If TSINAH is flaming about that, which is far more likely, then that kind of flame and implicit invocation of rach's authority should also be against the law of the land.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3956437&forum_id=2#35893384)

benzo was also explicitly goading TSINAH into calling his PO which undercuts the notion of it being threatening or over the line.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3956437&forum_id=2#35893399)

What I'm saying is that Rach absolutely should not be advising poasters to call other poaster's parole officers or otherwise endorse fucking around with other's IRL's. I suspect that's flame, and rach said no such thing, but flaming about that should also be against the LotL because it creates the false impression rach is taking sides in this stupid personal drama.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3956437&forum_id=2#35893433)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3956437&forum_id=2#35893484)

The law of the land is rach, because this is his absurd. "Rach told me to do <x>" is implicitly saying that <x> is permissible as the law of the land, because rach said to do it. Banning this shitty practice has "free speech" concerns roughly equivalent to banning saying "I'm a cop and you're under arrest."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3956437&forum_id=2#35893525)

all benzo did was post your ugly face, which you show to everyone in tiny chat 24/7

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3956437&forum_id=2#35894260)