PDA

View Full Version : What is this Martian Process



Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 02:56 PM
Gentlemen and Jean,

This is from sol 1296 Victoria crater Mars. My question is what process would present this image. Note I said would.

Mars has always presented outcrop disturbance in satellite images. Gullies have appeared with origination points associated with outcrops at certain levels. The debate has been are they dry slides or water related. I believe we are seeing both.

This image is from the Opportunity Rover sol 1296 and clearly shows a disturbed area in what I have petitioned off as area I. We see a change in surface characteristics, berry or spherical distribution. We also se a change in color, yes I said color. This image is from my hero image man, Hortonheardawho. I have no idea how he come up with this but I will tell you what he told me. He believes that each image has a story to tell, letís see if we can figure this out. We see in area II surface material disruption, smooth patches, berry displacement and color change.

ďYou will see a broad swath of very smooth ground in the left area, which is eroded smooth by... what? The ground to the right is extremely rough, and it is also raised. It is clearly where not as much erosion is occurring.

So we have a lower "trough" eroded down the crater face where water and sand have flowed downhill, and the result is just like any arroyo or streambed. Geologists take note- smooth versus rough- lower versus raised- this is erosion.Ē

The above quote is from Sir Charles W. Shults III
Xenotech Research

I really donít know what he is saying but that is his analysis of this image. He wrote a book or two and I figure guys that write books are smart. You guys know what I think it is. OK Grumpy old scientist, time to go to work. Help this woo woo.


Image (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1244/1467023787_d1f428eb15_o.jpg)

Note from moderator: please do not post huge images inline. People with dialup connections don't appreciate it.
- ToSeek

jlhredshift
2007-Oct-01, 03:17 PM
If I saw this in the field here on Earth I would say silt deposition followed by drying with wind blown debris of larger grains. But, without a Geologists' hammer in the field of view for scale, I'm unsure.:lol:

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 03:28 PM
If I saw this in the field here on Earth I would say silt deposition followed by drying with wind blown debris of larger grains. But, without a Geologists' hammer in the field of view for scale, I'm unsure.:lol:

Thanks, I would say followed by drying to.

dfrank

R.A.F.
2007-Oct-01, 04:14 PM
The above quote is from Sir Charles W. Shults III
Xenotech Research

Just so you'll know...Charles Shults has been discussed here before. Here is one thread. (http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/11774-chip-shults-martian-fossils.html#post233433)

Posters here pretty much concluded that his ideas weren't very credible.

jlhredshift
2007-Oct-01, 04:20 PM
Just so you'll know...Charles Shults has been discussed here before. Here is one thread. (http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/11774-chip-shults-martian-fossils.html#post233433)

Posters here pretty much concluded that his ideas weren't very credible.

Agreed, also has the rock grinder been applied to the white stuff? If it is "dried" stuff it had to happen slow, explosive devolitization would not leave that effect i.e. implies an atmosphere. And, anytime we are looking at Mars geology we do not know if we are looking at 3.? or 4.? bya stuff.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 04:33 PM
ďBackground isn't supposed to have anything to do with the merit of scientific workí I did like that part. If I put on my resume I joined BAUT and was banned for 30 of my first 45 days they would not like me either.

I donít know who is right or wrong. I am just a weatherman that sees things in the rover images that donít add up so here I am. Nobody on this forum can say I didnít kiss a lot of rear to have this opportunity.

I think scientists are all weird, they have something in them to bring to the table. I showed you the image. The Rover took it. Letís do the science thing. No claims just questions.

Dfrank, aka Darwin from Mars Rover Blog

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 04:59 PM
This is from sol 1296 Victoria crater Mars. [...] This image is from the Opportunity Rover sol 1296 and clearly shows a disturbed area in what I have petitioned off as area I. Image (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1244/1467023787_d1f428eb15_o.jpg)

That manipulated image is composed with undocumented processes from undocumented sources, but probably from multiple official NASA images from the general Planetary Data System (http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/) (PDS) or here at the specific MER raw image site, Opportunity :: Sol 1296 :: Pancam (http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/opportunity_p1296.html).

