As I rarely go in GD, I haven’t read much of his work, and never really experienced the fountain of knowledge so many have claimed he posessed. All I know was that over the years the two times I bumped into him, he was a) wrong, and b) a jerk.
Heh. Other than a deep and profound belief that his own arguments are unassailable and that this perceived superiority entitled him to fling insults like apple seeds, he didn’t have much to offer.
The reason, I’m guessing is that “in re” is the correct one. i.e. “With regard to” as opposed to just “regard to”…
I read Collounsbury’s last comment as a somewhat more elaborate version of “put up or shut up,” directed at someone who had already proven his ignorance. Unlike **december, ** Collounsbury is direct in letting people know what he thinks. I respect that in a person, and will be happy to take factually based criticism, no matter how harsh, every time over sneaky backhanded insinuations about a poster’s motivations for disagreeing.
I can’t say I’m surprised this eventually happened, but it still sucks rocks.
We all spend a great deal of time arguing with idiots. Only a few of us get banned. I find that rather telling. And the definition of idiot is a bit broader than ‘people who have disagreed with Collounsbury.’
Maybe I post on some parallel universe SDMB, but in my experience, insults followed in nearly every disagreemnent, and not all of the disagreeable were idjits. If there was some bizarro Collounsbury out there fighting the good fight and only slinging insults when and where appropriate, I didn’t know him.
D’oh.
Civility … (how to say this?) … was never Coll’s long suit. I too agree that people in Great Debates need to more clearly sort between assaults upon the veracity of their data or stance and personal attacks. However, like some sort of BASE jumper that keeps on pulling the ripcord closer and closer to the ground, Coll kept up his personal attacks, even after a recent warning. How clear does it need to be for someone?
I feel that there has been a marked decline in courtesy around here of late. People I have contacted all concur that a propensity for vicious personal attacks continues to grow. Disagreeing with what someone says is one thing. Smearing their character when they have done no direct harm to you is another. Evidently, some people are entirely unable to use the ignore function, be it by clicking on the scroll icon or implementing the viewing option here at the boards. Somehow, these same people see nothing wrong with raising Hell about a personal issue that could have been solved by ignoring it. I can only wonder if it will ever dawn upon them how they come across as whinging, pouting little rotters that have nothing better to do than foul the nest. To be completely clear about this, those who merely pile on in such situations are “pulling up lawn chairs” and not much else. A vital focus upon constructive criticism is being lost and astoundingly few people seem willing to lament this.
Coll, was fouling the nest. If there is one forum at these boards where civility must be held dear, it is Great Debates. Decorum in factual discussions serves an important function. It forces informative statements to the fore and reduces the clutter of personalities and characterization that interferes with clear communication. Anyone not able to respect this simple fact may well be lacking in other departments too. While I agree that there are some posters in Great Debates who are utterly uncontaminated by logic or reason, the place to point that out is in the Pit. Coll persisted in what amounted to being a drunken lout in the town hall meetings and was ejected therefrom. While I shall miss the chance to get detailed information about the MENA region, watching moderators reduced to mopping up bile gets tiresome.
Even though Collounsbury and I were on the same side of many arguments, I am not surprised in the least he got banned. For some reason, he seemed to think that the rules did not apply to him.
Even though the rules were clear, he couldn’t seem to be bothered to follow them if he felt like loosing another profane tirade. The Mods made the right move.
Again?
I’m not in GD much either so I never had chance to butt heads with him. In fact about the only stuff I knew about him was from his apology and the thread about his neighbor. This is a shame. He obviously was fairly knowledgable about certain subjects but less than patient with those less so or that disagreed with him.
Ah well, just think about how fucking nice that next letter’s gonna have to be. He’ll have to charm the pants off the Pope by gawd.
True enough. I wouldn’t mind seeing the amount of swearing and general venom ratcheted down quite a bit in GD myself.
However, I find it sadly ironic that a person who contributed untold amounts of actual knowledge (to which most of us would not have access any other way; yes, we can all check books out of the library, but I do believe that real-life experience adds an irreplaceable perspective) is once again banned, while others in GD continue to perpetuate misrepresentations which IMO verge on hate speech remain, even after steadfast refusal to back up their allegations with actual facts, as long as they manage to avoid four-letter words.
I’ll take the occasional swear word, or even the frequent swear word, over hateful bias anytime.
He was one of the Lords of the Dance! But every performance must end.
But getting a repeat show in the same venue is really testament to how well it was received. If he manages a third go, well, you’ll know you’re viewing a true master of the art.
Not surprised, either. In fact, I had a feeling this would happen when he was allowed back the first time. It was only a matter of time.
