are not charged with murder, you hurled unnecessary expletives at another member, who had done the same to you, lets cease with the dramatics.
1. Please desist from speaking for other people. "Everybody"? Who is "everybody"? Did you carry out a vote?
2. Your ululation when vooke called me a punching bag is still here on record. I can direct you if your lawyer memory somehow fails you;
3. I have made no admission of the kind you suggest;
4.
a. Your tribe: You came out as Nyooba but then stated that you are a Kisii;
b. Your profession: When you purport to adjudicate in matter drawing on your profession, I have a right to question it;
c. False claims: Please document the "false" claims and demonstrate the falsehood

5. Finally you come out clearly to state what you have been denying: You bias in the matter. Responding to expletives can only be "unnecessary" in the eyes of the advocate for the ravisher;
6. The principle of provocation (as a defense) is not limited to murder (as you probably managed to read, if ever!)
3.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 06:51:04 PM
False claims: I was giggling/ululating at something you and vooke said to each other. Please provide the evidence.
I am digging it out. The archives here need some persuading.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 06:56:36 PM
http://www.nipate.org/index.php?topic=129.msg822#msg822

This the thread you refer to, i searched "punching bag"

This is my post to vooke

vooke, speak plainly. Unasema nini jameni? I told you sometimes it is near impossible to tell what your mood is, are you giving yellowman compe for his criptic one-liners? ???

What I see there is me asking vooke to explain his statement because it did not make sense to me. How is that ululating? The giggling was after my subtle dig at him for doing what he accuses yellowman of.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 07:05:17 PM
http://www.nipate.org/index.php?topic=129.msg822#msg822

This the thread you refer to, i searched "punching bag"

This is my post to vooke

vooke, speak plainly. Unasema nini jameni? I told you sometimes it is near impossible to tell what your mood is, are you giving yellowman compe for his criptic one-liners? ???

What I see there is me asking vooke to explain his statement because it did not make sense to me. How is that ululating? The giggling was after my subtle dig at him for doing what he accuses yellowman of.
You are trying to be "clever" which is even more irritating. Is that the "Natural" response to the insinuations that vooke makes? What is tickling you is the fact that he calls omollo is private punching bag. Who do you wish to kid?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 07:06:58 PM
Omollo, believe what you want.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 07:16:33 PM
Omollo, believe what you want.
I base my positions on facts. You are trying to sneak out of it using cheap subterfuge and deliberate misleading interpretations of an obvious statement:
Quote
Omollo: For starters, I am suspending starting any new topics there. I will limit my responses to matters directly affecting me and perhaps issues of national concern.
Vooke: Negro, Give me an alternative punching bag

Kababe: vooke, speak plainly. Unasema nini jameni? I told you sometimes it is near impossible to tell what your mood is, are you giving yellowman compe for his criptic one-liners? ??? (giggles herself green)

Let me know if you need any more EVIDENCE. Lastly, try your amateur lawyer hair-splitting on other thick students of law. The standards of law in Kenya have been falling thanks to the likes of you who think you can get away with such jabs unnoticed.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 07:20:21 PM
Ladies and gentleman, let's get back to real discussions. This is exactly what detractors want. Divide our nest. Let's not fall for the ruse.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 07:25:43 PM
Like I said, go ahead and believe whatever you want, I totally laughed at you. I still am.  8)
Ladies and gentleman, let's get back to real discussions. This is exactly what detractors want. Divide our nest. Let's not fall for the ruse.
The "gentle-man' is an abusive blogger, theres'
Omollo, believe what you want.
I base my positions on facts. You are trying to sneak out of it using cheap subterfuge and deliberate misleading interpretations of an obvious statement:
Quote
Omollo: For starters, I am suspending starting any new topics there. I will limit my responses to matters directly affecting me and perhaps issues of national concern.
Vooke: Negro, Give me an alternative punching bag

Kababe: vooke, speak plainly. Unasema nini jameni? I told you sometimes it is near impossible to tell what your mood is, are you giving yellowman compe for his criptic one-liners? ??? (giggles herself green)

Let me know if you need any more EVIDENCE. Lastly, try your amateur lawyer hair-splitting on other thick students of law. The standards of law in Kenya have been falling thanks to the likes of you who think you can get away with such jabs unnoticed.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 07:28:08 PM
Kababe, stop.

Dear Omollo was slandered beyond belief on Nipate.com, such an intelligent mind trampled by trolls. I'm not having that here. I hope you understand.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Kababe on September 11, 2014, 07:29:13 PM
Kababe, stop.

Dear Omollo was slandered beyond belief on Nipate.com such an intelligent mind trampled by trolls. I'm not having that here. I hope you understand.
You've got to be joking??? Read through his posts and see who is attacking who? I have tried explaining myself, he insists on going after me, what do you want me to do?
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 07:29:29 PM
So? So nothing. You had no reason to LIE and try to hide behind subterfuge like a frightened rat. I am glad you own up and vindicate my position. You could have admitted earlier instead of wasting time when you knew all along that you were LYING
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 07:31:12 PM
Kababe, stop.

Dear Omollo was slandered beyond belief on Nipate.com such an intelligent mind trampled by trolls. I'm not having that here. I hope you understand.
You've got to be joking??? Read through his posts and see who is attacking who? I have tried explaining myself, he insists on going after me, what do you want me to do?
Why can't you produce more proof of me slandering people? You just failed to back the denial of you ululating while vooke derided me.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 07:33:46 PM
Omollo, please. Let it go.

Kababe, please. Let it go.

Please, let us go back to sobriety. We had a bit of a shock today. It's exactly what detractors want. We're good people. Let's move on.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 07:35:49 PM
And I wish you could read Swahili, even menstruation was in his/her armory
Kababe, stop.