(Dfrank, please help us out by leading us more surely to official images you want inspected. I'm weary of having to support you. Thanks for at least describing the true source well enough to be located, but links are appreciated. It imposes less on your readers. Thanks.)

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 05:08 PM
That manipulated image is composed with undocumented processes from undocumented sources, but probably from multiple official NASA images from the Planetary Data System (http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/) (PDS) or here at the MER raw image site, Opportunity :: Sol 1296 :: Pancam (http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/opportunity_p1296.html).

(Dfrank, please help us out by leading us more surely to official images you want inspected. I'm weary of having to support you. Thanks for at least describing the true source well enough to be located, but links are appreciated. It imposes less on your readers. Thanks.)

Do we need to default to grayscale? In this image erosion does not need color enhancement. I just wanted to show the mud.

dfrank

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 05:16 PM
Binary,

You have always supported me, bad boy. We all have our purpose, you must know something. I will let you guys know right away I am not real smart, but I aint stupid.

dfrank

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 05:27 PM
Do we need to default to grayscale? In this image erosion does not need color enhancement. I just wanted to show the mud.

If you want to ask people to analyze images, ask them to analyze official ones, and lead them there, not ones gobbed up by who-knows-what sloppy processes. It's the polite thing to do for people you are expecting to help you understand something.

Those undocumented processes make a difference in what is seen by analysts. They certainly shade the results, and I know you don't want shady results. Provide us the raw images, unmanipulated, please!

And there is no proof of mud there in that image, or the originals, so I would advise you to use different wording.

I hope you just wanted to show us something that to you looked like mud and ask what it could be, right? You're not going to assert some non-mainstream interpretation of what it is here in Q&A are you?

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 05:34 PM
Binary,

You have always supported me, bad boy. We all have our purpose, you must know something. I will let you guys know right away I am not real smart, but I aint stupid.

I'm not a bad boy.

I try to support you in technical presentation because I see you having trouble and I see you causing undue trouble for others.

I definitely do not support the erroneous conclusions you present about what you look at. Wrong is wrong.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 05:39 PM
If you want to ask people to analyze images, ask them to analyze official ones, and lead them there, not ones gobbed up by who-knows-what sloppy processes. It's the polite thing to do for people you are expecting to help you understand something.

Those undocumented processes make a difference in what is seen by analysts. They certainly shade the results, and I know you don't want shady results. Provide us the raw images, unmanipulated, please!

And there is no proof of mud there in that image, or the originals, so I would advise you to use different wording.

I hope you just wanted to show us something that to you looked like mud and ask what it could be, right? You're not going to assert some non-mainstream interpretation of what it is here in Q&A are you?

Yes I am. If you are going to just go by mainstream then itís not Q and A. You are not saying the answers can only be mainstream, are you? If you are we are limiting the response to it must be dust and wind.

Dfrank

R.A.F.
2007-Oct-01, 05:50 PM
No claims just questions.

I can assure you that you will not find answers from reading anything Sir Shults has to say.


I just wanted to show the mud.

That doesn't sound like a question, it sounds like a claim.

R.A.F.
2007-Oct-01, 05:52 PM
If you are going to just go by mainstream then itís not Q and A. You are not saying the answers can only be mainstream, are you?

OK, then...if your question is "does this image show mud?", then the answer is NO.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 05:58 PM
I can assure you that you will not find answers from reading anything Sir Shults has to say.



That doesn't sound like a question, it sounds like a claim.

That was in response to a question of why I wanted color. Thatís why we all want color. We can go grayscale. The erosion is there I think. You guys know more than me. Lets donít make this a color issue. We can do this in grayscale. WHY IS THE SURFACE DIFFFERENT? Tell me why the Martian wind and dust is different in that area. That is a question, no?

dfrank

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 06:13 PM
WHY IS THE SURFACE DIFFFERENT? Tell me why the Martian wind and dust is different in that area. That is a question, no?

That is a question, yes. At least the (SHOUTED?) first sentence is. The "tell me" is an imperative sentence with which I'm having trouble complying.

