Badchad

[Princhester]

These boards have or have had a number of posters who are some or all of vehement, hotheaded, opinionated, intelligent, bombastic, iconoclastic and above all highly interesting. Often they are my favourite posters despite being rather confronting and difficult to get along with at times. One of those posters is badchad, another is of course Liberal.

Takes one to know one.

[Jackmannii]

@cosmosdan

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.

um…what are these “powers” to which you refer?

[Dunderman]

Princhester, whatever other posters may have done and said, badchad has admitted, with apparent pride, to choosing another Doper and decided to “fuck his shit up”. He picked a target, beat at him, and didn’t let go. I’m surprised you can consider a person like that one of your favourite posters.

[Guinastasia]

@Liberal

misfired sperm

BAND NAME!!!

Dammit, Lib, stop saying things I’m agreeing with-you’re scaring me. Can’t you go back to hijacking threads and making cryptic remarks so I can be annoyed by you again?

bad chad:
Why he’s still allowed to post here is beyond me. Isn’t deliberately setting out to harass and drive a specific poster from this board pretty much a textbook definition of Jerk?

[Contrapuntal]

@Der Trihs

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.

Would it not also be true then that beliefs can kill and hurt people when those beliefs are objectively right? Assuming, of course, that beliefs can be objective at all.

[Cisco]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Beliefs never hurt anybody.

I’d like to see you over in the “How is it hurting me, jayjay?” thread.

To the rest of you: Do you feel good about yourselves for flinging shit all over someone because he is - in your opinions - a shit flinger?

[xenophon41]

@Cisco

I’d like to see you over in the “How is it hurting me, jayjay?” thread.

To the rest of you: Do you feel good about yourselves for flinging shit all over someone because he is - in your opinions - a shit flinger?

Is that what’s happening? We’re just monkeys flinging shit, same as the monkey in question?

When and how, then, do you, oh arbiter, think it is appropriate for a community to deal with someone who has just called for part of that community to rise up against another part? Who has just admitted harassing a particular well respected community member with the intent to drive him out?

We’re supposed to feel bad about criticising the little poo flicker publically? Really?

[xenophon41]

@Cisco

I’d like to see you over in the “How is it hurting me, jayjay?” thread.

To the rest of you: Do you feel good about yourselves for flinging shit all over someone because he is - in your opinions - a shit flinger?

Is that what’s happening? We’re just monkeys flinging shit, same as the monkey in question?

When and how, then, do you, oh arbiter, think it is appropriate for a community to deal with someone who has just called for part of that community to rise up against another part? Who has just admitted harassing a particular well respected community member with the intent to drive him out?

We’re supposed to feel bad about criticising the little poo flicker publicly? Really?

[xenophon41]

Crap; sorry about the double post.

[wring]

easy for you to say.

[raindog]

@cosmosdan

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.

I considered that, but he pollutes every discussion he enters. Rather than a discussion progressing, it quickly degenerates into teenage chaos. So it’s just not as easy as ignoring him. Other posters are quickly diverted from substantive discussion to responding to the troll shock factor nature of his posts. He is a cancer, plain and simple. And I would bet good money that if he—and those like him–aren’t dealt with more effectively this place will be degenerate into slashdot.

More than that, this place is a place for recreation for me. I come to learn, to discuss and to debate from time to time. I appreciate opposing viewpoints and intelligent discussion. But I have enough aggravation IRL than to come here and have my intellectual sensibilities assaulted. This kid is scum.

Now I take great pain to try and display civility, respect and Christian principles here, even though my views here are in the distinct minority. I can’t remember ever calling someone a name here, or intentionally denigrating someone. But I found myself wishing I could just see him face to face and visit some unpleasantries upon him.

If some nameless, faceless punk can get me that worked up, it is time to take my leave. I would do the same in a bar, restaurant or baseball game. (I would add that BC benefits from the net; I have spent many years trying to develop Christian principles in my personality. Still, I am not 100% sure that I would take my leave peaceably. I trust that if BC acted like this IRL he would take some well deserved beatings. My guess is he does not, and saves his bravado for the internet)

It is to Polycarp’s credit that he chose to take his leave rather than compromise his Christian principles. I did not read the exchanges between him and BC, but it seems apparent to me that Polycarp’s sense of integrity and decency kept him from responding in kind. It is truly ironic that in he end, it is BC that is the one who makes the most compelling case for Christianity. It is plainly evident in how this community views the 2 of them. If BC is the face of atheism, the world needs more Christians. If he’s the face of SDMB—even in a nominal way—than it’s time to find a new MB to hang out on.

[Guinastasia]

@Der Trihs

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

bad chad has flat out admitted that harassing Polycarp is his main goal on this board-that he WANTS to drive him away.

So how is his shitty behavior NOT on purpose?
:dubious:

[cosmosdan]

@Jackmannii

um…what are these “powers” to which you refer?

Um…that would be the mods and admin. Not the spirit powers. I’m reluctant to use them again. Jesus and Buddha cautioned me at the our last pow wow.

[Der_Trihs]

@Contrapuntal

Would it not also be true then that beliefs can kill and hurt people when those beliefs are objectively right?

Sure. Given that it’s easy to hurt people, you can be a blithering ignorant fool and do lots of damage ( ever read about some of the silliness believed by the Nazis ? ), but arming them with objective knowledge makes them even more dangerous; someone who knows how to properly make a nuke ( or good military tactics or . . . ) is more dangerous than someone who’s mistaken on how to do so.You want the bad guys to be ignorant fools, but I wasn’t talking about bad guys.