Dear Omollo was slandered beyond belief on Nipate.com, such an intelligent mind trampled by trolls. I'm not having that here. I hope you understand.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 07:40:19 PM
As I said before, and I'm not repeating this again, I private messaged Omollo about it already, as did the other chap. Omollo responded kindly. The other chap.. you've read it.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 07:42:29 PM
Sorry, I meant Omorlo was not exactly an altar boy/girl on .com either

As I said before, and I'm not repeating this again, I private messaged Omollo about it already, as did the other chap. Omollo responded kindly. The other chap.. you've read it.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 07:45:44 PM
Mrs. vooke

I thought we are agreed on the way forward. This jabbing and insinuation of woman is going nowhere.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 07:48:50 PM
You are lonely and I can see you need company
First you call Mwanabiashara Mrs then me..what's the point? To confuse as many negroes gender here and there so there will be more gender confusion cases like yours? Your next job is to convince all the members that am a woman. Not so smart negro...not at all


Mrs. vooke

I thought we are agreed on the way forward. This jabbing and insinuation of woman is going nowhere.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 11, 2014, 07:50:58 PM
Omollo, please stop calling Vooke "Mrs"

Vooke, please, let it go.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 08:09:46 PM
You are lonely and I can see you need company
First you call Mwanabiashara Mrs then me..what's the point? To confuse as many negroes gender here and there so there will be more gender confusion cases like yours? Your next job is to convince all the members that am a woman. Not so smart negro...not at all
Mrs. vooke

I thought we are agreed on the way forward. This jabbing and insinuation of woman is going nowhere.
Omollo, please stop calling Vooke "Mrs"

Vooke, please, let it go.
And I wish you could read Swahili, even menstruation was in his/her armory

Sorry, I meant Omorlo was not exactly an altar boy/girl on .com either

I thought gender reversal is a fair game?

What is Mutheemaumau's gender? As a matter of fact I thought Vooke is a woman.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 08:15:10 PM
You are lonely and I can see you need company
First you call Mwanabiashara Mrs then me..what's the point? To confuse as many negroes gender here and there so there will be more gender confusion cases like yours? Your next job is to convince all the members that am a woman. Not so smart negro...not at all
What gender confusion do I have? You have plastered this thread with insinuations reversing my self declared gender and now you want to accuse me of what?

I have no record of Mwanabiashara claiming to be a man. She has had the opportunity top protest and has not done it here or at .com! Why do you take it upon yourself to to it for her?

What makes you imagine what is good for s goose isn't good for a gander? Stop reference to me derogatorily and I will do the same.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 11, 2014, 09:56:29 PM
Am Mrs. vooke henceforth.
You got company negro...Sema asante

You are lonely and I can see you need company
First you call Mwanabiashara Mrs then me..what's the point? To confuse as many negroes gender here and there so there will be more gender confusion cases like yours? Your next job is to convince all the members that am a woman. Not so smart negro...not at all
What gender confusion do I have? You have plastered this thread with insinuations reversing my self declared gender and now you want to accuse me of what?

I have no record of Mwanabiashara claiming to be a man. She has had the opportunity top protest and has not done it here or at .com! Why do you take it upon yourself to to it for her?

What makes you imagine what is good for s goose isn't good for a gander? Stop reference to me derogatorily and I will do the same.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 11, 2014, 10:42:01 PM
Am Mrs. vooke henceforth.
You got company negro...Sema asante
Mrs. Vooke

Thanks for owning up. I have always suspected behind this attempt to use woman as an "insult" lay an elaborate conflict. I had no idea it was the self conflict you were undergoing about your gender. You have even tried to project it on me - son of Ramogi - with your he/ she and him / her thing complete with menstruation claims. 

Thanks for coming out Mrs. Vooke. You have my support.

Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 12, 2014, 06:46:13 AM
How does a woman abuse another woman using menstruation? You are sick negro, you need Jesus
Am Mrs. vooke henceforth.
You got company negro...Sema asante
Mrs. Vooke

Thanks for owning up. I have always suspected behind this attempt to use woman as an "insult" lay an elaborate conflict. I had no idea it was the self conflict you were undergoing about your gender. You have even tried to project it on me - son of Ramogi - with your he/ she and him / her thing complete with menstruation claims. 

Thanks for coming out Mrs. Vooke. You have my support.


Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 12, 2014, 06:53:04 AM
Gentlemen, that's enough. Please.

Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 12, 2014, 11:27:28 AM
Mrs. Vooke

I am done with you.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 12, 2014, 11:41:26 AM
Insults take intelligence
First you attempted to ridicule my fear of mosquito nets...totally tasteless since I shared it hadharani

Next you attempted to confuse Mwanabiashara..too bad he is not here and NOBODY but you imagines he is anythng else but a man

Now you are trying to confuse my gender....

You not only need to grow up but you also need brains negro, Kifacki underground pyramids and Nungi FGM-esque stance did you in. I will never tire reminding you of that.

PS: Quit abusing PM, am happily married
Mrs. Vooke

I am done with you.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: veritas on September 12, 2014, 12:20:55 PM
Vooke, stop.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: vooke on September 12, 2014, 12:24:22 PM
Address BOTH of us, otherwise any salvo from Omorlo will be met with that. Do you want me to share all his/her PMs?
Vooke, stop.
Title: Re: Banning Mwanabiashara was purely partisan
Post by: Omollo on September 12, 2014, 12:56:42 PM
Vooke, stop.

Veritas

I can promise you I will not bother vooke anymore. In fact since he is a man of God, I ask that he bury the hatchet, and allow me to help fill up the soil. He is my dear Brother.