The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Nov 09, 2025 5:46 pm Keen, not to stifle your flair, but, have you considered that rapidly posting in series without exposition may be considered by some as 'spam'?

Food for thought.

ex·po·si·tion
[ˌekspəˈziSHən]
noun
a comprehensive description and explanation of an idea or theory:

I prefer a more consice approach.

con·cise
[kənˈsīs]
adjective
giving the relevant or necessary information clearly and in a few words;

spam
[spam]
trademark
a canned meat product made mainly from ham.
verb
send the same message indiscriminately to (large numbers of recipients) on the internet.

Stubble, do you think that this is spam:

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=18378#p18378

?

Do you consider this spam:

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=489

?

This:

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=179

?

This:

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=575

?

This:

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=486

?

This:

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=405

?

And where was your concern about "spam" when this drivel was posted:

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=459

?

I could go on and on and on and on, use more "exposition" if you will, but I think the above will suffice. What do you think Stubble, is that enough exposition for you?

Stubble, I concisely responded to 3 different people in 4 posts, in which I concisely pointed out, with photo's, that the OP is demonstably false, the author of the thread is a mentally ill liar, asked 3 relavent questions that the threads author has been repeatedly dodging, and asked you a question about the same.

Give us an example of how you would have done the same differently - with exposition and in a way that some would not consider to be spam.

Keen, it's the repetition that seems spammy Sir. Concise is good. You encapsulate the argument well.

You are well aware that the poster in question has been dodged your queries previously and has not answered them. Matter of fact, they have bluntly refused.

Endlessly bumping a series of threads with the same argument is by definition spam Sir.

Surely you can see that.

Stubble wrote: ↑Mon Nov 10, 2025 6:43 pm You are well aware that the poster in question has been bosed your queries previously and has not answered them. Matter of fact, they have bluntly refused.

Stubble, do you deny that Nesserto repeatedly replies to my posts with "spammy" replies?

How much do you want to bet that I can show you dozens of examples where Nesserto has replied to my posts with "spammy" replies?

And "the poster in question" bluntly refuses to answer my questions huh?

You're full of shit Stubble:

"when I start to answer you, you clearly do not follow the answers."

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=18202#p18202

"today I have been answering you"

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=18185#p18185

"All have been answered."

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=18152#p18152

"Within a couple of posts, where I start to answer Keen's questions"

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=18125#p18125

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; Non-nefarious diggings for such things as garbage pits, cellars, wells, latrines, septic pits, etc. - were dug at Treblinka II - ??

True

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; Archaeologists can easily distinguish a garbage pit from a mass grave?

True

How many actual mass graves did CSC actually prove actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp?

11

Of the 15 alleged Treblinka II graves / cremation pits in question - the one that you can conclusively prove currently contains the most human remains is number: _?_.

I don't know

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=18099#p18099

What the lying coward does is run away every time it gets cornered, only to start a new thread and repeat the lies. To not respond to Nesserto's lies and propaganda, is to acquiesce. When a person gets cornered on a "debate" forum, and is allowed to run away again and again, and start new threads and make new posts that demand bitch-slap responses, that person should get those bitch-slap responses - in spades, just as often as they start new spammy threads and posts. If you don't like my responses, then why aren't you demanding that something be done about the blatent dodging that goes on around here? How many times did you have to ask bombsaway the same queston in this thread: ( https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=17172#p17172 ) You did what you had to do to get a response. If you don't like seeing the same questions over and over again, the demand that the lying cowards who dodge them answer the fucking questions. If you and your ilk would grow a pair and treat Nesserto like you treated bombsaway, maybe we could call this place an actual debate forum.

The irony here is I was thinking about that very problem this morning, and have what I think is a very good solution to the problem. I'll post it in this secton here later when I have the time: https://codohforum.com/viewforum.php?f=2

We are talking past each other Keen. As you say in your last statement of your rebut, you see the issue and you believe you have a solution.

I look forward to your implementation of the solution Sir.

Good luck with things.

Stubble wrote: ↑Mon Nov 10, 2025 6:43 pm Keen, it's the repetition that seems spammy Sir. Concise is good. You encapsulate the argument well.

You are well aware that the poster in question has been dodged your queries previously and has not answered them. Matter of fact, they have bluntly refused.

Endlessly bumping a series of threads with the same argument is by definition spam Sir.

Surely you can see that.

I answer questions when I am referred to as Nessie, the male pronoun is used and there is no bullying or abuse, in any form. Would you let yourself be bullied into answering hundreds of questions, by someone who refuses to answer your questions?

Stubble wrote: ↑Mon Nov 10, 2025 9:26 pm We are talking past each other Keen. As you say in your last statement of your rebut, you see the issue and you believe you have a solution.

I look forward to your implementation of the solution Sir.

Good luck with things.

I cannot see hos posts. What is his solution?

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 7:34 am What is his solution?

I am also interested to see if Keen has a rhetorical final solution to the debate question.

HansHill wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 10:12 am

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 7:34 am What is his solution?

I am also interested to see if Keen has a rhetorical final solution to the debate question.

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=598

Let's do a trial thread / post as suggested in the link in the above thread.

Let's say that my real name is Roberta Mulencamp and I have proven that I am a real person and that is my real name. I have accepted the challenge to post the following statement of fact in the CODOH Cross Examinaton section and I titled my thread - Treblinka II's "huge mass grave" F16, and my rebuttable presumption / statement of fact is this:

Carolyn Sturdy-Colls has scientifically and conclusively proven that the grave she labeled F16 actually exists and currently contains the remains of at least two people - via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology.

I am ready to defend that statment of fact / rebuttable presumption and will answer any relevant question related to it.

Bring it deniers.

A note to Nessie:

I will answer any relavent question that you have in defense of my above statement of fact.

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 7:33 am I answer questions when I am referred to as Nessie, the male pronoun is used and there is no bullying or abuse, in any form.

Let's put that to the test:

Mr. Nessie,

Did CSC discover archaeological evidence that proves the existence of the "huge mass grave" that she labeled F16 - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes., then;

Can you show us the physical evidence that proves that TII "huge mass grave" F16 actually exists and actually contains the remains of at least two people?

Do you deny that Treblinka II's F16 is an actual "huge mass grave" that has been scientifically proven to contain the remains of at least two people - Yes. - or - No. - ??

A few more Treblinka maps that DeathCamps.org doesn't have.

Their "KUDLIK, WIERNIK, TRAUTSOLT MAP" from Oboz stracen w Treblince was revised in 1946 in Obóz zagłady Treblinka with more details and revisions to the language in the map key:



- full reprt here

There's also this map from the Ringelblum Archive, date "After 07.1942." The version on the archive's website is much larger.



And this one, from the 1964-1965 trial of Kurt Franz, reproduced in Chad Gibbs's dissertation "Against that Darkness: Revolt at Treblinka."



DeathCamps.org really needs an update or successor. It's not on HTTPS, which might be the reason their images can't be embedded here.

Why has my ability to edit the OP been removed? Do you not like me to add more evidence?