I don’t think it’s egotism on my part to believe that there is a qualitative difference between my posts and handy’s and that mine are on the whole qualitiatively better. YMMV, regardless, that was not my main point and that was not what finally pushed me to open this thread. It was the inaccurate information posted in yet another GQ thread. Which, now that three people including two attorneys have pointed out that handy is wrong, he has further polluted by posting a cite that became obsolete in 1972. So yeah, I think a little server time on a topic that is obviously of some general interest is warranted.
Not a comment on the thread that Atreyu linked to, but did you notice that it is from exactly one year earlier? To bad we can’t search by date. I’d like to see if there was a Handy rant on 9/30/01.
He’s already banned from posting in medical threads. Perhaps legal threads are next.
And soon all threads in GQ?
Actually, it’s not a violation to discuss the ignore function. If it were, then your own post would be in violation of board policy. Revealing who is on your ignore list is a violation.
Revealing the usernames of people on your ignore list is forbidden at this board.
[handy]
You know, it’s a board violation to discuss the ignore function.
[/handy]
Oh come on! Give the guy a break. There are plenty of wrong answers posted in GQ all the time. Just post your correction and move on.
And one point in favor of Handy is that he does not have the obnoxious and belligerent attitude of some other posters.
No, but I find he gives off the ‘posting just to be posting’ odor pretty strongly.
It’s not really irritating…just more useless drivel.
I’ve been guilty of posting short, unimportant posts many, many times. However, I do so in the Pit, IMHO and MPSIMS, where those sort of posts are pretty much a big part of the way things are done in generally silly threads.
If I am going to take the time to reply in a thread in GQ or GD, I make pretty damn sure I know what I’m talking about beforehand and/or have some experience in the matter, because I know otherwise there are plenty of others here who will swing in with numerous cites and make me look stupid.
handy simply doesn’t have any fear of looking stupid, is all.
Sheesh, Otto you used to be such a bad boy. You used to be pig-biting mad, now we get a complaint that others are sharking your pontification time.
handy isn’t the most worthwhile poster on these Boards. Sometimes he doesn’t add much. I’m glad we don’t have an Ask Dr handy thread. But he is often witty and thought-provoking. And he often makes a point more effectively in a dozen words than some posters make in a screenful.
iampunha: Why are you shilling for Cité Consulting? What do they have to do with cites?
I wonder if handy’s being deaf has something to do with him posting so much. Like he’s making up for not being able to communicate verbally. I have a deaf coworker like that; I used to be in the same department of a guy who knew sign language and just about every day he’d complain about the deaf guy continually wanting to communicate.
I wouldn’t buy that for a Peloponesian Minute. He’s GOT to know it’s annoying by this time.
And the way he held off 3 weeks (or something like that) posting his 10,000th tells me it’s not the style…it’s the volume.
Possibly, but there’s a few more of us on the boards who are deaf and have much different posting, er, styles. Plus, handy is late-deafened, and can talk, but IIRC has stated that he chooses non-verbal communication. I see him as a man with a gigantic chip on his shoulder, and he and I are typically in 100% disagreement about deaf culture, etc. I just ain’t so outspoken as he.
I just still loathe the “FrankenDeaf” comment from him quite some time ago. I find the wires sticking out of my head to be kind of cute, so no, I have no hangups about people thinking CI’s are unattractive.
:rolleyes:
And he’s at it again, this time spewing more shit in the “Why aren’t porn sites illegal?” thread in IMHO. He first falsely claims that permits are required to make porn films and that there are only two cities in America which issue such permits. When pressed for a cite he comes up with Title 18, section 2257 (which requires proof of age on file and says nothing about permits), the Millenium Digital Copyright Act (which says nothing specific about pornography or permits), “federal and state obscenity laws” (federally there’s law on transporting, selling and distributing obscene material but nothing about permits, on the state level there’s nothing about permits) and various copyright and trademark laws (none of which have anything to do with permits for making porn) and doesn’t bother to back up his cites because he doesn’t want to look through tens of thousands of porn sites for them. Because of course every porn site has links to the United States Code and state statutes on it. When further pressed, he falls back on his “go to Amazon and read books” line.
How exactly did he get himself barred from posting in medical threads and who do I have to blow to get him barred from legal threads too? Bad legal information has the potential of being as dangerous as (some) bad medical information.
Has he ever responded to a pitting?
I’ve always wanted to start a pit thread on him where every single word was a link to a thread where he either 1) said something completely wrong and refused to own up to it, 2) came in after lots of discussion and contributed an incorrect “fact” that had already been disproven in the same thread, or 3) answered the wrong question because he was in such a goddamn hurry to increase his post count that he didn’t actually read the thread.
There are enough instances – I just don’t have the patience.
You forgot 4) posted a correct answer that someone else already posted WAY before him.