Different from what? In what area? Area I in the diagram? Area II? The crater wall slope as opposed to the surrounding plains? The rim? The white rocks as opposed to the dark rocks? The soft eroded rocks as opposed to the harder less-eroded rocks? The small mounds of regolith, opposed to the rocks?

I'm lost. Help, please.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 06:16 PM
That is a question, yes. At least the (SHOUTED?) first sentence is. The "tell me" is an imperative sentence with which I'm having trouble complying.

Different from what? In what area? Area I in the diagram? Area II? The crater wall slope as opposed to the surrounding plains? The rim? The white rocks as opposed to the dark rocks? The soft eroded rocks as opposed to the harder less-eroded rocks? The small mounds of regolith, opposed to the rocks?

I'm lost. Help, please.

Cant help you with comprehension. Call in the boss.

dfrank

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 06:25 PM
Cant help you with comprehension.

I suspect you're not going to get a lot of help if you prefer to refuse to clarify your vague questions. That's not in the spirit of BAUT Q&A.


Call in the boss.

What boss are you talking about? You have confused me further.

astromark
2007-Oct-01, 06:27 PM
The environment of Mars is not that of Earth. Pressure is minuscule and gravity is less.. So a damp surface material might be dried by winds and appear as we see... It does not follow that a liquid was present here. It just looks like it by Earth like conditions I agree. We have not yet proof of water on Mars. Mud might be as close as we get. This image is interesting but, proves very little. Lets go have a look.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 06:34 PM
The difference in the surface is apparent between area I and area II. There must be a reason. What is it? If you can not see it then I say call your boss. I donít know what spirit you have on BAUT, but the truth is what I am all about.

dfrank

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 06:36 PM
He was there real fast on the face man. Why not me?

dfrank

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 07:01 PM
The difference in the surface is apparent between area I and area II. There must be a reason. What is it?


Thank you. You're asking what is the difference in the surface between Area I and II as marked on that image (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1244/1467023787_d1f428eb15_o.jpg)? Does this image from NASA (http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/1296/1P243234339EFF86JZP2366L2M1.HTML) include the diagonal dividing line between your lighter Area I and darker II? Mark up an official image if it would help you ask your question.

I see lighter rocks and darker rocks, in fractured bedrock of an impact crater's wall. They are certainly from different stratigraphic layers. The light rock is, I believe, what they referred to as the "bathtub ring", an intriguing feature visible from the rim. It probably offers clues to the level and persistence of ancient waters on Mars that helped form, or modified, these sedimentary rocks. The different colored rocks were laid down at different times, in different chemical environments, forming different minerals that look different.

That's it on a gross level, light vs. dark. But, I suspect that's too easy. Is there some other, finer detailed, more subtle, surface variation that you are asking about? Please be explicit. We're not mind readers. Really. We don't know what you're thinking.


If you can not see it then I say call your boss. I donít know what spirit you have on BAUT, but the truth is what I am all about.

You assume I have a boss to call. Why? What is your point? That doesn't make any sense. Is it true for you?

You surely do seem not to recognize the spirit of BAUT Q&A in which almost all questioners do what they can to help the people who are trying to help them. Refusing to clarify questions is not in that spirit. It assists the search for truth, important to you if that's what you're all about.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 07:14 PM
You are right it aint that simple. Let me hold your hand. Look at the image. See the wash pattern, between area I, and all the other. Let us not go to the source yet. This is just questions.

Donít go to photon emission. I been there.

dfrank

Jim
2007-Oct-01, 07:21 PM
That was in response to a question of why I wanted color. Thatís why we all want color. We can go grayscale. The erosion is there I think. You guys know more than me. Lets donít make this a color issue. We can do this in grayscale. WHY IS THE SURFACE DIFFFERENT? Tell me why the Martian wind and dust is different in that area. That is a question, no?

dfrank

01101001 has posted a link to the original JPL/NASA image, in grayscale. Looking at it, the features appear to be as he described, fractured rock.

