I like that better than what was appearing in my head, which was Dexter wearing a unitard.
Guh.
He added hugely to my understanding of the way the mod/admin team work, and for that alone I thank him.Information in any form fights ignorance.
Thanks to Liberal for asking the questions I was thinking.
This is a shock.
Fuck you people.
Because it was purposely to try and goad Polycarp. He made stalking Poly his whole reason for posting, and he was a One Trick Pony at that. I don’t think I EVER saw him post on any other subject than religion-nothing on movies, or books he read, nothing about annoying coworkers, or anything like that.
Absofuckinglutely, from another hard atheist. The guy was a jackasshole*.
*Oh please let that become a new word. It’s so convenient and useful.
I couldn’t have said it better.
For what? Not liking a guy you liked? We didn’t ban him.
Exactly. The request the mods made was actually pretty simple, and he failed to follow it.
And if it is true that, as Giraffe said, they removed a Polycarp quote from his signature, that means he intentionally put it back, or at least another quote, as evidenced by his current profile. That’s being deliberately antagonistic in addition to straight-up breaking a mod rule.
badchad said at one point in one of the recent Pit threads that when reason fails to convince someone their beliefs are wrong, he sees nothing wrong with ridiculing them mercilessly. I just don’t see how that’s defensible when used against decent people, even if you don’t agree with their beliefs. It’s just jackassery of the highest order.
Ah well Ogre, IIRC you did defend him, but I also remember you told him to please not make you look foolish by then getting himself banned for showing later to be a jerk or a Troll. So yes, you are better than that.
The thing is that I saw his banning coming a mile away, one thing I can see in all this is that surprisingly the “I’m holier than you” attitude can come also from extreme atheism, the problem is that people like him can make others confuse assholiness with holiness.
If there is something that one should learn from all this is that behavior can affect the message, in this case by getting him banned for jerkish behavior. Others should check carefully before jumping to defend people like him that claim to be guided “by destiny”.
A jerk that agrees with me is still a jerk.
AAANNDD **Malacandra **nails it in one. A real gut busting bit.
It is incumbent upon me to mention that the scurrilous blaggard that is **tomndebb **took issue only with the charge that he *may *not be guilty of. Who knows how many legs are his, and how many deb’s? What is he, after all, to Hecuba, and Hecuba to he?
Real X-tian thread what with all the sentiments expressed in it.
You got your pound of flesh, why not give it a rest and lock this thing? Guess Jesus was the gloating kind.
Enjoy.
::::shrug:::
I did not “take issue” with the “charge” so much as ask what the heck it meant.
As to taking issue with all your other odd complaints: I was afraid that if I denied all of them (or any of them), I would have overtaxed your limited resources attempting to [del]invent[/del] provide evidence for your charges. Better to suffer your slings and arrows stoically, soldiering on without complaint, than to actually defend myself, causing your head to explode with overexertion.
Interesting that you say that just a few posts after a few “diamond hard” atheists said they felt he was making them look bad. Guess you’re not the reading-for-comprehension kind.
::::shrug::::
Adamantine atheist here. He did not serve the cause well. The 10% of his posting that was information (yummy filling) was coated in a thick layer of inflammatory masa. You ever get one of those tamales, where it’s all corn meal, and shaped like a coke can, and tastes like. . . corn meal? (I’m not big on corn meal) His recent request for a recommendation for a decent NT Greek dictionary, needed solely for the non-academic, non-Christian purpose of a furthering an obsession with baiting people made my eyes roll very hard and it hurt. That’s just. . . rabidly evangelical, you know?
Not being one, does that mean I can continue with the Dance of Joy?
Just from the replies in this thread, I have my guesses as to who next is going to shower in gasoline and light a match. Someone pass the marshmallows.
What a great title for this thread! Good on ya, Shodan! 
Actually, I haven’t noticed anyone in this thread that I know to be Christian either gloating or name-calling (I may be wrong). But I may have missed something - nonetheless, there isn’t a lot of vitriol thus far. Just saying.
Same quote, FWIW. I took it philosophically, for the most part – I did say it, though in a nuance that quoting it out of context completely lost. But it was annoying in the extreme, and I did report it, asking if it could be removed under current policy.
At first, he seemed to improve. He responded to points where I invoked him (recognizing that his “take” on a question would be different than the one I was stating). Then he directly engaged me, answered me civilly once, then reverted to the twisted questions and digs again.
I know it’s not charitable of me to be glad he’s gone, and I wish he had shaped up and argued his position with civility – that’s all I expected from him. (That, and stopping finding ways to embarrass me at every instance I posted on anything remotely relevant to his bete noire.)
I don’t rejoice at his banning, as I thought I would. I am saddened by the fact that he could not let go of whatever about me inspired his ire, even when I stopped the one thing that irked him (wholesale condemnation of conservative evangelical Christianity’s insistence on playing Pharisee).