More to the point, he would never get away with it! Nobody would stand for that, going back in the Wayback Machine to find a bannable offense for action, and then acting upon it when it wasn’t acted upon then! I don’t know if your fans would be infuriated, but I bet they’d both say something.
No I wouldn’t.
ok, so maybe banning isn’t really a legitimate fear… but what about the irreparable damage done to his reputation by such an insidious allegation of trollery?
One works so hard, for so long, to build it, and then to have it torn down so cruelly…
Dear me, I do have to use shorter words to get through to you, don’t I?
That’s another thing the party loyalists get bashed for here - making up shit like that and calling it fact.
Is it *hard * to type with your thumb in your mouth?
with a banner reading “Mission Accomplished” in the background?
on on the main thread subject: I think samclems post was wrong. but I also don’t /didn’t see it as him specfically asking other posters to help him get evidence towards a ban. I also think Scylla’s smart enough to know this, but is not above using the situation to his advantage.
there, now, I’ve probably pissed off both sides.
Not me. Hey! you’re a liberal, right? right?
yes, the founder of the “liberal, but not a fucking lunatic” society.
I know that no such post exists, so I was never worried about that. What I was worried about was getting misrepresented. The very thread we are talking about was founded by deliberately misrepresenting my arguments to conclude that I was endorsing genocide and thought such to be a favorable outcome.
Someone eager to do so, could easily go back and find something to misrepresent and claim that I was a self-admitted troll. Several people actually went and did this and posted their results here. Now, of course they could say that they would never seek to ban me over these old things. But, they could use those old things to support banning me for the current things they are misrepresenting me about.
It probably wouldn’t work… this time. But, a banning is usually a gradual thing. It happens because of a pattern. I’ll bet Samclem didn’t read my whole arguements in the original thread very carefully. Somebody was just saying that I was promoting genocide and people were arguing about it, and didn’t Scylla he was a troll who posted just for effect anyway?
The next time something I say is controversial, or misrrepresented, the die is cast, a pattern exists.
As to using the situation to my advantage. Absolutely. It is to my advantage that I not be misrepresented or percieved as a troll.
Once people start saying you’re a troll pretty soon the only space for rent is under a bridge.
Was “fuck you” short enough for you?
Oh, so you admit that it was hostile to conservatives prior to GWB? Thanks, that was easier than I thought.
No. Is it hard to type with *your * thumb up your ass?
Thank you. As a conservative (sort of) and an unremitting enemy of the Bush Administration, it’s nice to know that some people can see the difference between being conservative (sort of) and being batshit crazy.
That’s true enough. And compounding the problem is that a particular admin has a very short fuse, shoots from the hip, and sometimes seems to be severly comprehension impaired — all while making judgments on years old misinformation and stereotypes. And no, I won’t say who. I just wanted to confirm that a rep can be born out of nothing more than the sheer consensus of an ad hoc pile-on, and it’s partly due to what I’ve noted.
The board used to have a liberal v. conserative undercurrent. Lately it’s been as subtle as a tsunami. And it’s making this place about as fun as a tsunami.
If you have children and spouses and friends whom you are ignoring in order to continue waging this ridiculous “Us v. Them” battle, you really need to realign your priorities. Shame on both Samclem and Scylla for squandering their considerable talents on this tiresome battle of ideology and wills.
No, a rep can be born on evidence. Had you used the word “continued”, I’d agree with you. It is difficult to change a rep once established, here as in real life. It takes persistence and patience.
If one were to regard this thread as a sample of conservative thought and expression, one would easily conclude that conservatives are (almost all) whiny pussies. The reason why many conservatives have left is that they were pretty much the party-before-country type of Republicans. Of course it is getting unpleasant because it’s getting harder and harder to be that type of Republican these days.
But they can’t admit or acknowledge this, so they’ll cry foul and claim to have been attacked for their beliefs rather than their behavior.
I’d love for the board to maintain a strong representation of conservative thinking. Now all we need to do is get some strong conservatives. The ones we have represented in this thread are pretty sad.
Why the “no”? It can be born from evidence, but it also can, as I said, be born from bullshit gossip and mindless consensus. There’s no reason to deny one and accept the other.
What a thread.
It’s got it all. A whiny OP. A drama queen declaring his final post. The confusion between acting as a moderator and as a poster. Petty sniping. Clashing egos. The wailing of conservatives.
It’s a perfect microcosm of the complaints, accusations, and drama that have been done, over and over and over, since this board began. I suggest we adopt this thread as a template for all the crybabies in the future to use for their threads.
This part is, almost unbelievably, sort of close to the truth. I grant you, given who we are dealing with when we read it, this is not very true, but in the spirit of “let’s give the retarded three-year-old a gold star for using the potty even if he forgot to wipe himself or flush”, I will give him credit for it.
One gets piled on and Pitted somewhat less even if you are a Republican, but the price of this is that you must post a disclaimer that you hate Bush. It seems to be necessary to knuckle your forelock in front of this before the Usual Suspects can overcome their reflexive attack mode to react to anything that contains the word “Bush”. I don’t do that, which is why the knee-jerkers tend to go into their act. I and others have gone around and around (and around) with many of them to the point where little amusement can be derived from the process - once you have seen four or five hundred attempts to change a thread around to “Bush lied about Iraq and 9/11”, you’ve seen them all.
This is pretty obviously wrong - I have never been warned for mentioning the Usual Suspects, and no one has ever been warned for calling non-Bush haters anything at all.
Not by the mods, as a general rule, and certainly not by you. I didn’t notice you springing into the Pitting that triggered all this to point out that Scylla did not, in fact, advocate genocide.
Actually, that depends on your point of view.
Your general MO seems to be to assert that a point of view with which you disagree is necessarily made in bad faith. You sometimes seem to think that personal attacks are bad for the discussion, or instruct other Dopers to ignore remarks like “you have absolutely no contribution to make” but only, it seems, for those with whom you do not agree. In cases where you don’t, the rules seem much more flexible.
Yet you seem to have no problem with the reflexive assumption that I am deliberately posting falsely out of malice. You ruled out the possibility that any error could possibly be other than deliberate - until you were caught in an error in the same thread. Then, of course, the standards immediately changed, and you insisted that you should always be given the benefit of the doubt.
To be fair, of course, you do not limit this to me alone, but, as I mentioned, to posters with which you disagree. Which, on this board, means the minority of those for whom hatred of Bush does not form the basis and pinnacle of their political thinking. Such as it is.
And making a discussion personal without adding anything to a discussion seems to be something other moderators are guilty of as well, and aimed at a non-Bush hater, and on a topic which is very much a sacred cow among knee-jerkers.
This part is true, in general, and the comparison to Tamerlane flattering beyond my deserts.
Whoops, this is getting long, and I have to do some real work.
This should be long enough to satisfy Apos, so he will have to bide his time until I post something else appropriately dismissive.
Regards,
Shodan
You forgot the hysterical squealing from Leftists. Also the bizarre, almost stalking behavior of one member obsessed with another.