Michel,

I read all Bill's messages more or less immediately after he wrote them, and I was shocked. I have not taken the time to go back and read through all the different message afterwards since this has become a very large thread. From the different comments from other persons yesterday and today, I came to the obviously wrong understanding that his messages had been removed. Considering the vocabulary in Bill's original messages, I would have supported censorship in this case, but nobody has any reason to think that I am narrowminded just because of that. His original messages could easily have given him a much harder punishment than being banned from here. 'Nuff said'

>>Well, if flockhead was all he called him. I was one of the (few?) people who read Bill's messages before he was kicked out and his messages were censored/deleted. I was wondering what drug Bill had taken, because even the relatively liberal censorship in Norway would have stopped his messages. To call them obscene, is to put it very mild. He was asking for trouble, and he got it. In this case I must agree that the banning was well deserved.
>
>This is a bad accusion. No one here do things like that. What you are confused about is that he updated one or two of his messages minutes after he created it to make it more smooth, which is what I seem to understand when reading some related messages. From what I understand, the messages were much worst before he updated it. Again, I can only rely on some messages I read here. This is not something I can confirm as I didn't observe that directly.
>
>As for flockhead, as the four letter word is not accepted on UT, as validation is kicking in when someone tries to enter that word in a message, such as multiple other vulgarities as well, it seems the member used three characters instead to represent the letter U. Personally, I don't see any relation of "loc" versus letter "u" in what I read.