Ah, milroyj, we barely knew ye.

[Unregistered_Bull]

The banning really doesn’t seem all that justified to me either.

[Liberal]

@tomndebb

Not so much a refusal as that I had simply approached it from a different perspective. (Frankly, I’ve only skimmed the thread looking for issues addressed to the staff, so I have probably not paid enough attention to the slurs directed at milroyj–something I will now do.)

Fair enough. Thanks.

[Guinastasia]

Lib, I understand what you’re saying, but then, wouldn’t it also apply that we can’t criticize anyone who’s ever died, because they can’t defend themselves?

[Miller]

@Liberal

But when people call him names, everything from “buffoon” to “creepy piece of shit jerk”, and declare him to be “nasty, angry, mouthy, and derisive” — these things are about the man. He literally cannot respond to people who characterize his posts as accusations of child abuse. That is not about moderation, but about him. And your refusal to acknowledge the difference amounts to your tacit participation in, and institutionalization, of the bashing. Perhaps my longheld respect means nothing to you, but if you continue to let this go on, I will think very differently of you from now on.

I don’t get why this is such a bad thing. If I call milroyj a fuckhead in this thread, I’ve made some terrible breach of ettiquette because he can’t respond. But I can go ahead and call George Bush, Andrew Jackson, or my Uncle Lou fuckheads, even though none of them can respond, either. What makes the former so much worse than the latter? Especially when you consider that there’s nothing that’s been said in this thread that hadn’t been said to milroyj face more times than I can count?

[Giraffe]

@Miller

I don’t get why this is such a bad thing. If I call milroyj a fuckhead in this thread, I’ve made some terrible breach of ettiquette because he can’t respond. But I can go ahead and call George Bush, Andrew Jackson, or my Uncle Lou fuckheads, even though none of them can respond, either. What makes the former so much worse than the latter? Especially when you consider that there’s nothing that’s been said in this thread that hadn’t been said to milroyj face more times than I can count?

No, I think Liberal is right. It’s gauche to attack a banned poster when they can’t defend themselves. Since the debate over whether milroyj’s banning was justified has spilled over into some straight-up bashing of milroyj as a poster, I’m going to close this thread. Anyone who wants to continue the discussion of whether or not milroyj’s banning was justified is welcome to open another thread, but I ask that any posters who choose to continue the discussion are asked to refrain from negative comments about milroyj which are not directly related to the discussion of his banning.