Badchad

I’m fairly certain you’re both wrong (although I know you both merely state what bad himself claims to be his motivations). Here’s my theory, for which I claim absolutely no supporting evidence:

bad did not appear in the SDMB out of nowhere; it’s reasonable to assume he’s posted elsewhere, and it’s also reasonable to assume he brought already well developed feelings toward Christianity/Christians with him. It’s my bet that the SDMB is not the only, and was not the first, message board to be graced with the same bad wisdom and zeal we’ve seen in his career here. It would not be surprising were such a zealot to have practiced his badness at one or more website of a more fundamentally Christian bent, hoping to humiliate the ignorant, backward membership with his artistry. In fact, this is another past development in the bad oeuvre I’d bet has actually occurred. –Anyone willing to guess how much tolerance a fundeamentalist website or two would show to the bad modus operandi?

So, what would such a stalwart do once thwarted by a succession of ignorance-based Christian sites? My guess is our little nonXian soldier marched onward to war at one or more websites which presented enough of a mixture of a-, non-, poly- and plain theism that he would not be summarily rejected but would still be presented with targets for his heroic wiping out of ignorance.

Which brings us to the Dope, where pugnacious a-, non-, poly- and plain theistic outlooks have always been welcome.

And what did badchad find? An actual Christlike Christian! Even better, one whose liberality and generosity ensured he would feel obligated, once engaged, to respond openly and honestly to each attack, while restraining and restricting his own anger to a mere registry of complaint – water off a duck’s back to one as courageous as bad! The beauty of it was that all the bad playbook called for was illustration by bc, and acknowledgement by the target, of inconsistencies in the textual bases of Christianity, and a great victory could be won against the evils of ignorance.

Piece o’ cake in the land of milk and honey.
The attempted assassination of Polycarp had no noble purpose behind it. It was a crime of opportunity suiting an agenda of convenience. Good thing the shooter is so inept, but it is quite a nuisance.

I’m a little behind…has Polycarp left?

I disagree. “The path to Hell is paved with good intentions” and all that. If anything, being nice and wrong makes people more dangerous than someone who’s wrong and obnoxious, because it can let them get away with doing more harm longer.

But… doing harm would itself be behavior that’s shitty, wouldn’t it? I think Left Hand of Dorkness has split it out nicely.

I have not been posting recently, and in fact asked tomndebb to cancel my account. (which apparently went unheeded by the brass)

I agree with much of Liberal’s OP, although I would not be so quick to give BC the credit (infamous as it may be) Liberal ascribes to him.

I have another perspective. BC’s behavior is a reflection on the SDMB population generally, and the SDMB moderators and administrators specifically.

The fact is, I think BC is a poop flinging, immature punk. A punk with a teenage intellect, and preteen maturity. He engages in rapid fire one liners that lack substance or depth. He is clearly clever, however, and able to point out the inconsistencies and the apparent hypocrisies in modern Christianity. And so I believe Hawthorne makes a good point. Behind BC’s rank immaturity and witless behavior there is an occasional point; even if offered at 30,000 feet and without substance or scrutiny. BC excels at rapid fire, parlor game one liners that (from my experience) that frustrate, anger and even disorient those who disagree. I have yet to see a poster slow him down and make the shithead make his case point by point. Instread, BC thrives in rapid fire exchanges in message board settings where the conversations are splintered and lack both substance and the time to consider them thoughtfully. I am convinced that one of the reasons that no one else has slowed hon down and removed his internal organs is that most of the posters know no more of the bible than he does. And so again and again I’ve seen posters extol BC’s knowledge when it is clear that they know even less than BC does. And so as far as the bible is concerned, the SDMB is the land of the blind. And BC has one cut and paste half blind eye. The other kids (and I mean kids) snicker and revel in his rank immaturity. In the land of the [intellectual] blind, BC has somehow become king among the dimmest bulbs among us.

Even so, I do not fault BC. The SDMB has a policy stating that there should be no trolls or jerks. BC is both a troll and jerk, in the extreme. It is simply not enough in my view to put this idiot on my “Ignore” list.* I am amazed that the moderators have done so little to maintain civility here. Perhaps the moderators need approval from admins to take action. Either way, in my view the Powers That Be are/have done an absolute miserable job as it relates to BC. IMO, they should be ashamed of their performance.

I also think that in many ways, this is our board. How many subscribers will you let leave here before you act? If it is true that Polycarp is absent because of BC, is that an acceptable condition to the SDMB brass? I can tell you that I asked Tom to cancel my account over that idiot, and will remain outside of this community while you let miscreant jerks and trolls run rampant. I believe that if enough “customers” leave to go elsewhere, while the SDMB management fiddles, eventually the management either wakes up or the board withers. For my part, I will not return while this idiot remains. If others feel as strongly as I do, I would encourage you to put your money where your mouth is, and let the SDMB know that you will not remain while they do little to rein in trolls and jerks.

FTR, I fully expect the supporters (few as they may be) of BC to crow about free speech etc. This is not about free speech. I disagree with much of Polycarp’s theology-----and ironically found some of BC’s points compelling if you strip away the ton of excrement and immaturity—and have debated Polycarp relentlessly. We have had many sharp exchanges. (and many pleasent ones) Yet we have been able to disagree while refining our own arguments and showing common courtesy and respect. Polycarp is a First Class individual.

