Paying the money doesn’t give one the right to break the rules. It says that right in the agreement to join before one even pays one’s money.
Yeah…except the infractions weren’t serious and were most likely a pretext. Let’s be real here - who’s more upsetting at a party - the guy who’s a bit rude, or the guy who’s raving? Once the mods (and pretty much everyone else) fingered Graham as probably psychotic, they were looking for an excuse to show him the door. I personally had the feeling that Graham tried as best he could to follow the rules, and actually did reasonably well considering his apparent state of mind. I’d give him a refund since I think the mods were holding him to stricter standards than normal because of (what looks to be) mental illness. But again, I do not blame them for this. I just am not really ready to blame Graham either.
The posts started by GW got terrific view and reply numbers. I have to say I’m a bit surprised that apparently (I haven’t read any of his threads in full and have opened only a few) people who thought him a loony, and even mentally ill, should engage with him. I feel that if anything can be learned from this, that can be.
Good point, but I’d read the whole Castenada thread before jumping to any conclusions.
I take your point (actually, I still have no idea who C.C. is, except he’s involved with prisoner abuse??). I guess what I was also trying to say (but didn’t want to appear holier than thou) was that I basically ignored GW’s threads (after reading one or two OPs) because it was fairly clear to me that he wouldn’t be around long and was an attention seeker who would string people along. But, thereagain, so am I, but, I hope in a different way. One that is willing to take it, as well as to give it, and to keep a sense of balance about Internet graffiti of the kind we indulge in. (Graffiti can of course be an extremely valuable resource, for example, to historians, so I don’t intend to dismiss the “fighting ignorance/making a difference” aspect of teh Dope, even though I often take the piss out of it.)
I feel that the GW situation does highlight a gawping-at road-accidents tendency among some members, which I think doesn’t help the overall flavour of the board. Although I’ve just had a mini clash with her, I feel that the whole TubaDiva thing was another example of this tendency. (I’m referring to the reaction to what she did.) Of course, people should be free to write what they like (within the rules of the SDMB), and I am against just about all censorship, and heaven forbid everyone should be like me, but my point is that this tendency has negative effects.
True, except that his infractions were relatively minor and yet the axe was swift and merciless, especially when compared to others who have broken the rules.
Good riddance. While some of the topics he started were somewhat interesting, I had a feeling there was something assholish about him. And bingo.
A perpetual jerk on the boards is bad enough. A perpetual racist jerk is intolerable.
Please note that the three posts cited by TubaDiva in the OP are a sampling, they do not constitute the entire body of evidence. He wasn’t banned for just using one word, he wasn’t banned for those three posts alone, he was banned for general and overall repeated jerkish behavior that seemed pretty much like trolling (provoking solely for the sake of provoking.)
ala GB’s preemptive strike against Iraq? 
sry, just being a wanker
One might also note his habit of repeatedly starting threads in the wrong forum. That happens once or twice with a newbie, OK, he’s still learning his way around. And it happens to even experienced Dopers now and then. But when half of your threads have to be moved, after repeated explanations from the mods, well, eventually it crosses over into jerkdom.
Okay. Not having really encountered him much, if at all, I was going by the examples Tuba gave, and what some people have said in here. I see that Dex has indicated that the sampling is incomplete. That’s good to hear because, like I said, what I saw of him based on those was no worse than Mully’s remark about having as much chance as a black girl on The Bachelor. You seem to have interacted with him, and of course I’ll take you at your word.
My comments about Askia, however, and myself still stand. I also still agree with Sobran. If indeed a man is banned because he espouses racism, then we who would take him to the mat have been robbed of an opportunity to reveal the weaknesses of his position. And the world is no less racist for having banned him.
Stricter standards? I didn’t see that at all. What I saw was someone who was not capable of adhering to, or even understanding, the standards that all board members are held to. If he was trying as best he could, then his best wasn’t good enough.
And Lib, I only read the CC thread, but no one there was trying to silence GW. They were trying to get him to stop repeating “FOLLOW MY INSTRUCTIONS TO THE LETTER” and just tell us what his big scary secret was. He showed no evidence of being superior to others in that thread, either, because he didn’t show anything. It’s impossible to judge someone at all if they don’t tell you what their deal is.
OK, well I too, will now admit incomplete knowledge. I read the one infamous thread, the bbq thread it spawned, the linkies listed here, and a few other random posts by him which weren’t impressive, but didn’t offend me. On the basis of those I thought he was being held to stricter behavioral standards than other posters. However since Dex is saying that’s just a sample, I’ll take my analysis back totally. Obviously if what he did in the three links represented a pattern (instead of being the only three infractions he committed), then ban away.
You know, it has always been my opinion that your contributions are valuable.
You’re very right. And for the record I rubber-necked my way through both those threads, which I ordinarily don’t do (largely because of a lack of patience, not moral rectitude). What can I say? [/Shrug] I found that thread thoroughly fascinating, and I don’t have any other reason or excuse. But in a way, though it was very public, it was none of my business. I’ll try to remember that next time.
Yes, true, but then irrelevent to the fact he paid to be here.
As to the ealrier party analogy, if you pay to hear your favorite band at the local club, it doesn’t confer upon you the right to be a fool. You’ll be shown the door, with no refund from the bouncer.
The barber shaves all those who do not shave themselves. Who shaves the barber?
Your original proposition still isn’t defensible.
The barber.
I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
From dictionary.com:
defensible
I think the word means exactly what I intended.
Then again, the words I use usually do. 
Are you talking about this Sobran?