- This topic has 645 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by
fredo4.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 11, 2010 at 5:32 PM #563947June 11, 2010 at 5:32 PM #562906
NotCranky
Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote Russell]
I believe you asked us to email complaints, maybe sdddude did this but his schoolyard bullying tactics against brian are, or were, on the threads.
[/quote]To be honest though, it was a case of bully against bully. “briansd1” tries(ed) to turn almost every discussion into a Democrat vs Republican mudthrowing contest.
sduuuude has been on this board far longer than briansd1 and we haven’t had that much of a problem with sdduuuude before. I suspect that he may have just had enough of briansd1 and ‘lost it’. I just prefer not to ‘feed the trolls’.— tried because I am giving briansd1 the benefit of doubt on his ‘reformation’.
That said, I think briansd1 will have a problem resisting the temptation. I get the feeling he likes the attention that ‘stirring the pot’ gives him, almost at an OCD level.[/quote]
You make a lot of sense, ucodeng. I am not saying I don’t understand people’s disappointment with the partisan mudslinging . Usually it is a cooperative effort and Brian is outnumbered (admitting he more or less begs for it). I feel that talking of banning and nuking him has this slippery slope into conform or be cast out, clique territory.To their credit many of his adversaries are concerned about this.
More people should cooperate with Rich’s aims of eliminating the problem,as you do by not feeding trolls, before scapegoating an individual, even if he represents the worst in their minds. On the other hand, I think that as long as there is a free forum for discussing illegal immigration,distribution of wealth and these kinds of topics, and “nutty teabaggers”, kicking someone off won’t change the tendency for “red meat” throwing and nasty rebuttals, or various other kinds of hi-jacks to creep back in.
June 11, 2010 at 5:32 PM #563004Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote Russell]
I believe you asked us to email complaints, maybe sdddude did this but his schoolyard bullying tactics against brian are, or were, on the threads.
[/quote]To be honest though, it was a case of bully against bully. “briansd1” tries(ed) to turn almost every discussion into a Democrat vs Republican mudthrowing contest.
sduuuude has been on this board far longer than briansd1 and we haven’t had that much of a problem with sdduuuude before. I suspect that he may have just had enough of briansd1 and ‘lost it’. I just prefer not to ‘feed the trolls’.— tried because I am giving briansd1 the benefit of doubt on his ‘reformation’.
That said, I think briansd1 will have a problem resisting the temptation. I get the feeling he likes the attention that ‘stirring the pot’ gives him, almost at an OCD level.[/quote]
You make a lot of sense, ucodeng. I am not saying I don’t understand people’s disappointment with the partisan mudslinging . Usually it is a cooperative effort and Brian is outnumbered (admitting he more or less begs for it). I feel that talking of banning and nuking him has this slippery slope into conform or be cast out, clique territory.To their credit many of his adversaries are concerned about this.
More people should cooperate with Rich’s aims of eliminating the problem,as you do by not feeding trolls, before scapegoating an individual, even if he represents the worst in their minds. On the other hand, I think that as long as there is a free forum for discussing illegal immigration,distribution of wealth and these kinds of topics, and “nutty teabaggers”, kicking someone off won’t change the tendency for “red meat” throwing and nasty rebuttals, or various other kinds of hi-jacks to creep back in.
June 11, 2010 at 5:32 PM #563510Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote Russell]
I believe you asked us to email complaints, maybe sdddude did this but his schoolyard bullying tactics against brian are, or were, on the threads.
[/quote]To be honest though, it was a case of bully against bully. “briansd1” tries(ed) to turn almost every discussion into a Democrat vs Republican mudthrowing contest.
sduuuude has been on this board far longer than briansd1 and we haven’t had that much of a problem with sdduuuude before. I suspect that he may have just had enough of briansd1 and ‘lost it’. I just prefer not to ‘feed the trolls’.— tried because I am giving briansd1 the benefit of doubt on his ‘reformation’.
That said, I think briansd1 will have a problem resisting the temptation. I get the feeling he likes the attention that ‘stirring the pot’ gives him, almost at an OCD level.[/quote]
You make a lot of sense, ucodeng. I am not saying I don’t understand people’s disappointment with the partisan mudslinging . Usually it is a cooperative effort and Brian is outnumbered (admitting he more or less begs for it). I feel that talking of banning and nuking him has this slippery slope into conform or be cast out, clique territory.To their credit many of his adversaries are concerned about this.
More people should cooperate with Rich’s aims of eliminating the problem,as you do by not feeding trolls, before scapegoating an individual, even if he represents the worst in their minds. On the other hand, I think that as long as there is a free forum for discussing illegal immigration,distribution of wealth and these kinds of topics, and “nutty teabaggers”, kicking someone off won’t change the tendency for “red meat” throwing and nasty rebuttals, or various other kinds of hi-jacks to creep back in.