It’s a damn shame, because he DOES have a lot of knowledge and information. But for some reason, he can’t share it without being an ass. And that’s a shame.
But it isn’t fair to ask the mods, “Well, but he’s soooo knowledgable!” They put up with a lot of shit from a lot of people.
shrugs
I suppose any insult could be construed as “an elaborate version of `put up or shut up.’” If he meant to say that, he should have said it. Instead he just kept insulting people. I don’t remember him ever insulting me, but I have to admit I rapidly grow tired of his I-am-smarter-than-you-so-fuck-you act.
It comes down to this; the rule is you can’t be a jerk. He constantly acts like a jerk for no good reason. Whether he’s right or not is a stupid non-excuse; there have been occasions when I have corrected people of the most astounding sorts of ignorance, but I’ve never even approached his level of jerkitude in my worst moments, and many Dopers can say the same thing. Thousands of other posters on this board regularly engage in spirited debate without constantly hurling profanities and insults at one another in GD, but Collounsbury is incapable of doing so.
I don’t know what his problem is, if he has anger management issues or if he’s arrogant or insane or on prescription drugs or what it is, but it’s his problem.
As to whether or not he’ll be missed, I don’t think the board was any worse when he was gone before and it won’t be any worse now.
My only comment on the matter is that it is a long-standing principle of the SDMB that bashing someone who cannot defend himself is bad etiquette.
I disagree with you on that. “Put up or shut up” in this instance would have been a more abrupt way of saying “come up with some actual evidence rather than hateful whining, or leave the topic alone and complain elsewhere.” I’ve sen attacks in GD, from **Collounsbury **and others, which were much more personal. To me, this “fuck off” wasn’t even directed at the person, but at the factual and moral emptiness of his posts on Islam. Off all the things Collounsbury might have been banned for, that one seemed odd to me.
It just frustrates and saddens me that between **Collounsbury ** and **Alan Owes Bess, ** we are left with the latter, who adds absolutely nothing to this place except uninformed hate.
Eva Luna, if you read the other thread about this, evidently Gaudere had emailed Coll with a warning just minutes prior to his final outburst. For all his vaunted intelligence, he should have slowly backed away from the computer and taken a break. Instead, he immediately disobeyed the moderator’s instructions in the exact same forum. It’s pretty safe to say that Coll knows how to tie his shoelaces. With that much intelligence safely under his belt, he also should have known when to back off. He refused to, and now we are deprived of both his knowledge and incessant spewing.
Well guys, I was one of a handful of people who were online and posting at the time that Coll made his “fuck off” remark in the Great Debates thread in question.
I’m no apologist - not by any stretch - merely (to paraphrase the man himself) - a partisan of balance and fairness.
It was about 9:30pm Australian time - that’s about what 4:30 am USA time? - and I was jumping from forum to forum looking to see if something interesting was popping up to read.
I could see Collounsbury posting in various threads - and I watched his posts in a real time as they unfoled. Here’s what happened.
I imagine it was the start of Coll’s business day, Egypt time. He posted a few things in the BBQ Pit first of all. I daresay his email linked him to the various threads he was showing an interest in. This isn’t an unreasonable assumption. A few people, as always, were hanging shit on him in the Pit, and as always, Coll was doing his Douglas Fiarbanks impersonation and flinging his sword around left right and centre.
Then I saw his name pop up in the Great Debates thread with the “infamous fuck off” post. I’ll swear black and blue he didn’t realise he was in the Great Debates forum. I’ll gladly admit that’s speculation on my part, but I was watching it in real time you know. I reckon he’s just kept clicking his email’s and he’s not noticed he was in a thread in the GD forum - and he then came across more of the same sort of disparaging remarks. So he let fly - and I honestly believe he thought he was still in the Pit.
But take note my fellow posters - I’m no expert at all on the Middle East. I’m just a guy who asks polite questions if I can. Note: I followed Collounsbury’s post with a totally reasonable question regarding some new American spokesperson in Iraq who speaks Arabic very well apparently. Note how respectful, and cordial, and polite, and informative Collounsbury answered my questions. Coll owes me no favours - I’m just another poster who shows an interest in the same kind of threads.
My opinion? There’s no way you can say that Coll was going out of his way to start trouble that night. No way. He was merely responding to people who were baiting him, and I genuinely believe he didn’t realise he was no longer in the Pit and maintained the vibe, as it were.
That’s my take. I watched it happen in real time. I doubt few of you can say that.
**Zenster, ** I’m not denying it was a boneheaded move on Collounsbury’s part. I’m just frustrated by the unfortunate outcome.
:rolleyes: