Who gives a shit? If banning were about perfect justice and fair trials, then most who have been banned had never been so.
So, the disruptive force called Liberal is allowed to disrupt the board 5x worse than the typical banned poster because he doesn’t mean to be naughty? What a load that is. He is perhaps the most justifiably despised poster this board has ever had. Does anyone else have more pittings?
Whether he has the “intention” or not, he does. And I know he’s reading every word of this. Fuk yoo, Liberal!
No, of course not. I should just let him say whatever the fuck he wants and be the bigger person. Well, squash that noise. He posted stupid shit and I called him on it. I don’t hold my tongue. Especially not for whiny, paranoid crybabies.
Don’t be silly. He has the power of the whiny complaint. The power to get YOU banned if you dare call him Libertarian.
Um, huh? I have perfect control over myself. Just because I feel like being sarcastic and flippant in response to being accused of-- lemme see-- planning Lib’s demise doesn’t mean I don’t have control over myself.
But wait! Maybe you’re right Zoe. Maybe I should just let Lib talk shit about me, annoy the living piss out of me, control the way the board is administrated and not say a goddamned word about it! Yeah, I’ll take the high road and suffer in silence! Because Zoe said!
I would like to make clear that my complaints are about the management’s treatment of Lib, not him. He’s a jerk and having a bad upbringing or a sad life or any of the other excuses made for him do not excuse his actions, but I still culdn’t care less about said actions. My beef is with the double standard obvious in the administration’s treatment of him. Feel free to ban me for stating it, or how I stated it (despite the forum), but I ask that you start treating him like you treat the rest of us. If he sets himself up for abuse then he should expect abuse. If he is going to live a lie on this board through his choice of user name then let us call him on it. He made his bed so let the chickens come home to sleep in it.
The first half of that quote you don’t have any control over. You don’t let him do or say anything. That’s up to Lib, the mods and administration. Your choice comes in with whether or not you choose to “be the bigger person.” I’m not the one who picked your name.
Maybe you need to speak up for yourself; I don’t know. (I do know that it is the arguments back and forth that form the hijacks that tear apart the threads.)
Meanwhile, no one is responsible for the words that I use here except me. The same is true for you and the words you use. “See What You Made Me Do” is a child’s game.
I said nothing about remaining silent or suffering. I suggested that you not give Lib so much power over you.
If you can show just exactly how this “disruptive force” works his voodoo so that everything stops when he appears, yet idiots can wander through religious threads making rather dumb anti-religious comments and other idiots can wander through scientific threads making truly idiotic religious comments and clowns can tramp all over political threads making morons look brilliant and none of those people have the power to disrupt the board, then you might persuade me that we need to “do something” about Liberal.
What I continue to see in this thread are claims that he has a magic power to be disruptive. (I am also beginning to see some whining that he gets special treatment, although in nine months of Moderating I notice that I am not bombarded with reports complaining about his behavior.) Basically, the argument seems to be that it is the duty of the staff to save you folks from your own inability to withhold responses to posts that you think are irritating.
I am willing to stipulate that Liberal is often hard to understand.
I am willing to stipulate that he has a mean temper and that he sometimes lashes out at people out of proportion to their perceived offense.
I am willing to stipulate that he has portrayed himself as a martyr on several occasions. (And I had forgotten the thread to which ETF provided a link, but that one was pretty odd, even for Lib.)
So?
I can think of several posters in this thread who have been taken to task for posting (perceived) gibberish.
There are several posters in this thread with deserved reputations for overreacting to perceived slights.
Everyone that claims that they simply cannot resist feeding his “hijacks” is playing the role of martyr.
I make no claim that Lib is an ideal poster. I do not claim that he has not earned the anger directed against him.
I am not, however, going to recommend banning based on the notion that some loud contingent of posters does not like him. Wander back through this thread. The condemnation of Lib does not approach unanimity. Lib, like a number of posters, is a lightning rod for strong feelings, but if that is the justification for throwing someone out, several of his detractors would find themselves bouncing on the pavement alongside him.
Change the underlined word slightly and tighten up the sentence: do you see evidence that he knowingly hijacks threads and stirs up anger? I agree that there’s not much evidence that he does it deliberately, but it seems obvious that he does it knowingly.
Actually, I think it’s only fair for me to observe that I’ve not had any beef at all with Lib since his return. I hope he continues to post with the moderation and restraint he’s currently showing; if he does, I’ll have no problem with him at all.
Lib had a special rule made just for him. Because he’s a whiner. I’d say that’s a special power. A power he has over you.
