Strap yourselves in, boys and girls. This is going to be a long one.
vote_for_palpatine said:
From my previous post:
And I have to beg, like L. Ron Hubbard's dog must have done at some point...
I think you've misunderstood. That post did not get you in trouble. Here's the original post that landed you on PROBATION:
vote_for_palpatine said:
Petition to Threadmaster in re: retroactive probation for poster "C3PX"
The subject of the thread during the period in question was "William Shatner". Poster "C3PX" responded in post #4 with "KHAAAAAAAAAAN!" - presumably referring to Shatner's line from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Strictly speaking, this line of dialogue was not solely delivered by Shatner. It was given in a similar way by Jason Alexander on Seinfeld (c. 1996-1997) and again by the ensemble cast in the movie Free Enterprise (1999). As multiple performances of this line of dialogue can be confirmed, it was the responsibility of the poster "C3PX" to specify which one he intended, but there was no accompanying detail providing such specificity.
I appeal to the Threadmaster, for great justice, to retroactively pass a judgment of PROBATION!!! on poster "C3PX" for his neglectful ambiguity in this matter. Though I myself opined - correctly - that every post on every thread all across the internet is ultimately about William Shatner, the burden falls upon the poster to provide de jure proof of this, not de facto proof based on my ultimately correct supposition.
I only hope I am not out of turn here in suggesting punishments for thread participants, but it occurred to me that action must be taken and nowhere in the thread is there a resource availing one of the opportunity to take such action. If I have stepped too far, I am prepared for the consequences. The greater good of bringing more Shatner into the thread must be served.
Sincerely,
vote_for_palpatine
VFP/rmc
Enclosures upon request
And here was my response:
TV's Frink said:
VFP, you are not outside the bounds of reasonableness in your questioning of another thread-member's supposed on-topic post. Your diligence is commendable. However, your post contained one glaring error...violation of Rule #1!
PROBATION!!!
And here's the post that put you at risk for the HALL OF SHAME:
vote_for_palpatine said:
Sorry to respond so late, but the message was late in getting to me here on Rura Penthe, where I am serving my probated sentence. I realize you didn't send me here, but I figured I better find that hot chick that could turn into Shatner. That way if my probation was permanent, I have already made the best of it.
(Something about this reads creepy - ah, here's the edit button)
And here was my response:
TV's Frink said:
I'm sorry - where was the connection to Scientology?
VFP and ABC, as you were already on PROBATION, you are hereby notified that you have been nominated for the HALL OF SHAME. Should you believe this nomination is in error, you may appeal. You are given 24 hours to state your defense. Otherwise, you will be inducted into the HALL.
So...you think you are being treated unfairly? I could have easily just thrown you in the HALL. Instead, I'm still waiting to hear how your Star Trek post related to Scientology.
Tick tick tick!
And in other news...
Akwat Kbrana said:
I got it from my handy-dandy English-Latin/Latin-English dictionary. Aula is "court" or "hall" and Pudendus is "shameful." Granted, I'm no expert in Latin, so the grammar may be off...

lol...
PROBATION!!! (pic didn't show up, so Rule #1 is violated)
C3PX said:
Wooooohooooo! My good name seems to have been cleared from the hall of shame!
PROBATION!!! (clear violation of Rule #1)
Wooohoooo! indeed.