As to why the surface is different, you have answered your own question, I think. The surface appears differently because it is different, part of it is rock outcroppings exposed by the wind, part of it is covered by soil. You can find the same thing in many locations on earth... no mystery.

If you want to have Phil look at the image and give his opinion, PM him (The Bad Astronomer).

(BTW, let's be sure to keep this thread Q&A and not try to espouse any ATM ideas here.)

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 07:22 PM
You are right it aint that simple. Let me hold your hand. Look at the image. See the wash pattern, between area I, and all the other. Let us not go to the source yet. This is just questions.

You don't have to be patronizing. Let go of my hand, and just help with earnest words. Otherwise I shall lose interest.

No, I see no wash pattern. To me a wash pattern is the result of a wash. I don't see evidence of one.

"between area I, and all the other" Other what? You mean some "pattern" between your Area I and your Area II? Along the long yellow line? Under the yellow line?

Can't you just mark up an image for us with what you are asking about? Why do we have to play 20 questions?

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 07:25 PM
01101001 has posted a link to the original JPL/NASA image, in grayscale. Looking at it, the features appear to be as he described, fractured rock.

As to why the surface is different, you have answered your own question, I think. The surface appears differently because it is different, part of it is rock outcroppings exposed by the wind, part of it is covered by soil. You can find the same thing in many locations on earth... no mystery.

If you want to have Phil look at the image and give his opinion, PM him (The Bad Astronomer).

(BTW, let's be sure to keep this thread Q&A and not try to espouse any ATM ideas here.)


Thanks I will.

dfrank. aka Darwin from Mars rover blog

aurora
2007-Oct-01, 07:27 PM
You are right it aint that simple. Let me hold your hand. Look at the image. See the wash pattern, between area I, and all the other.

I don't see a "wash" pattern, but I am not sure what a "wash" pattern is.

I do see some ripples on the left of the image which look to me like windblown material.

Is that what you meant? washboard?

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 07:33 PM
I did not see a PM area for this Bad Astronomer. Just tell Him Darwin wants to talk to him.

Dfrank

01101001
2007-Oct-01, 07:46 PM
I did not see a PM area for this Bad Astronomer. Just tell Him Darwin wants to talk to him.

The Bad Astronomer profile (http://www.bautforum.com/members/the-bad-astronomer.html)

See there: Send a private message to The Bad Astronomer (http://www.bautforum.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=3)

Be considerate of his time, please. He might be busy fighting anti-science.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 07:52 PM
The Bad Astronomer profile (http://www.bautforum.com/members/the-bad-astronomer.html)

See there: Send a private message to The Bad Astronomer (http://www.bautforum.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=3)

Be considerate of his time, please. He might be busy fighting anti-science.

We should do this private, shuuuse

dfrank, aka Darwin from the Mars Rover blog

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 08:05 PM
The Bad astronomer aint nothing to me. The regular guy means a lot.

dfrank. aka Darwin

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 08:15 PM
The Bad astronomer aint nothing to me.

Have you ever heard the phrase "stepping on the tail of the Dragon"?

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 08:25 PM
Have you ever heard the phrase "stepping on the tail of the Dragon"?

Yea. I do that every day. If you dont, than what are you. I have seen a lot. You should have seen some of the images from Dana Johnson. Hort is a good man. I have not even gone to Dana images yet. I am just warming up

Pm Hort he will tell ya.

Darwin

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 08:29 PM
I am just warming up



I can see that. I just hope you don't overheat.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 08:32 PM
I can see that. I just hope you don't overheat.

We will see.

Darwin

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 08:41 PM
lets get to the part were goldilocks meets the bears. Call that bad astronomer

Darwin

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 08:44 PM
lets get to the part were goldilocks meets the bears. Call that bad astronomer

Darwin

It was already pointed out to you how to do it - go ahead and PM him.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 08:52 PM
Do we really need to go PM on this? That is so weak ,and yes you can tell him I said that. Ms Joan is my wife, she is a bad woman , she dont like weak folks.

Darwin

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 08:55 PM
Do we really need to go PM on this? That is so weak ,and yes you can tell him I said that. Ms Joan is my wife, she is a bad woman , she dont like weak folks.

