Of course, the mindless left-liberal domination of this Board, and its Stalinist moderators, will no doubt ensure that Beaten Dam’s tenure is short. 
Coldie, I thought you were a Nazi? Or are you a CommieNazi? Or was that some other mod? My head hurts.
Sam, you need help. You are seriously paranoid.
quote:
Originally posted by BeatenDam
I am new to this message board and like you see many of these people really to need have their minds changed for the good of america.
In addition, we really need to lead the war against run-on sentences.
Welcome, BeatenDam. 
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…oh well, so much for that cliche.
You only said that because THEY told you to.
Is this really a serious question? If so, open a Great Debates thread about it, and I’ll be happy to debate it. Be warned - it’s pretty easy to tear very large holes in your thesis.
This is why I agree with his banning – the mods apparently told him to tone down his thread-starting habits and he refused.
**
I disagree, although I’ll be happy to reconsider if you give some examples. It seems to me that people were insulted by his political views.
**
This is true, but I hope it wasn’t the reason he was banned. IMHO, the correct response to such tactics is to point them out, again and again if necessary.
ADMINISTRATOR: “… What’s not OK is when those quotes are taken out of context, distorted, misattributed, etc.”
(I’ve always wanted to say this…) “cite please?”
- " But when we have a consistent, repeated pattern many many times over many many months, we have to conclude that this is trolling.*
Cite please?
Classic trolling: dropping a shocking or extreme (usually false) comment solely for the purpose of generating attention."
So let’s see. A seventy five year old man gets his kicks making shocking remarks (usually lies) because he is lonely and wants attention.
Hmmm? Nice theory.
Personally, I think the skew to the left, to the extent there might be one, probably only exists because of Iraq. Around the world, this was not popular. Add in the international posters to the U.S. folks (a lot of whom, btw, aren’t liberals) who didn’t like it, and you probably do get a majority. Outside of that, it’s far more, if I may use this word, balanced.
My thesis? Aw Goddam Contrary, its your thesis, that there is a distinct leftward tilt to the SDMB. I merely batted my innocent brown eyes and said “Gosh, Unca Sam, how did it get that way?”
So, how did it get that way, Sam?
I guess december was just too good at debating the conservative side. He pissed off many SDMBer’s, most of whom are probably young, students, struggling artists, etc., people who are more likely to be 1. angry; and 2. on the left side of the political spectrum.
And this notion about dressing up insults in pretty language is very lame and unpersuasive.
A personal attack is pretty clearly a personal attack, and the controversy generated by december’s ouster makes me want to coin a phrase like Shakespeare’s “methinks thou dost protest too much,” in that we’re all sittting here trying to figure out precisely why december was ousted, and that just convinces me that there was no good reason, and perhaps the moderator who banned him should be disciplined somehow?
I think this is a very perceptive observation, not just of this Board, but of American conservatism as a whole.
I’m doing my Ph.D. dissertation on a topic in post-WWII American history, and in the course of my research i come across many letter, pamphlets, books, etc. written by various American conservatives. One thing that almost all of these people share is a claim to beleaguered, minority status. This is true whether the period is the McCarthyist period of the early 1950s, the counter-cultrue period of the late 1960s, the Reagan-dominated 1980s, or Clinton’s 1990s.
Even George Nash, in his sympathetic account of post-war American conservatism,* makes a similar point. It seems that, no matter the actual political situation–even if it involves a Republic president and a Republican-dominated Congress, as right now–conservatives feel better is they can portray themselves as a small group struggling against the overwhelming numbers of surging liberals and leftists who dominate America. This persecution complex helps sustain their moral rectitude.
*George Nash, The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America since 1945.
And another thing: if december’s post riled up 80% of members here and it created administrative headaches, SO FUCKING WHAT? That is just the way it goes, and if you are going to have a real message board, that’s one of the perils.
Yeah, that’s it. :rolleyes:
You do realize that in all likelihood this was discussed by the staff before he was banned. Long time posters aren’t banned because only 1 mod or admin thinks they should be. I suspect the only bannings that aren’t discussed are the ones of newbies that are obviously socks or trolls, and only have a handful of posts under their belt, like two of the people in this thread.
