Re: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H ###

On 20/05/2024 11:16, immibis wrote:

On 19/05/24 21:48, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

>
No shit. Sick. Puke! Wow.
>
>
If olcott loves child porn and claims to be a god, well... Is there any hope? Puke! Gross. Sick fuck!

 I am not commenting on Olcott's habits but in this exchange, you are the troll. Please cease.

Indeed.
If someone has hard evidence of a crime (claiming to be "god" is not a crime), take it to the relevant authorities - don't spout it here.  If you don't have evidence, then accusations are public humiliation and lynching.  That in itself is likely to be criminal, or at least liable, and is morally unjustifiable here.  It is particularly reprehensible to do so on no more basis than some posts by unknown people about other unknown people.  Two vital principles for modern society are that people are innocent until proven guilty, and that establishing guilt and meting out punishment is handled by designated authorities and not private individuals - these apply to everyone.
It is appropriate to call out someone /here/ if they post something illegal, offensive, or outside the norms of public decency /here/, in one of these newsgroups.  It is not appropriate to spread or promote vicious rumours where we have no idea if they are true or not, no way of knowing if they are true or not, and which, if true, should be handled in a totally different context.
Olcott has posted (yet again) about his ideas regarding halting behaviour.  Let's all stick to that, responding in whatever way you think suits - supporting his ideas, arguing against them, ridiculing them, giving advice, telling him that they are way off-topic for comp.lang.c, ignoring him, killfiling him, or whatever.