Darwin

Are you PWI? Your posts don't make sense.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 08:59 PM
Lets see, you are wanting me to PM him. I am saying lets go public, or band me. I donít play.

Darwin

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 09:00 PM
. . . or band me. I donít play.

Darwin

If we're going to put you in a band you better be able to play.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 09:06 PM
Thats why we are here. If i could not play you would have said so spock. I showed my hand. Is he going to say wind and dust. I am a weather man. Strap it up brother.

Darwin

Neverfly
2007-Oct-01, 09:22 PM
Dfrank,
PM'ing is not a secret or weak tail between the legs approach.
PM'ing the administrator would be for the purpose of getting his attention.

If the Bad Astronomer has the time and inclination to go through every thread debunking vaguely sheilded claims such as this, would he have time to do his work(You know, the Day Job?) or live his life?

PM'ing will attract his attention to your thread. It would most likely be public as you wish it to be.

The rest of your posts make your admission and retraction of claims in the thread you started, "NASA the conspiracy generator" look like just a ruse to get support so you can blithely promote your claim in other sections of the board.
You have presented one image from a questionable source, with a questionable opinion from Sir Shultz. You ask to bring the science but you are not bringing any science!
So far you seem to be doing a lot of swaggering and blustering, some kind of macho man attitude and rebelling against authority.

You continue to see those who do not see water in your images as "your enemy" that you need to "call out."

A very large part of science in general, especially astronomical sciences is patience. If you are impatient in astronomy you will find yourself gnawing at the furniture a lot.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 09:26 PM
Dfrank,
PM'ing is not a secret or weak tail between the legs approach.
PM'ing the administrator would be for the purpose of getting his attention.

If the Bad Astronomer has the time and inclination to go through every thread debunking vaguely sheilded claims such as this, would he have time to do his work(You know, the Day Job?) or live his life?

PM'ing will attract his attention to your thread. It would most likely be public as you wish it to be.

The rest of your posts make your admission and retraction of claims in the thread you started, "NASA the conspiracy generator" look like just a ruse to get support so you can blithely promote your claim in other sections of the board.
You have presented one image from a questionable source, with a questionable opinion from Sir Shultz. You ask to bring the science but you are not bringing any science!
So far you seem to be doing a lot of swaggering and blustering, some kind of macho man attitude and rebelling against authority.

You continue to see those who do not see water in your images as "your enemy" that you need to "call out."

A very large part of science in general, especially astronomical sciences is patience. If you are impatient in astronomy you will find yourself gnawing at the furniture a lot.

**, tell him we should do it in public.

Darwin

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 09:28 PM
**, tell him we should do it in public.

Darwin

A duel!

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 09:31 PM
[QUOTE=Tucson_Tim;1080631]A duel![/QUOTe

Yep

Neverfly
2007-Oct-01, 09:33 PM
A duel!

I hardly think so...

The last duel between the B.A. and a claim promoter did not last long nor turn out well for the claim promoter.

More like a shoving match between an arrogant mouse and a Rhinoceros. And no, Dfrank, the B.A. is not the mouse in the analogy.

There is no duel...
If you wanted science, duels would be irrelevent.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 09:36 PM
I hardly think so...

The last duel between the B.A. and a claim promoter did not last long nor turn out well for the claim promoter.

More like a shoving match between an arrogant mouse and a Rhinoceros. And no, Dfrank, the B.A. is not the mouse in the analogy.

There is no duel...
If you wanted science, duels would be irrelevent.

I am what i am shut up.

Darwin

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 09:40 PM
I am what i am shut up.

Darwin

You're Popeye?

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 09:42 PM
He saw the image, we are at wind and dust i believe.

Darwin

antoniseb
2007-Oct-01, 09:49 PM
This is not a warning, but it is intended as guidance. Neverfly and Dfrank have fallen into kind of a trap. I'm asking them to both take a step back and try and see the bigger picture.

