and who in the mansion the commander?
boys, and who is right now in the shoutbox runs, well, like, with the following order?moder, my dear man, if you are reading this - answer obchestvo accomplish your goal, they say, such and such a servant of God.
Ali is it a secret?
[Denis] wrote:
In my opinion,Chicken
chicken? how cute.
but it's not for sure, I would not want to bother the user if this is not true.
Spoiler
[Denis] wrote:
In the shoutbox strictly was,but the punishment can fly immediately
not immediately? I don't think so. based on my last activity is no more than one comment per day, and only in the shoutbox can with high probability to specify what exactly I slapped the warning.
paragraph 8 of the rules of PG. Provocation (which is what is imputed to me the blame) around, as well as discussion of topics directly or indirectly related to politics, ideologies, religions or nationalities.
I'm a very law-abiding citizen (and not my fault that I'm interested in topics related to politics and ideologies), probably would've been satisfied with a similar explanation of my rights on the PG... if not for that, namely, paragraph 4. article 29 of the Constitution.
4. Everyone has the right freely to seek, receive, transmit, produce and disseminate information by any legal way. The list of information constituting a state secret is defined by Federal law.
if reputable I site of PG internal rules for users have the highest legal force in relation to the Constitution, it is no problem - of course I have to obey them.
if not, then I wish all the participants of the described situation, it would remain within the legal field, defined by the basic law, not private rules for internal use.
I want to see that you don't judge the administration's decisions, but merely trying to analyze the legitimacy of its application to yourself, a loved one. simple selfish interest and curiosity, nothing illegal.
Spoilers at the end, contrary to popular wisdom - sometimes it's better sorry than safe
in order to verify this simple idea is enough to look at the profile of this newborn user of PG, a list of actions which can be counted on the fingers
https://users.playground.ru/2811698/
and to perform what may be received the warning about the provocations.
Hello
Hello wrote:
not immediately?
There was an episode, I like something about our army in detail painted, or her mobile.I ban slapped for provocation on the national and political question.Only I didn't cause I wrote it.Slapped not once, after nekotoroe time
Hello wrote:
I am a very law abiding citizen
We write the laws to be broken for a fee.This is his deformity. To take the same traffic rules:it is easier to pay off than give it to the right.
Hello wrote:
(and it's not my fault that I'm interested in topics related to politics and ideologies), probably would've been satisfied with a similar explanation of my rights on the PG... if not for that, namely, paragraph 4. article 29 of the Constitution.
That, incidentally, is also an interesting question:why, in principle, to ban for politics?Stalker somehow eternal ban slapped:
https://users.playground.ru/366812/
Hey, unban
Hello wrote:
if not, then I wish all the participants of the described situation, it would remain within the legal field, defined by the basic law, not private rules for internal use.
Then, it turns out, it isn't just about you, and all of us, users of PG.Sour legally savvy, he might be able to explain this phenomenon.Noesli it PG or be accused of tacit submission to the ROC (to people not to make noise, to punish them with a ban), then again ban
Hello wrote:
I want to see that you don't judge the administration's decisions, but merely trying to analyze the legitimacy of its application to yourself, a loved one. simple selfish interest and curiosity, nothing illegal.
Well, Yes.How to present:you can politely ask, and you can pounce with indignation and reproaches.The court will not go well, right?))) And funny it is:sued, because banned with the requirement to pay a certain amount in damages)).
Hello wrote:
and to perform what may be received the warning about the provocations.
For the poem received the tab)))).Considered for provocation is probably behind a thin
[Denis] wrote:
For the poem received the tab)))).Considered for provocation is probably behind a thin
that is, people who have the right to stick such labels initially believes the public manifestation of love for the President of the provocation (even thin)?
Spoilerage, heh... we can only guess at what made to such a guardian of morals political talk show on any of the Russian Federal channels, whether he is editor of one of these shows.
Spoilergate, this person is nothing but praises of the leader did not publish (which means the same rights[Denis]), most likely it is for them and got a yellow card.