I just think he crossed the line from unpopular* (defensible and treatable) to flat out bigotry. He thought anyone who believed was an idiot, and that he was too good to even listen to them. YMMV
*I can think of several Dopers I wish were gone and are still here, and several who are gone who I am glad are gone, as well as several who are gone who I wish weren’t. Some who were unpopular got warnings. aldebaren(sp?) comes to mind. He pissed me off to no end, but I never saw any reason to ban him.
Is it going to be in an interest-bearing account for the next two years, Great-Unca Tris? And if so, where will that interest be sent? 
And just one more thought… I am totally in agreement with What Exit?. This whole incident set a terrible precedent. I respect and applaud Jim for trying to stop it as it happened.
My only (Machiavellian) objections are that prr IS gone. By any means necessary…
I am not up to speed on aldebaren, I know nothing about him.
Triskadecamus, I pretty much left you out of this, I wish you did not facilitate this charade, but the two were determined and would have found someone eventually I guess.
What is the deal with “did Manhatten ever get his money? How did the Mellen Lawsuit turn out?” Are the two thing related? I know Manhatten was a mod, but nothing else on this.
Jim
Because we are paying members of a closed system and it affects more than just those two.
Why are drugs not okay for adults, for example? One adult makes the offer, and another freely chooses to accept? Because it hurts the system as a whole.
And you will note that I said in my very next post that I didn’t expect any money, specifically because I said that I wouldn’t do what I was told. The dishonest scenario you mention was rendered moot the moment I posted the very post that Vinyl Turnip called an example of my “dishonesty”.
You said if you were offered money to leave, you might take the money but not leave. I admit I’m at a loss to explain how that is dishonest, because it involves a concept so fundamental that I cannot conceive how anyone with a functional brain could fail to understand it. It’s quite possible that I mistook a Guinness-World-Record-level stupidity for dishonesty, and if that is the case, I apologize.
I would wager that at least on this board, your “honesty” would not rank as the most objectionable of your qualities.
Even at 1 in the morning I cannot keep up. So in the end it boils down to happy with the results and unhappy with the method. This I can fully understand at least.
I give **PRR ** a lot of credit for his prior history on the dope that was mostly good. That and he was a nice guy in person and raised some interesting debates even in the ugly subject. I understand how annoying he was to religious posters, especially liberal religious posters that were not guilty of the many sins of the Fundies. By the way, is my very strong dislike of Fundies bigotry or just rational thinking?
I mean I hate what **Der trihs ** says about our soldiers, but there is also a disturbing kernel of truth and I think this makes both I and other posters angrier. So instead of pitting him, I defend his right to say what he says.
Jim
Doing what someone pays you to do is neither honest nor dishonest in itself. If someone pays you to lie, is that honest ? Of course not.
I have never believed the idea that doing what you are paid to do is some sort of innately virtueous act.
Damn right, his honesty is so objectionable, it’s downright offensive!
Though I actually tend to agree with him - if someone is stupid enough to offer me money for what amounts to an unenforceable agreement prompted by what is quite obviously a lame attempt to secure the moral high ground, I’d consider taking it and not complying to be offering the valuable service of teaching the idiot a lesson.
I might give the money back, eventually, but I’d drag it out a good long time.
It’s bigotry unless you talk about specifics.
I have to admit, I only noticed him after he started this vendetta. And yes, I despise the method of his demise, but I’m still glad he’s gone.
On fundies… I have the same “strong dislike” of Fundies. But not for their beliefs…beliefs in the Bible that is. I have a problem with them thinking “if you don’t believe exactly the same as us, you’re going to hell”. Much like GW thinking “if yer not fer us, yer agin us.”
Let me try again.
It’s bigotry unless you are willing to think in terms of individuals and specifics, but sometimes it can be a very rational response.
Strictly in the interest of complete openness: I certainly hope that this event never repeats, (as I am sure the rest of the staff hopes). OTOH, I have no way to predict that we will never encounter a situation where a poster with an excess of disposable income will choose to offer a poster whom the first poster considers contemptible some portion of that money to leave. (I also cannot promise that the staff will meet such a future hypothetical situation with aplomb and sagacity.) However, I do believe that a repeat situation is unlikely and I will promise that we will consider the fallout from this event in evaluating any future situation (which is not a claim that we will make the correct decision).
On at least one (perhaps two) occasion(s), manhattan posted that on the advice of his lawyer he was not going to post the resolution to that issue. (A twit former poster with an overweening ego had insisted that Gaudere was a sock of another poster (possibly manhattan, I don’t recall), and offered some huge sum to anyone who proved otherwise. manhattan produced two posts by the named parties with identical date/time stamps and the twit claimed that he had so much integrity that he was going to make good his offer–then went conspicuously silent on that issue while engaging in one of our more spectacular meltdowns.)
Melin never filed a lawsuit and, (as far as I can tell), never intended to file a lawsuit. In response to a series of posts (not all on this message board, but all in reference to it), she expressed concern that a particular series of statements could be construed as libellous and noted that if she discovered libel, she would sue. Ultimately, it was agreed by all parties that no libel had occurred and no lawsuit was launched.
Let me clear this up. Zoe, you made yourself look like an ass. The person you did it to is gone forever, on a wager. Now it’s time for you to get a grip, all on your lonesome.
Thanks for clearing that up, CarnalK!
Amen, brother.
Posted by rubystreak:
One of these things is not like the other.
Bryan, you have kept me laughing through two threads. Great perspective!
Sorry, I really can’t squat any lower without ripping my seams. Anyone else who’d care to try to explain to you the concept “if you agree to do something you should do it, otherwise don’t agree to it” is welcome to have a crack at it.
This is not the first thread recently that’s made me wonder whether I’m being “Punk’d” somehow, or whether I’ve inadvertently strayed into the Twilight Zone.
So it ought to be easy for me to shit on top of your head? Awesome. Nothing like shitting on a genius, like yourself.