Quote Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
I understand the reply, and that is fair. But allow me to elaborate on my question, please. I suppose I did leave it rather vague.

Although I can't find the thread at the moment, I recall that several patrons had seen images which Soly had claimed to have taken. I was one of those patrons, and I had seen one of those photos in Time or Newsweek, if my memory serves me correctly.

If I also remember correctly, there was a discrepancy between what Soly had provided to us and what the Magazine offered. I don't recall entirely, but something about the origination or originator of the photograph.

The controversy here was quite genuine, and the patrons had some legitimate questions.

The results of that controversy concluded with thread closures, stonewalling, and Soly's disappearance. If Solypsist had been only a member and not a staff member, the conversation would have continued and questions might hae been answered. What many of us found disturbing was the way that this was handled. We weren't allowed to discuss the issue, and legitimate questions were never answered.

I was hoping that since it has been nearly a year, the time would be right to ask about this and maybe find out the truth.

Forgive me, but I appear to be incorrect about that. It seems that this goes to the depths of the Org administration. Which gives us the truth about this conspiracy:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
TosaInu is actually Dick Cheney, and Solypsist is an undercover CIA agent who has disappeared to continue his work in a secret eastern european torture prison.
Hello Divinus Arma,

I know bits of the topic. I've not seen the topic(s) that spawned that topic.

I know where the topic is, I know where Solypsist is, I think it's a weird topic and that's it.

Maybe staffmembers who were fully active there and then can comment? Please remember knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. in the rules.