June 11, 2010 at 5:32 PM #563617Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote Russell]
I believe you asked us to email complaints, maybe sdddude did this but his schoolyard bullying tactics against brian are, or were, on the threads.
[/quote]To be honest though, it was a case of bully against bully. “briansd1” tries(ed) to turn almost every discussion into a Democrat vs Republican mudthrowing contest.
sduuuude has been on this board far longer than briansd1 and we haven’t had that much of a problem with sdduuuude before. I suspect that he may have just had enough of briansd1 and ‘lost it’. I just prefer not to ‘feed the trolls’.— tried because I am giving briansd1 the benefit of doubt on his ‘reformation’.
That said, I think briansd1 will have a problem resisting the temptation. I get the feeling he likes the attention that ‘stirring the pot’ gives him, almost at an OCD level.[/quote]
You make a lot of sense, ucodeng. I am not saying I don’t understand people’s disappointment with the partisan mudslinging . Usually it is a cooperative effort and Brian is outnumbered (admitting he more or less begs for it). I feel that talking of banning and nuking him has this slippery slope into conform or be cast out, clique territory.To their credit many of his adversaries are concerned about this.
More people should cooperate with Rich’s aims of eliminating the problem,as you do by not feeding trolls, before scapegoating an individual, even if he represents the worst in their minds. On the other hand, I think that as long as there is a free forum for discussing illegal immigration,distribution of wealth and these kinds of topics, and “nutty teabaggers”, kicking someone off won’t change the tendency for “red meat” throwing and nasty rebuttals, or various other kinds of hi-jacks to creep back in.
June 11, 2010 at 5:32 PM #563902Participant[quote=ucodegen][quote Russell]
I believe you asked us to email complaints, maybe sdddude did this but his schoolyard bullying tactics against brian are, or were, on the threads.
[/quote]To be honest though, it was a case of bully against bully. “briansd1” tries(ed) to turn almost every discussion into a Democrat vs Republican mudthrowing contest.
sduuuude has been on this board far longer than briansd1 and we haven’t had that much of a problem with sdduuuude before. I suspect that he may have just had enough of briansd1 and ‘lost it’. I just prefer not to ‘feed the trolls’.— tried because I am giving briansd1 the benefit of doubt on his ‘reformation’.
That said, I think briansd1 will have a problem resisting the temptation. I get the feeling he likes the attention that ‘stirring the pot’ gives him, almost at an OCD level.[/quote]
You make a lot of sense, ucodeng. I am not saying I don’t understand people’s disappointment with the partisan mudslinging . Usually it is a cooperative effort and Brian is outnumbered (admitting he more or less begs for it). I feel that talking of banning and nuking him has this slippery slope into conform or be cast out, clique territory.To their credit many of his adversaries are concerned about this.
More people should cooperate with Rich’s aims of eliminating the problem,as you do by not feeding trolls, before scapegoating an individual, even if he represents the worst in their minds. On the other hand, I think that as long as there is a free forum for discussing illegal immigration,distribution of wealth and these kinds of topics, and “nutty teabaggers”, kicking someone off won’t change the tendency for “red meat” throwing and nasty rebuttals, or various other kinds of hi-jacks to creep back in.
June 11, 2010 at 5:47 PM #562966sdduuuude
Participant[quote=IForget]If you want to stop the political posts, all you have to do is remove the OT posts from the ‘Active forum topics’ section on the right. I predict political posts would dry up right quick if you did that.[/quote]
The gripe is not with off-topic political threads. It is with thread-jacking of on-topic threads with political posts intended to insite tiresome and poinless “left is better than right” arguments.
June 11, 2010 at 5:47 PM #563064Participant[quote=IForget]If you want to stop the political posts, all you have to do is remove the OT posts from the ‘Active forum topics’ section on the right. I predict political posts would dry up right quick if you did that.[/quote]
The gripe is not with off-topic political threads. It is with thread-jacking of on-topic threads with political posts intended to insite tiresome and poinless “left is better than right” arguments.
June 11, 2010 at 5:47 PM #563571Participant[quote=IForget]If you want to stop the political posts, all you have to do is remove the OT posts from the ‘Active forum topics’ section on the right. I predict political posts would dry up right quick if you did that.[/quote]
The gripe is not with off-topic political threads. It is with thread-jacking of on-topic threads with political posts intended to insite tiresome and poinless “left is better than right” arguments.
June 11, 2010 at 5:47 PM #563676Participant[quote=IForget]If you want to stop the political posts, all you have to do is remove the OT posts from the ‘Active forum topics’ section on the right. I predict political posts would dry up right quick if you did that.[/quote]
The gripe is not with off-topic political threads. It is with thread-jacking of on-topic threads with political posts intended to insite tiresome and poinless “left is better than right” arguments.