I agree: people held his past against him for far too long. But for his part, he never really backed off for long either. He knew that the Bali thread would be inflammatory, because he’d posted many many threads before just like it, to much hue and cry. There was a fair point in there somewhere, but it couldn’t come from him and be recognized for what it was. The implications and assumptions about what he was really after, as unwarranted by the actual OP statements as they might have been, came built in with december’s history.
And I agree inasmuch as if I had I started such a thread, and said “seriously, it may not be nice to think about, and it may be something we have to put up with as the price of freedom, but given that our enemies are irrational, and given that their stated purpose is to break our resolve to implement our policies to combat them and their interests, doesn’t the appearance of partisan dissension egg them on and make them think there is a weak point to exploit?” I doubt I would have gotten the same vitriol. Not because people would have granted the point, but because they don’t assume the same things are in my mind that they assume are in decembers’.
Many times I suggested to him that he branch out into other topics: into philosophy, into language, into art. Spend some time in Cafe Society too. Get to know people outside of a very narrow litany of partisan sniping matches. Sometimes he did seem like he was branching out. He definately had a lot to offer in other subjects. He was NOT a die-hard conservative in all of his opinions, and he was NOT unamenable to reconsidering points: as long as they were outside the very very cliched partisan knuckle fights he kept starting. The problem was that he kept returning to them, and any chance of building up good relations with people again kept getting squandered.
People may have been biased: but they were far more biased by decembers own history than his ideology. The fact is, you are more conservative, and more angry about it than december was. And yet the majority of people here don’t immediately assume that your arguments and cites are nonsense and lies. Again, how can that be if it’s just conservatism that’s the target?
My real hope is that the mods will be amenable to letting him back sometime in the future. December has said that he has a real GD addiction, and maybe once its back is broken, and he’s moved on to other things for a bit, the mods will listen to both his requests and the requests of others. There are plenty of liberals and otherwise who don’t think he deserved to be banned.
Again, this is a problem, but its very easy to percieve attack from all quarters no matter who you are. Libertarian got piled on incessantly, and it very obviously exasperated him.
But the problem is, if you are advancing an idea for debate and starting an OP, what you are doing is inviting skeptics, not supporters who already agree with you. If you start OPs, you are going to get a lot more pile-ons than if you start arguing midway into a thread, no matter who you are. December started a LOT of threads. I have a feeling that if he more often played the skeptic to anti-Bush threads, he NEVER would have developed the reputation he did. The same thing is happening with Reeder. There are plenty of liberals that have as blinkered a view of reality as Reeder, but the difference is that htey don’t start thread after thread inviting comment.
Moderators do not have the power to ban. They can recommend somone be banned but the banning is ultimately up to an Admin (e.g.: Tubadiva, Lynn, Arnold, Gaudere).
And who disciplines Administrators? Cecil?
I personally blame the illuminati.
Don’t be coy, elucidator. You have suggested on more than one occasion that this board tilts leftward because it is devoted to rationality, and that rationality naturally leads one to the left. Or that leftists are rational people. Or something. If you want to debate that, go for it. Set up a debate.
DanielWithrow: Hey, I’d be thrilled to be in the majority. It would nice to come in here and see other people doing the heavy lifting for me in debates. I’ve got no dog in the ‘poor underdog’ hunt.
And I’d be careful of describing me as a conservative in the first place. I’m more of a libertarian. My stance on the war has distanced me from a lot of other people here who I share a lot in common with. Far more so than any commonality I shared with December. I’m a fiscal conservative, and a social liberal. Can’t stand most of the neocons and their continually blathering about religion. Jerry Falwell can kiss my ass, etc.
And I agree that conservatives often do feel beleagured, but I suspect that had more to do with their belief that the media was tilted to the left. Now that the media is moving to the right, we’re starting to see the same behaviour to the left - witness the hysterical screeds from Al Franken, Michael Moore, and others. And the left in America sure felt the same way in the 60’s, when they saw a conservative orthodoxy. These things come and go in waves.
Ed seems to be the head Admin. All prospective Moderators have to be approved by him.
Sam have you ever even been pitted, much less had anyone seriously call for your banning ? A quick search on “Stone” in pit titles reveals Rolling Stone, Oliver Stone, and Kidney Stone, but no Sam Stone.
You’ve been accused of idiocy, ignorance, and partisan idolatry on occasion, but AFAIK, never trollery or intentional deception. Perhaps that’s because, unlike december you’re not a deceitful troll ?