Evil Captor himself said in post # 174 of this thread that he gets a kick out of his (as lissener put it) “guerilla exhibitionism”. He claims it’s not sexual, in nature, but pardon me if I say I somehow doubt that. I also stand by my post # 166 in which I presented evidence (his own words) that he is aware of the nonconsensual aspect of uninvited explicit sex talk. Both of those statements together clearly indicate to me that some creepy exhibitionism is going on. Do you disagree with that?
Also, what lissener said.
I’ll give you the Cheney one was inappropriate and IMO stupid, but the other two are a stretch. When the off board brigade roasted him, he was shit bombing everywhere.
He really has toned it down. By the way while I am somewhat defending EC, I didn’t like his post either when inappropriate. But he has toned it down a lot as requested and he does offer up many good posts when he avoids the bondage posts.
I think he is a bright guy with an out of the mainstream interest. 20 years ago the various gay posts would have probably been considered more out of place. The world changes. What happens between two consenting adults is between two consenting adults.
I try not to condemn people for what they say and do. But of course I have my buttons too. I just try not to advertise them. Oh, I’ll own up to one, say something nice about Cheney and I will turn into a "Pit"bull.
Jim
You’ll note that I did not take issue with either of those statements. You’re free to be as creeped out by them as you want, although, speaking personally, I find the obsession you have with EC’s posts far creepier than the posts themselves. What I do take exception to is the idea that making a joke about Elizabeth Rohm having the acting range of a porn star is “inappropriatly sexual.” That’s patently ridiculous. EC agreed to stop posting about bondage in non-bondage threads, and has done so. Apparently unsatisfied with that concession, you now want to pillory him for using any word remotely related to any sort of sexual activity, in any context. Which leads me to believe that, for you at least, the issue is more about getting your kicks in on Evil Captor than any element of his actual behavior, past or present.
I am mildly amused by how the post before my last references demonizing EC, while mine brings satanism into play.
I just wanted to note that little irony. Ah, well.
Nine posts in a single thread do not constitute an obssession, IMO, so I have to disagree with your characterization of my involvement in this discussion. Also, I have said I was “squicked out” and that is a different thing from being “creeped out”. You can think someone is creepy without being creeped out by them. In this case it’s more like revulsion at his (now admittted) exhibitionism.
About comparing the actress Rohm to porn stars: I have never heard of porn actresses being described as “wooden” in their acting skills. If you have a cite for that as a common description, I’d like to see it. More often I have heard them described as overly emotive hams in the vein of over-the-top When Harry Met Sally fake orgasm in the diner types. For that reason, I thought the comparison was a bit of a stretch.
As for the posts of Evil Captor that I posted, I have used them as cites in this discussion. The main reason I jumped in here is because people were arguing over his posts without showing any as evidence to back up their claims about his behavior. I would like to repeat that I have never called for restrictions on his posting, and I don’t understand where you got the idea that analyzing something is the same as wanting to pillory someone to force further concessions from them.
I am still waiting for a mod to show up here and answer the question about off-topic sexually themed posts being a report this post offense or not. I will perhaps need to post a topic in ATMB to get their attention on this matter if another day goes by without hearing from them. (I would do that rather than email because I’m sure there are others around who would also like to know.)
Of course there is a line. I can’t pop into a GQ on the subject of transmission repair and announce that I like to jerk off onto the hood of my car. But I will bet you twenty bucks that no matter what the mods say about your general question, they will not think EC’s porn actress comment was a warnable offense.
I might be persuaded to further wager that their response will be not to define “sexually inappropriate”, but rather to say “we know it when we see it, report whatever you want”.
I’m putting terms on this so no one accuses me of “junior modding” again. I’m not modding, I’m trying to make some money. 
How about option C – you people are completely fucked up. The impersonal nature of a message board allows comments which are not appropriate in real life without there being a certain amount of ground having been cleared? You two can’t seem to wrap your heads around that point. Ponder it, why doncha?
MY BOLDING
EC, that they don’t like your post does not = they are “completely fucked up.”
I agree with the sentence I bolded however.
Isn’t it better to keep the high ground in an argument? Quite often it infuriates the other side more.
Jim
OK, I’m kinda bored with this discussion and am ready to wrap up. So I ask if there are any points relevant to the discussion that haven’t been brought forth and there is one that seems to be relevant, so here it is:
I think of myself as a regular guy. I know there may be many who find this amazing, but bear with me. I write my posts in the voice of a regular guy. I mentally assume this board to be populated mainly by regular folk, who like a dirty joke or the occasional bawdy reference. Maybe not as much as I do, but enough to enjoy them when they hear them, even if the topic at hand isn’t necessarily sexual in nature. I think I’m mostly right about that, becuase you know, I’m not the only one who does it. Lotta people on this board enjoy a sexual metaphor, especially if there’s an element of humor involved (which is mostly the way I enjoy my sexual metaphors.)
I think regular guys (and gals) ought to be free to talk as they like on a discussion board aimed mainly at adults, as this one is. Frex, there’s a lot of TMI stuff over in MPSIMS that I wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole. But that’s OK. We’re all regular folks here. Well, almost all of us.
