"Full"? Hardly. There are some and there is a subsection for OO/EO "gloves off" discussion. Did you post there? I don't go there myself; I don't 'have a dog in that hunt".
As far as I know all but one of the mods/admins is some kind of EO either cradle or convert.
I would suggest that your thread was deleted because you did not follow the forum rules.
Ebor
joselauro
Their forum is full of coptic heretics pretending to be orthodox.
Two of the top 25 posters are Oriental Orthodox, or less than 10%. And while one admin is Oriental Orthodox, the other two are Greek Old Calendarist and ROCOR. Hardly a coptic paradise! 
I created a topic saing that "Oriental Orthodox are not orthodox" and they deleted it.
Actually, it's still on the board; it is topic 8739.0 and I am looking at it right now. The problem was an apparent lack of communication. There is a private section of the forum where OO and EO can argue with each other till their heart is content: it is to that section that the moderators moved your thread. All you have to do is PM a moderator and let them know that you want to participate in the private OO section, and they will let you in. Why a private section? Exactly because of polemical posts like you posted
Btw, in response to your argument that...
The OC has 7 (or 9 ecumenical concils).
The "oriental orthodox" have only 3 ecumenical concils, so they are not a part of our Church.
I presented the following questions...
Well which is it? It seems to me that someone who is "right believing" (Orthodox) would know how many God-inspired Ecumenical Councils there are. After all, pretty much everyone who is Orthodox has to agree to accept a Council for it to be given the title Ecumenical, so by definition it should be impossible for the Orthodox to not know how many Ecumenical Councils there are... so is it 7 or 9? I have read about a half dozen (almost all Greek) theologians--all of them from the 20th century--who advocate including the Photian and Palamite Councils as Ecumenical... but not everyone agrees. I know Orthodoxy moves slowly, but surely over 1,100 years after the Photian Councils there should be some consensus! The term Ecumenical seems to mean a very different thing to some theologians? Maybe 5 or 6 other Councils are Ecumenical Councils in the making, and we just don't know it yet?
And something else that I'm curious about (by pure luck I was thinking about this very topic this morning, thank you for posting on it.) In what way can the Vincentian canon be reconciled with historical fact? That is to say, if something must be believed everywhere, always, by all, then how can any of the Councils be considered Ecumenical, since none of them fulfilled the three criteria (or even one of them for that matter) perfectly? Indeed, so far from the Oriental Orthodox being unOrthodox because they reject Chalcedon, one could rather more persuasively argue that Chalcedon cannot be Ecumenical since a rather large portion of the Church rejected it. But really, what Council was ever accepted everywhere, always, and by all? Saying that the "all" of St. Vincent's canon refers to all who are truly Orthodox is not very persuasive, unless you happen to be one of the "all" who don't get condemned. Likewise with the everywhere and always criteria. Of course, theologians (Florovsky, Lossky, etc.) suggest ways around the problem, but I'd like to hear your own thoughts.
I look forward to seeing your answer on OC.net!
My oh my. This happens so often. Someone makes a lot of assumptions about our site and then comes here to complain. I bet you didn't know, Jose, that I am very good personal friends with Ioannis and Dcn Nikolai, who run this site. That's why I linked to this site in the post that was similar to yours (by Daher) Like I said, post here if you want to have solely Traditionalist Orthodox discussion. But OCnet is a public place where anyone who claims to be Orthodox can participate, in order to debate the issues. We don't all accept each other as Orthodox, but the point there is free debate to prove one's claims. I believe that since traditional Orthodoxy is the only truth, that it will win out. In fact, you would be surprised at how many people message me privately asking about the Old Calendarist Church. We have had people visit our parishes, etc., because of what I write on the site. Also, I just find such discussion interesting. The reason that that thread was moved is that we don't want every informational post to turn into a debate. So we have a private forum where one can debate forever these issues, but in the public forum Non-Chalcedonian and Chalcedonian issues are not debated. It solved the never-ending fights we used to have. Just PM me on the other site if you want access to the hidden forum.
All of this has been detailed many times here and there. In fact, there is even an announcement in the Oriental Orthodox forum and a invitation to it at the top of the forum under "NEWS" that flashes each time you refresh the page. If you had read a little bit more before just posting away you would have realized this. Would you go into your friend's house and immediately start contradicting him? Please, try to find out why we do things first. You could have PM'ed us for an explanation. Instead, you came here and talked about us behind our back.
Anastasios
joselauro, unfortunately for you, no one deleted your thread; as has been pointed out, it was simply re-located. That's unfortunate for you for two reasons: 1) you will look like a coward if you don't come back here and defend your baseless claims, 2) you will humiliate yourself trying to defend your baseless claims, especially if you continue the line of argument that you have initiated the discussion with. It's kind of a lose-lose situation for you there.
Quoting a polemical Chalcedonian article that declares the (Oriental) Orthodox Church to be heretical is hilariously pathetic if that's what you consider evidence against our Orthodoxy. The article you presented is full of hot-air and empty rhetoric; the author was too afraid to engage with the hardcore evidence, and obviously incapable of employing logic in order to formulate any sort of a reasonable argument. All I read in that article was "bla bla bla monophysite heretic bla bla bla reject the Holy fourth Ecumenical Council bla bla heretics bla" - all he could do was cry and whine. If that article is the best you can do, then you're wasting our time, and making a fool of yourself.
The (Oriental) Orthodox Church does not hide the fact she rejects the alleged Ecumenicity of any Council subsequent to Ephesus 431. She furthermore does not hide the fact that she is not in Communion with your Church, and has not been for over 1500 years. Observing these facts and concluding we are not Orthodox begs the question; it is the utmost stupidity. I hope you have better arguments then that.
Fraction on Wisdom
"If we fear to preach the truth because that causes us some inconvenience, how, in our gatherings, can we chant the combats and triumphs of our holy martyrs?” - St. Cyril of Alexandria
anastasios wrote:Would you go into your friend's house and immediately start contradicting him?
Well, it's a good way of attracting attention so as to get some other "disgrunts" to join your forum.
In case you missed it, it's:
joselauro wrote:P.S. See also our forum!
http://ortodoxiabrasil.iforums.com.br
"As long as it depends on Monothelitism, then Miaphysitism is nothing but a variant of Monophysitism."
EkhristosAnesti I am not a coward. You know, my topic was FIRST moved and THEN deleted. Unfortunately for you if you was unable to realize this. My friend Daher was baned from that forum because he as tradicional view just like yours. When I say they are not orthodox I mean they are not from our same church, just this. You don't know how things are here. In my country there are people tring to make a confusion, first we don't have "eastern" and "oriental" words used in this way (In fact this looks to come from WCC). The word 'orthodox' comes from greek and I think those who never used this language as 'jew' and 'coptic' shoud use anoter word for not make confusion. Just this. Of corse orthodox jew does not make so much confusion.