However, well meaning people are far less likely to do harm ( and to stop what they are doing if they cause harm anyway ) if they are following objective reality.

As far as objectively true ideas in the hands of well meaning people being harmful . . . I expect it’s possible, but rare. Objective knowledge tends to be morally neutral; data, not a motivator for good or bad.

@Guinastasia

bad chad has flat out admitted that harassing Polycarp is his main goal on this board-that he WANTS to drive him away.

So how is his shitty behavior NOT on purpose?
:dubious:

I was commenting on Left Hand of Dorkness’s post rather than badchad*.

[Cisco]

@xenophon41

Is that what’s happening? We’re just monkeys flinging shit, same as the monkey in question?

When and how, then, do you, oh arbiter, think it is appropriate for a community to deal with someone who has just called for part of that community to rise up against another part? Who has just admitted harassing a particular well respected community member with the intent to drive him out?

We’re supposed to feel bad about criticising the little poo flicker publicly? Really?

I’m not going to tell you how to feel about anything. Just so long as you know that you are part of the circle, and what badchad is doing isn’t much different from what a lot of you do and are doing, and from what a lot of you would do if you truly believed - like he does - that you were doing what’s right.

I don’t agree with his stalking of poly - I like poly - but I completely understand why he’d doing it and I can relate. In fact I think what he’s doing is, in a way, noble.

[Ensign_Edison]

@Cisco

I don’t agree with his stalking of poly - I like poly - but I completely understand why he’d doing it and I can relate. In fact I think what he’s doing is, in a way, noble.

No, what Der Trihs is doing is in a way noble. What badchad is doing is loathesome and pathetic.

[Contrapuntal]

@Der Trihs

As far as objectively true ideas in the hands of well meaning people being harmful . . . I expect it’s possible, but rare. Objective knowledge tends to be morally neutral; data, not a motivator for good or bad.

Suppose you live in a community that is being terrorized by … oh, I don’t know, lets say rogue bikers, a la The Wild Ones. Let’s further say that it has become (objectively true) common knowledge that the bikers are all drunk out of their minds at a party down by the old swimming hole. If the community, bands together, in a well meaning way, and kicks the crap out of them, are they (the bikers) not hurt?

[badchad]

Boy the world does love a villain. You guys just can’t get enough of me can ya.

[Der_Trihs]

@Contrapuntal

Suppose you live in a community that is being terrorized by … oh, I don’t know, lets say rogue bikers, a la The Wild Ones. Let’s further say that it has become (objectively true) common knowledge that the bikers are all drunk out of their minds at a party down by the old swimming hole. If the community, bands together, in a well meaning way, and kicks the crap out of them, are they (the bikers) not hurt?

But that’s just another example of how objective knowledge makes people more effective. After all, if it turned out the bikers were, in fact, sober and armed then this episode wouldn’t turn out well for the townsfolk.

Besides, I didn’t say it was impossible for objective knowledge to be destructive in itself, just rare.

[cosmosdan]

@the raindog

I considered that, but he pollutes every discussion he enters. Rather than a discussion progressing, it quickly degenerates into teenage chaos. So it’s just not as easy as ignoring him. Other posters are quickly diverted from substantive discussion to responding to the troll shock factor nature of his posts. He is a cancer, plain and simple. And I would bet good money that if he—and those like him–aren’t dealt with more effectively this place will be degenerate into slashdot.

More than that, this place is a place for recreation for me. I come to learn, to discuss and to debate from time to time. I appreciate opposing viewpoints and intelligent discussion. But I have enough aggravation IRL than to come here and have my intellectual sensibilities assaulted. This kid is scum.

Now I take great pain to try and display civility, respect and Christian principles here, even though my views here are in the distinct minority. I can’t remember ever calling someone a name here, or intentionally denigrating someone. But I found myself wishing I could just see him face to face and visit some unpleasantries upon him.

If some nameless, faceless punk can get me that worked up, it is time to take my leave. I would do the same in a bar, restaurant or baseball game. (I would add that BC benefits from the net; I have spent many years trying to develop Christian principles in my personality. Still, I am not 100% sure that I would take my leave peaceably. I trust that if BC acted like this IRL he would take some well deserved beatings. My guess is he does not, and saves his bravado for the internet)

It is to Polycarp’s credit that he chose to take his leave rather than compromise his Christian principles. I did not read the exchanges between him and BC, but it seems apparent to me that Polycarp’s sense of integrity and decency kept him from responding in kind. It is truly ironic that in he end, it is BC that is the one who makes the most compelling case for Christianity. It is plainly evident in how this community views the 2 of them. If BC is the face of atheism, the world needs more Christians. If he’s the face of SDMB—even in a nominal way—than it’s time to find a new MB to hang out on.

Thanks for the response. Maybe my experience with the public has thickened my skin a bit. When someone is able to get under my skin and I really think they shouldn’t then I consider it my failure. Still, we are all human with different hot buttons and sometimes it is best to walk away.

Like you I come to the SDMB for recreation and for the brain cells to be stimulated by smart folks who don’t agree with me and offer their own perspectives. Someones whose argument amounts to repeating “That’s bull and you’re stupid for thinking it” isn’t offering anything to keep me interested.

I can understand a certain frustration on the part of atheists and I welcome the dialogue as they speak up. I’ve encountered the Christians who feel like they have some sort of dibs on this country and they need to understand they don’t.
But I digress. Whether it’s a believer or non believer a loud mouth jackass is just that. Reading this thread I do have to wonder what level of jerkishness would warrant a banning.