I don’t think lissener and Ave are regular folk. Ave’s a prude and a bluenose, who’d censor this board shitless if he/she had the chance, and lissener’s a tiresome gay SNAG who’d nag the board shitless if people let him. I wouldn’t give two cents for the good opinion of either of them. I’ve tried to be reasonable and patient here, but really, these two take the cake. I kind of agree that the whole point of their posts are to take shots at me. Boh-ring.
Well, at least you didn’t call me a Republican.
Dude, you really confuse me. Half the time I’m reading and it’s like ‘Okay, that’s reasonable’ and then suddenly here’s something that makes me go ‘Wait, now I I think you’re an asshole too.’ Is it possible that lissener and Ave and whoever else is on your case at the moment are also regular guys who just disagree with you?
I wouldn’t use that comment as an example of his threadcrapping since it was a weak example to begin with (as lissener pointed out) and it is obviously debatable as being appropriate or not.
I would instead refer the mods to my original example in post # 154 of the blow job campaign poster fantasy in the middle of a Great Debates thread on politics.
Agree with whom?!? First of all.
Second, I had left this thread as finished, but was thinking about coming in to suggest to Ave that he/she was taking it a bit far, and was approaching prudish censoriousness, which has never been my perspective.
But then I see that EC, being pretty convincingly robbed of his attempt at martyrdom–that he was an innocent victim of the subject matter, and my only conceivable reason for objecting to his behavior was that I was repressed :rolleyes: --he still can’t take responsibility for his behavior, or engage with the actual content of my objections. No; now he switches from martyrdom to ad hominem; he doesn’t have to engage because my issues with him are purely personal. My agenda is nothing beyond poking him with a stick. Well, OK, he retained a little bit of the martyr angle.
He still shows an utter inability to have any respect for anyone else’s perspective, or sexual philosophy. He’s a solipsist who thinks that anyone who has arrived at a different place from him, sexually, is in denial, repressed, or dishonestly sniping at him for the mere fun of it.
And then he tries to suggest that I’m not a “regular guy”; that I don’t like a “a dirty joke or the occasional bawdy reference.” Dude.
Dude.
The bizarro-world self-pitying blindness of your lame attempt to deny reality in order to hold onto your solipsistic--------Dude.
Have you seen Showgirls? I’m a prude who’s too repressed to appreciate “the occasional bawdy reference”?
Dude.
And this, I *loooooooove *this: “Lotta people on this board enjoy a sexual metaphor, especially if there’s an element of humor involved (which is mostly the way I enjoy my sexual metaphors.)” Has anyone, ever–EVER!!!–complained about your “metaphors”? Do you even know what that means?
Hint: THIS. Is not. A metaphor: “Hey, having a lesbian daughter will throw your aim right off. It’s the double dildoes. Your eyes keep trying to resolve them into a single dildo, and pretty soon you’re seeing a third one, and you can’t tell a Whittington from a quail.”
When most people say “sexual metaphor,” they mean a non-sexual image implying a sexual subtext. When you say it, apparently you mean an explicitly sexual image implying a non-sexual subtext. Do you understand the bizarro-world inappropriateness of that? You’d butt into a group of young moms (well, only if they were “smokin’ hot” :rolleyes: ) at a preschool playground who are discussing Barney the Purple Dinosaur and go “Yeah, he always made me think of a giant throbbing purple hardon, ready to squirt jizz in the hair of all those kiddie-porn rejects. Although that one chick’s gonna be hot when she hits puberty, if she gets the proper training.”
This does not make you a “regular guy” who likes “the occasional bawdy joke” and who has a clever way with “sexual metaphor.” You’re not Rabelais, dude, you’re just a sad pervy jerk.
Welll, I read all their posts, and formed and opinion of them, and set it forth. I wouldn’t have been so blunt except that, after so many posts in which they have responded to my posts by smearing my character and so forth, I don’t feel there’s much chance of coming to any kind of rapprochement with either of them.
Now that I"m pretty much through arguing I have no problem with pretty much summarizing the impression I have of lissener and Ave, and the terms I used do accurately convey my opinion of them.
I do however appreciate your opening this thread in my defence, however much you may regret it by now. If you feel there is some line of argument on their part that I have not responded to adequately, please bring it forth and I’ll either respond further or explain why I think I’ve already adequately covered it.
Already covered. I can’t be blamed if there are pornstars running for governor of California. But this does bring up a new point. Lady (the name Ave seems to suggest it) the stuff is out there. There’s all kinds of sexy stuff going on in the real world. Especially in the movies and on TV, which is why most of my posts of an adult or suggestive are in CS. The movies and TV are full of sex and bondage and stuff. If you don’t wanna pay any attention to them, that’s fine. But I don’t see where you get off telling everyone else they can’t.
Oh, yeah, you’re a regular dude alright. :rolleyes:
Just to add that I would also point out Evil Captors post # 174 in which he admitted he gets a kick out the exhibitionism he displays on the boards, after it was pointed out that he aware of the inappropriateness of that behavior.
I’m not going to debate whether that is trolling or not, but I think it is being a jerk.
Ooh! Snayup!
Oh poor widdle Evil Captor! People are annoyed with his inappropriate comments because they’re all a bunch of repressed prudes. Not because his comments, are, you know, inappropriate.
Dude, just shut up. Disagreeing with you != prude!