Ha! Ha! funny joke-- because my name is Biggirl and I said “bigger person”-- ha, ha. Hahaha. . . .anyway, I see where we come to our major disagreement. You think not voicing you displeasure at silly posters and special rules is noble. I think suffering in silence makes you a sucker. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Again, don’t be silly. I’m not arguing that Lib can make you say his name. I’m arguing that Lib’s complaining can now get you banned if you do. You do see the difference, don’t you?
Again, Lib can do whatever the hell he likes. It’s when he gets to make the rules that I’ll bitch. And will continue to do so with or without your approval.
Even if the rule had originated with Lib, it means nothing to me. I give it no importance. Why should I?
But I’m not suffering. I think that it would be terrible if you are.
No one has been banned because of Lib’s complaints. People are banned only because they break the rules that are very clearly stated. Do you have any examples that support your claim otherwise?
Lib doesn’t get to make the rules so far. Nor do you or I. My intention was never to approve or disapprove of your “bitching.” Remember that I have acknowledged your right to respond from the beginning. I regret that you inferred anything different from what I said. I am not in control of you anymore than Lib is. (At last we agree!)
There are accusations that I usually respond to myself. But they have become fewer over time. I give less and less importance to what others say about me and that has been rather empowering.
I brought all of this up in this thread only because the responses to Lib’s comments are part of the hijacks. He can’t hijack without cooperation from others.
I have no further comment for the time being, but I wish you well.
Yeah, but this isn’t about you, is it? You’re trying to tell me how I should react when people piss me off and accuse me of nonsense. Since it is of no importance to you, then I should ignore it? Is that what your point is?
Well no, I’m not suffering. I’m getting my own back. That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you. Maybe instead of telling me how I should react to getting my chain jerked, you should be telling the jerker to stop being such a jerk. And this holier-than-thou attitude you got going is pretty irritating too. I don’t like it. I thought you should know. I suffer not at all when I get shit like this off of my chest.
Have you been reading this thread? The administration has said that anyone can get banned for calling Lib “libertarian”. I gotta wait until they do it before I can say this is stupid?
He certainly does "make the rules’ if threads are moved on his whiny say so. And that’s what I was pitting. It happened. I didn’t like it. I made a pit thread.
“You have the right to choose not to let some one jerk your chain.” Sounds like a very long-winded and circular way of saying, “Learn to like getting your chain jerked.” Maybe you can explain to me what you meant by it.
That’s nice how you’ve come to terms with letting people talk shit about you. I’m happy for you. Really. And I do understand about letting some shit slide. It’s just not up to you to decide what I let slide and what I don’t.
Don’t let me jerk your chain, sweetie. And thanks for the well wishes.
In a way, yes,hedid, though it was couched as falling under the “trolling” rule. However, Liberal likes pointing people directly to the “ruling” as though it pertains directly to him. (Coloring for emphasis, mine.)
dropzone and TVeblen had a specific exchange in which banning was raised, although it is unclear whether the referenced potential banning was for the use of the old name or for general hostility.
One of the warnings that lissener accumulated was in regards to his persistent use of Lib’s old name. (As far as I know, Coldy’s admonition to Desmostylusregarding the name did not make it into the permanent record as a Warning and did not figure in his subsequent banning.)
So, I think it is a stretch to say that simply calling Lib “Libertarian” (or “Liberaltarian”) is going to put anyone in jeopardy of imminent banishment, although a persistent habit of doing so is liable to be viewed without favor.
I will admit that I really wish I had forgotten the incidents with lissener and Desmo (or remembered them more clearly) and not bothered to post my first comment in this thread. I had thought that it was a simple reminder to avoid a particular behavior known to be frowned upon and it has now turned into a cause célèbre.
I’ll wander back to the staff room and see if I can discover a consensus regarding any “rules” regarding name abuse.
I will note, however, that even if I have misapplied the principle regarding names, we have long had a policy regarding harrassment and it is possible that deliberately and persistently calling Liberal “Libertarian” may, indeed, be considered harrassment. That is hardly a special rule for Lib as we have warned people for other forms of harrassment of different posters, as well.
For what it’s worth, any rule against variants on calling people Poopyhead are okay in my book. The way I see it:
There’s no good reason to do it; and
There’s a good reason not to do it.
So if y’all want to make a new rule that there’s no mocking user’s names, that’s cool. (As long as you interpret it liberally–err, like a libertar–dammit!) Folks obviously shouldn’t get in trouble for calling me Dorkness, for example.
