Coll mused:
Who gives a shit what you think?
Why I do, who else counts?
But come now Lib old boy, what’s the collic about, I’ve long ago given up on your inanely naive economics so your tender self shouldn’t be so bruised.
(finger hovering on the big red button next to Sterra’s name) Lord, give me the strength to resist temptation!
Quit Sterran at me!
Precisely the response one would expect from an asshole. Frankly, the board wouldn’t miss you if you did leave; there are plenty of folks around with a good knowledge of genetics who aren’t assholes, and it doesn’t take a great genius to repeat assertions about the Middle East he read in The Economist and dish them out with a few insults on the side.
There are message boards around with far more ignorant twits than you’ll find here. Maybe you could spend your time there?
I’m no great genius, I read The Economist, do I get the job?
Gee…and it was but a mere 18 months ago that I was making observations similar to these in these threads:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=61676
and
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=61841
…seems ole Coll was getting a fair bit of support back then…guess some of you finally got tired of his pompous shit.
However…
Those in charge that may be intellectual elitists will never ban one of their own. Just ignore this little man…like I learned to do. There’s plenty of other entertainment and great information out here.
Suit yourself, but I note that you are making generalizations and refusing to back them up with specific examples. Thus, you are doing nothing more than conclusory handwaving.
As far as the rest of your post goes, I think there’s no need to continue the discussion. Collounsbury is receiving special treatment. Feel free to keep dancing around this obvious point.
That’s nonsense. First, when I don’t “listen or understand,” it’s generally because the post in question is incoherent or misses the point. (But if you think that I’ve engaged in “deliberate denseness,” feel free to ressurect the the thread in question and point out a specific example.)
In any event, I have had debates on these boards with lots of different people and observed many other debates. Collounsbury is the only person who repeatedly engages in personal attacks on many (most?) of his opponents. Yeah, I’m sure it’s frustrating to him that many people don’t see the incredible correctness of his position. But that doesn’t justify his misconduct.
Sorry if this sounds condescending, but have you considered the possibility that whatever point it was you were trying to make truly doesn’t make any sense?
Anyway, let’s suppose for the sake of argument that me, December, IzzyR, and everyone else whom Collounsbury has attacked in Great Debates is a total sophist. Even so, his behaviour clearly violates the rules as articulated by the moderators. Will you concede this obvious point?
What Luc said.
Sorry, Tars, you’re WAY wrong on this one, IMO. If I can’t savage the Nazi jackasses in the “Ask the Neo-Nazi” threads, if Lib and Olent can’t rip each other up for incompatible economic views, if Polycarp can’t shred one of our resident athiests in GD, then Collunsbury shouldn’t have that privilige either.
It’s not understandable: he’s bright enough to understand the rules. He should face the consequences if he chooses to keep breaking them.
Fenris
Thing is, it seems to me he does face the consequences of his actions.
The consequences are, the moderators discuss it amongst themselves and talk to him–over and over again, from what I gather–and don’t do anything further.
Sure, that seems like a somewhat inconsistent approach to me, but it’s not like I’m going to demand a refund of my subscription.
Uh, negative on resurrecting the dead. But from this we have:
And that is just from the first two pages. The entire thread you argue against people denying race exists in all forums, an argument NO ONE is making (or at least no one who matters). People are arguing against a biological concept of race, which you keep dismissing as a medium race theory or something. Your responses that you don’t understand what is being said is addressed to everyone in the thread. I doubt everyone can be speaking incoherantly and one person is the voice of sanity.
In the thread i linked Collounsbury goes from normal mode to rude mode. I didn’t bother to check the language, but was surprised he wasn’t chastised. if you felt you were being treated unfairly, you should have clicked on the “Report this post” button. I will admit i am wrong on them being understandable, but hopefully people can get an idea what may be setting them off.
Then quit being such a jackass. You know perfectly well that what Collounsbury does is wrong, no matter how good or bad my arguments are in the race threads.
And by the way, I stand 100% behind what I said in the thread. Your comments here only confirm my point in the earlier thread - you and Collounsbury totally missed the boat.
Again and again, you posted irrelevant and/or incoherent crap, but somehow I resisted the urge to accuse you of “drooling idiocy.”
**
As a matter of fact, I did report (some of) his posts. Would please end your hijack?
Saying repeatedly hundreds of times that “We don’t use race in biology because humans have fucked each other so much there is no biologicaly pure race and instead we use populations as it more accuratly indicates region of origin.” is incoherent? What is so hard to understand about that concept?
And did you get any replies from the mods on his posts? just curious.
It’s passably coherent, but basically irrelevant to any claim that I made in those threads. I realize that you can’t, don’t, or won’t see why this is so. Please just let it go.
**
As I recall, I got one reply. After that, none, although my e-mail has not been working for the last month or so.
The Great Debates (GD) moderators have reviewed recent Collounsbury posts in the Great Debates forum and have found only a few, minor violations (where you see the appropriate warnings) of the GD rule of “attack the post, not the poster.” His infractions of that rule are few and far between. At this point, we do not see sufÞcient reason to ban him. If you do see posts that you believe break the rules, or if you believe the GD mods have missed something recent that has broken the rules, please contact the GD mods via e-mail or by reporting the post in question.
administrator, «Straight Dope Message Board»
All together now!
Someone’s singing lord, Kumbaya
Someone’s singing lord, Kumbaya
Someone’s singing lord, Kumbaya
Oh lord, Kumbaya
Kumbaya my lord, Kumbaya
Kumbaya my lord, Kumbaya
Kumbaya my lord, Kumbaya
Oh lord, Kumbaya
Someone’s shouting lord, Kumbaya
Someone’s shouting lord, Kumbaya
Someone’s shouting lord, Kumbaya
Oh lord, Kumbaya
I believe Eutychus has a very important message for you, Arnold.
Well Arnold, considering how our e-mails concerning Collounsbury have caused such a headache for the SDMB staff, and the complete lack of any indication that Collounsbury will even attempt to comply with GD rules,(that I am aware of)
following your pleas to him even, are you sure you want us to e-mail you?
And as you are prepared to accept that “his infractions are few and far between” and that they are “minor violations”, are you expecting worse to come? I doubt it.
The infamous GD remark “Use your own fucking eyes, fuck!” was made just over a month ago. September 29th to be exact. The staff did not respond to complaints. You’ve ruled all recent violations are minor, and thus have not been worthy of taking action. I am left with the conclusion that any further violations by Collounsbury’s will be treated as heretofore, as I am hard pressed to imagine how Collounsbury could be any more vicious than he’s already been as attested to by some very long time respected posters in this thread.
I do not wish to flog a dead horse or hastle the SDMB staff in vain. I suspect that many other feel as I do in this regard. Please do not consider the lack of future e-mails regarding Collounsbury as indicative that all is well.