And so I am not suggesting that BC go easy on Polycarp, or anyone else. He can make his case, if he’s able. (And I submit that in a rational, non-hystrerical, substantive setting he cannot) He can be as passionate or abrasive as he would like to be. He may be as relentless as he would like to be. But if the SDMB’s version of free speech is that a member cannot be constrained by civility, decorum, courtesy or substance than I think you are sorely misguided.

Liberal, unfortunately, the world has no shortage of miscreants like BC. But the stupidity that he spews should be laid at the feet of the SDMB, not BC. He should have been sent packing a long time ago.

(*IIRC, it is a cardinal sin to call someone a troll or mention who is on your ignore list. Ironically, this is a bannable offense. BC is on my Ignore list. Further, if he is not a troll, I am perplexed who is. If this gets me banned, cool. At the very least it should be added (with Polycarp it would seem) to those who are serving notice that they’d rather leave here than stay while punks like BC remain)

Not anymore, as long as you do so in the Pit.

Sorry to hijack, but wasn’t Peter Boyle a Christian Brother prior to his acting career? I would think he’d be OK with a strong religious opinion.

-Cem

As Lib said, someone who’s doing harm is engaging in bad behavior. I did not say that good manners trump objective correctness, which is what seem to be objecting to. I said that behavior is more important than objective truth. Give me the choice between the atheist who kills for his opposition to the opiate of the masses, and the Identity Christian who furthers her belief in white folks’ sole claim to human status by running a free daycare for poor white kids, and I’d rather hold my nose in support of the latter than go along with the former.

Beliefs never hurt anybody. Behavior has.

Daniel

I agree 100% with John Mace. Those who continue to engage him are merely prolonging his inevitable (and much anticipated) demise. Ignore him altogether and he will disappear sooner rather than later.

Of course, the real irony is that discussing who’s on your ignore list is against the rules, whereas calling someone a troll, as Lute pointed out, is not. I’d rather that the “who’s on your ignore list” taboo be taken out of the Pit: if you can call someone a goat-felcher, saying they’re worth ignoring seems pretty copacetic to me, and it may be the petty face-saving maneuver some people need in order to end a nonproductive conflict.

Daniel

He may get more leeway than most. I had been back not even a week before I got my first warning in Great Debates. For what? For providing a link to a Pit thread. “Let’s not bring the Pit to Great Debates” was the exact wording, as I recall. Which was extremely ironic because that’s what the OP had already done. Now banned, he had simply moved his theater of operations from the Pit to Great Debates. I was just pointing that out with my link, which I thought would serve as proof.

Even so, having been a supermod for several months on a fairly active board with a lot of things to tend to, I don’t think there was any sort of conspiracy to keep Badchad and lose Poly. At least I sure hope not. Anway, I’m not sure dropping our subscriptions will make any difference. Someone will fill the void even if we all leave. New day, new member. It could become filled with Badchads, and morph into something like Slashdot, but with less class (were that possible).

I don’t know much about board policy but I’m surprised he hasn’t been banned. Doesn’t it violate the “don’t be a jerk” policy by bragging about how you harass a fellow member so much that they rarely post? Doesn’t saying that you made someone your target make you a troll? That’s jerkish if your talking about religion, politics or The Simpsons.

Only if it’s on purpose. If it’s by mistake, it’s stupid, but not necessarily “shitty”.

Ah, I see what you are getting at.

But beliefs shape behavior. Beliefs can kill and hurt people, even when the people practicing those beliefs are well meaning, if those beliefs are objectively wrong.

I think the point was more about their politics being different than their religion, but although he was in a monastary as a young person, I believe later he rejected organized religion, and searched for a different form of spiritual answer.

Let’s hope not, especially over a pathetic little asshole like badchad. I mean, jeez, if all theists were like Polycarp I wouldn’t bother to have anything against religion.

Perhaps you are not responding but I am curious. Why isn’t ignore enough? Why choose to leave the board over one or two obnoxious posters? I tried to have a serious exchange with BC and learned all I need to know about him. I think the rules in GD and other forums are enough to control him. I glance at his posts and just ignore them for the most part. I couldn’t care less if he attacks my beliefs and thinks they’re ridiculous. The same goes for those of his ilk.

If enough people answered his recent call and started ridiculing anyone who expressed belief I would expect the powers that be would put a halt to it.

Technical note for those who wish to do likewise.

I have gotten a couple of similar requests each year since becoming a Mod. However, Mods have no authority to touch posters’ accounts. My standard practice is to forward the request to an Administrator(s), copied back to the originating poster. If no action occurs, one’s best bet is to place a second request to an Administrator. (Sometimes their mail is sufficiently inundating that an individual request may be misplaced.) Obviously, placing the first request to the Administrator is generally a good idea, as well.

Not that I know of, although I haven’t talked to him recently.

[sub]I just searched, and he is merrily posting away.[/sub]

If Polycarp WERE to ever leave? I can assure you it wouldn’t be because of anything badchad said or did.

I wondered about that myself. I had the impression, when I read Poly’s post alluded to by Crotalus in #6, above, that Polycarp might simply be talking about how he spends less time in GD, not on the Dope as a whole.

Polycarp still posts regularly. What he meant, I believe, is that he will spend far less time than he used to discussing religion in GD. That was misfired sperm’s stated goal, a goal that makes him an overdue candidate for banning. He has targeted, stalked and badgered Polycarp. He is a jerk. We have a rule. He should be gone.