The reality is that Dfrank has an idea which most of us think is wrong, and he is exploring every possible way that he can see that might make his idea stand up. This process seems irritating to many of us, but isn't uncommon. Neverfly went a little over the line with his Rhino-mouse thing, and Dfrank went over the line saying 'shut up'.

What I'm hoping for here is that Dfrank will read more carefully the careful criticisms of his idea, and acknowledge them, and that Neverfly will apologize for the ad hom of painting Dfrank as an arrogant mouse.

Tucson_Tim
2007-Oct-01, 09:52 PM
Well, then I need to apologize too: For going a little too far and prodding Dfrank.

Sorry Dfrank.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 09:55 PM
Guys, This is between me and the man.

Darwin

Jim
2007-Oct-01, 10:09 PM
Dfrank, please be very careful in what you post. Your attitude is becoming smart alecky and antagonistic, and that's not good. You may have been prodded into some of it, but you should stop now.

It has been suggested to you that, if you really want Phil Plaitt to comment on the image you have posted, you should send him a private message (http://www.bautforum.com/1080538-post29.html) and ask him to join the thread. You should do so.

Maksutov
2007-Oct-01, 10:10 PM
Guys, This is between me and the man.

DarwinExcuse me, but the last time I checked, this was a public bulletin board. That means all posters who have something to say and stay within the rules for the BAUT are welcome in any thread.

Aren't you the same fellow who wrote elsewhere:
Gentlemen,

After careful consideration of the presentation I was trying to make in conjunction with a better understanding of this forum I would like to say, ďI do not have evidence.Ē...

I hope to ask a lot of questions in the future. You guys can rest assured; I will make no claims unless I have the evidence.That first word looks like "Gentlemen", not "Gentleman".

Neverfly
2007-Oct-01, 10:20 PM
This is not a warning, but it is intended as guidance. Neverfly and Dfrank have fallen into kind of a trap. I'm asking them to both take a step back and try and see the bigger picture.

The reality is that Dfrank has an idea which most of us think is wrong, and he is exploring every possible way that he can see that might make his idea stand up. This process seems irritating to many of us, but isn't uncommon. Neverfly went a little over the line with his Rhino-mouse thing, and Dfrank went over the line saying 'shut up'.

What I'm hoping for here is that Dfrank will read more carefully the careful criticisms of his idea, and acknowledge them, and that Neverfly will apologize for the ad hom of painting Dfrank as an arrogant mouse.


Actually the arrogant mouse was an ad hom toward MarsRevealer, but wrong all the same- So apologies to the unpresent M.R.

I encourage Dfrank to explore the science and to seek answers rather than theories.
I have been doing so all along.
I can hope this thread will yield such results that satisfy all parties involved.

The process is not what is irritating.
Personally, I don't have good answers for Dfrank a.k.a. Darwin - Having spoken at great length on and off the BAUT forum about the issue.
I, as much as anyone else, would love to have good solid answers.

Dfrank
2007-Oct-01, 10:23 PM
I say again. Lets get to it .

Darwin

Dfrank
2007-Oct-02, 12:11 AM
Guess you guys are scratching your heads. Just a heads up, I aint.

Darwin

Dfrank
2007-Oct-02, 12:57 AM
Ok phil. Darwin is here. Look at my image and tell me how wind and dust changes on the surface like that.

Darwin

Dfrank
2007-Oct-02, 01:15 AM
OK phill. I am going to bed. Got to go to work tomorrow. Study hard my friend., Aint much I aint heard, and we will do it tomorrow for all the world to see.

Darwin

Whirlpool
2007-Oct-02, 04:49 AM
Gentlemen and Jean,

Are you pertaining to me or someone else?

:confused:

Serenitude
2007-Oct-02, 06:25 AM
And thus ends the short, trolling BAUT Dfrank era, most of it spent on suspension.

This is actually a more cordial and polite version of a CT thread he started.

This is a community board, with the emphasis on community. All of our minds together are exponentially greater than the weakness of any individual flaw. This is not a dueling ground for machismo gunslingers. Especially those that forget their guns ;)

Dfrank is banned for life. Thread closed.