**EC ** has done well. **Excalibre ** has so far decided not to return. He has said as much in Emails to various posters. Maybe he will return with the New Year.
fluiddruid: What is the current board practice as far as ATMB announcements on why a poster is suspended?
I think** Q.E.D.** might be wrong on this and of course you are the only Mod in this thread so far, you either know or can find out for sure.
Jim
Didn’t he walk away on his own?
Yes he did, in a very dramatic way he requested he be banned. **Tuba ** wisely changed his status to something like sabbatical. I do not recall the exact term that was used.
So he left and came back under his own terms. I noticed he lost the Charter Member status. So I am guessing he allowed his account to lapse.
Jim
More than once. He was also suspended for cause.
For what little it’s worth, I heartily disagree with badchad’s suspension.
Yes, he is brusque. He is abrupt. He isn’t unduly deferential to religious belief. The fact of the matter is that no argument can be made for the existence of the Christian God that can’t be effectively rebutted with a simple, off the cuff, kneejerk response.
Yes, he was mean to Poly. But I do not recall him ever turning personal in their exchanges. Snarky, yes. But never personal. I would bet even money that Poly has personally insulted badchad many more times than badchad has ever insulted Poly. Furthermore, I can think of several posters who have been involved in far more vicious personal vendetta’s and escaped censure. And to be honest, badchad’s treatment of Poly is positively civil in comparison to the treatment fundamentalist Christians or Iraq war supporters receive at the hands of many regulars here. The fact of the matter is that if Polycarp were a Bush apologist or a Creationist, no-one would give a shit how he was treated. His suspension seems symptomatic of an unconscious bias towards the pillars of our community on the part of both the regulars and the administration.
Did you miss post #8? I’d call that personal.
There is no formal policy. If there was not an appropriate thread to post the reason in, I would have posted in ATMB.
Sucks. Plain and simple. May placate the masses to get their share of flesh, but beyond his abrasiveness, I thought he did more than his share of lifting in “fighting ignorance.”
No matter. 'suppose he lives on in “spirit.”
:rolleyes:
Yeah, for Pete’s sake. How did this POS manage to attract so many apologists? I am fascinated by how much attention this adolescent, pseudo-expert has created (from myself included), and by all the outrage over his “mistreatment.” God almighty, he is an unmitigated shit, who spouts insulting non sequiturs. I am not only glad he has a suspension, I hope he gets deported, excommunicated, and impeached. Wait! I’m guilty of what I am expressing bemusement over. Okay, let me try again–I hope he gets Saturday detention.
Yes, he’s a martyr to the cause. Holy crap, overreact much? He doesn’t “Live on in spirit.” He wasn’t killed. He wasn’t even banned. He was suspended for thirty days with good reason. Cyber stalking is still stalking, and he not only admitted it, he gloated about it.
I came back from a suspension and have so far not “flamed out”. Also, Liberal was actually suspended before his (most recent) voluntary hiatus.
You call that “fighting ignorance”?
Red, old pal, I often side with you, but on this issue I agree with Maureen and think you’re wrong.
Another atheist speaking up here. I have much more respect for Poly than MS (see BC thread) and recognize the difference between debate and stalking. Those in opposition to this suspension are doing here what I often see them complain about in such threads. They are clinging to a perceived injustice and tuning out all that does not support this preconceived notion.
I’d sooner have Poly in my corner on most anything than a gang of MS’s.
Lord Ashtar, don’t you think taking badchad’s line completely out of it’s context is dishonest? I sure do. Besides, it’s most unseemly to attack someone who cannot defend themselves. heh.
I disagree.
How am I attacking him by quoting him?
By quoting him out of context, like I said.
Ok, let’s
[quote]
(http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7774477&postcount=16) him in context:
Nope. Doesn’t change a damn thing.
I, too, think that the membership of this board is best served if a thread is started in ATMB if a very active member is banned. Not the people who are socks…but yes. When someone who is an active member, who has been a jerk or otherwise violated the rules of this board is suspended or banned? I think we are best served with the kind of explanations that were posted for a time. I don’t know why they discontinued doing that, but I think the PTB should reconsider and start doing it again.
Not that I take issue with this particular suspension, because I don’t. I just think it serves all of us best if explanations are given.
Reading it in context would usually include actually looking at what was actually being discussed, dipshit.
See how yojimbo was already tossing around the word “cunt”? See how that changes the context of badchad’s comment?