June 11, 2010 at 5:47 PM #563962Participant[quote=IForget]If you want to stop the political posts, all you have to do is remove the OT posts from the ‘Active forum topics’ section on the right. I predict political posts would dry up right quick if you did that.[/quote]
The gripe is not with off-topic political threads. It is with thread-jacking of on-topic threads with political posts intended to insite tiresome and poinless “left is better than right” arguments.
June 11, 2010 at 5:48 PM #562961Participant[quote=IForget][quote=sdduuuude]Sorry brian – I caught that and edited it while you were posting.
It originally said “in favor of brian” then I messed with it and it incorrectly said “in favor of banning brian” – as you quoted it. It reads the way I meant now.
Just note that 49/25 against banning is quite atrocious. Nobody would fare that poorly. The question wasn’t “do you dislike brian” or “do you agree with brian?” or “does brian annoy you a little bit?” it was “should he be banned?” 1/3 think yes.[/quote]
So you want to ban people if only 1/3 of posters are in favor of it? That’s a bit draconian.[/quote]
This is a great example of putting words in someone else’s mouth. You imply that my answer is yes before I can even answer.
Did I ever say that ? No. I did not. So, let me be very clear. If brian can shape up, I’m not in favor of banning him. If he can’t I am in favor of banning him.
Unfortunately for the 2/3 who are not in favor of banning him, there is the 1 vote that matters who just laid down the law and I suspect brian will not be able to contain himself for more than a few days.
June 11, 2010 at 5:48 PM #563059Participant[quote=IForget][quote=sdduuuude]Sorry brian – I caught that and edited it while you were posting.
It originally said “in favor of brian” then I messed with it and it incorrectly said “in favor of banning brian” – as you quoted it. It reads the way I meant now.
Just note that 49/25 against banning is quite atrocious. Nobody would fare that poorly. The question wasn’t “do you dislike brian” or “do you agree with brian?” or “does brian annoy you a little bit?” it was “should he be banned?” 1/3 think yes.[/quote]
So you want to ban people if only 1/3 of posters are in favor of it? That’s a bit draconian.[/quote]
This is a great example of putting words in someone else’s mouth. You imply that my answer is yes before I can even answer.
Did I ever say that ? No. I did not. So, let me be very clear. If brian can shape up, I’m not in favor of banning him. If he can’t I am in favor of banning him.
Unfortunately for the 2/3 who are not in favor of banning him, there is the 1 vote that matters who just laid down the law and I suspect brian will not be able to contain himself for more than a few days.
June 11, 2010 at 5:48 PM #563565Participant[quote=IForget][quote=sdduuuude]Sorry brian – I caught that and edited it while you were posting.
It originally said “in favor of brian” then I messed with it and it incorrectly said “in favor of banning brian” – as you quoted it. It reads the way I meant now.
Just note that 49/25 against banning is quite atrocious. Nobody would fare that poorly. The question wasn’t “do you dislike brian” or “do you agree with brian?” or “does brian annoy you a little bit?” it was “should he be banned?” 1/3 think yes.[/quote]
So you want to ban people if only 1/3 of posters are in favor of it? That’s a bit draconian.[/quote]
This is a great example of putting words in someone else’s mouth. You imply that my answer is yes before I can even answer.
Did I ever say that ? No. I did not. So, let me be very clear. If brian can shape up, I’m not in favor of banning him. If he can’t I am in favor of banning him.
Unfortunately for the 2/3 who are not in favor of banning him, there is the 1 vote that matters who just laid down the law and I suspect brian will not be able to contain himself for more than a few days.
June 11, 2010 at 5:48 PM #563671Participant[quote=IForget][quote=sdduuuude]Sorry brian – I caught that and edited it while you were posting.
It originally said “in favor of brian” then I messed with it and it incorrectly said “in favor of banning brian” – as you quoted it. It reads the way I meant now.
Just note that 49/25 against banning is quite atrocious. Nobody would fare that poorly. The question wasn’t “do you dislike brian” or “do you agree with brian?” or “does brian annoy you a little bit?” it was “should he be banned?” 1/3 think yes.[/quote]
So you want to ban people if only 1/3 of posters are in favor of it? That’s a bit draconian.[/quote]
This is a great example of putting words in someone else’s mouth. You imply that my answer is yes before I can even answer.
Did I ever say that ? No. I did not. So, let me be very clear. If brian can shape up, I’m not in favor of banning him. If he can’t I am in favor of banning him.
Unfortunately for the 2/3 who are not in favor of banning him, there is the 1 vote that matters who just laid down the law and I suspect brian will not be able to contain himself for more than a few days.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.