Mmhm. Y’know? You’re right! You so do not look like a drama queen by blowing my posts out of proportion. I’ve found a whole new respect for you.
That’s not anywhere near what she’s doing.
Sorry, my first language is Martian. Try “But it’s the way he attempts to defend himself, in which he calls into question the motives of those who criticize him, which leaves him open to that fairly, I think.”
Hmm. Still only replying to the manner of my posts, while continuing to ignore the content. Wonder what that signifies?
Which “first pitting”? Do you mean the extremely brief one posted by Inkleberry or the really, really long one I started about twenty minutes later after Inkleberry got hers closed?
Because I can tell you with a pretty good degree of certainty what I was thinking in posting that thread - and believe me, I have nothing against bondage. I’m not squicked out by the thought of people being tied up in the slightest. I’m not aroused by it in the slightest, not being straight - and when it comes into detailed descriptions of naked women, I don’t find it all that pleasant, but I’m certainly not “quicked” by any of it.
Evil Captor, Arnold Winkelreid, and the folks who banded together to defend Evil Captor shouted over and over that I was just some kind of prude for wanting him to knock it off. It didn’t matter whether they had any evidence or not - though of course they didn’t have any evidence of that (as it would be pretty damn tough to call me a prude if you knew me) - Captor ‘n’ crew simply told the same lies over and over, and the fact that you believed them is pretty good evidence that it worked. It’s the same sort of thing that you see in politics - Bush and his team did such a good job painting Kerry as “weak on security” and “a flip-flopper” that suddenly it became the public perception - regardless of the truth.
That’s a morally indefensible tactic - though obviously a little message board fight is a much smaller issue, it still reflects on Evil Captor ‘n’ friends that they felt no particular compunctions about making shit up when it was convenient. And it reflects on this message board as a whole that people believed it just because it was repeated enough.
None of the people who said nasty things about me in that thread have apologized so far. I’m beginning to think that holding my breath while I wait might not be a good idea.
The trouble is when they start deliberately posting deceptive thread titles in order to sneakily convince folks to talk about Buffy when they don’t want to. Evil Captor wasn’t even just a one-trick pony - he constantly hijacked threads to bring them back to his preferred topic, and posted threads with rather bland titles about movies when the only topic he planned to discuss was how the movies depicted bondage. It is faintly creepy that Evil Captor seems to view movies in terms of nothing but potential masturbation-fodder - but that’s a minor quibble. It’s obvious that (as lissener has pointed out) Evil Captor wouldn’t have managed to stay around for nearly as long has his one topic been something else - he managed to convince a number of people that he was some sort of martyr for the noble perverts of our fine country, no matter the reality, which is that perverts (and again, I use the term affectionately, as I’m certainly among them) are anything but marginalized here on the SDMB. The irony is that S&M enthusiasts are about the least discriminated against minority group on the board, with the possible exception of us queers - but that didn’t stop Captor and his little posse of idiots from pretending like he was some unfortunate victim of the SDMB Puritans’ Society.
You can’t write SDMB without B, D, S, and M.
Just sayin’.
That’s because you’re twisted and evil. 
Somewhere in between is where I find myself. Yes, I think it was the extreme hijackassery that did him in, but that the hijacking wouldn’t be noticed as much if not for his fave hijack subject.
I’m reminded of Handy. Lots of posters would chastise him for his contantly spouting off wrong/misleading answers in GQ. But it was the medical posts (still wrong/misleading but a specific subject) that was used as a banning tool.
Perhaps you are all arguing from near the same side and just don’t know it yet?
Not just you; I just read this thread title as Eric Clapton’s suspension (which would be an A chord with a D on the second string).
Try using content that’s not made of straw. 
Me, I always think of **Evil Captor **as Eric Cartman. Appropriate on OH so many levels.
If anyone thinks he didn’t get off on talking about it where it wasn’t expected:
This was a thread about some guy who wanted to tell a coworker he wacks it while thinking about her. Evil Captor said his fantasy in that case would be some big bondage thing.
He likes making people uncomfortable. Whether he gets a sexual charge out of it, or just a big laugh, it’s inappropriate.
Perhaps you could tell me in what way you are discriminated against on the board because you are gay.
This had gotten just way too meta. Would you please explain what this means? Specifically?
Frank I read that as Ex’s saying that gays are one of the least discriminated against (ie hasseled)
We’re mostly discriminated against by people who should read twice before replying.
Just to clarify, I’m not in any way saying his suspension is undeserved. It’s deserved.
One annoying thing about EC’s one-trick-ponyism is that I’d be interested in a few threads about BDSM, bondage imagery in modern media, and similar topics. (I’m not into it myself, but I’m often interested in intelligent discussion of sexual interests.) But EC’s own behavior made it impossible for him to have those discussions – people got so tired of seeing his posts in inappropriate places that it became impossible for him to have any credibility when he’d try to appropriately discuss his interests.
I do think the subject matter was a motivating factor for some people’s interest in “quieting” Evil Captor, but his own behavior was the justifiable reason for the suspension.
Ah, you’re right. Sorry, Excalibre, I misread.
Certainly. From where I sit, your argument with Maureen has become one big strawman.
:dubious: