Sorry, Pirate, D’s real. As real as 1 and 2 and S at least… (3 and Prime didn’t survive Crisis)
An’ as fer Veb addressing ya, I’m sayin that if Manny were around, you’d get it with both barrels. It’s tradition. Now put on that happy mask.
Is there an official date the Right-Wing became a pack of whining pussies?
Is it at the first recorded utterance of “liberal media” or is there another specific milestone I can’t think of?
-Joe
Shodan, if you believe a single word of this, I pity you. Seriously. That you could be so invested in your side winning to see blanket persecution in the (fairly mild) mocking of a single inflammatory idiot makes me sad.
Oooh…did you just call him an ‘inflammatory idiot’ with or without your ‘Mod Hat’ on?
Because, apparently, it makes a difference.
-Joe
Roy Cohn, 1951.
Do you have anything of substance to contribute? Or do you just like making pointless drive-by posts that add nothing to the discussion? Just wondering.
Of course the ‘Mod Hat’ makes a difference. Why else use it? In one aspect, you speak for yourself. Wearing the ‘Mod Hat’, you speak for the board. Are you so thick you don’t understand this? That is the point Psycho Pirate is making (with agreement from me and others). Maybe you are just trying to distract from the issue because you were in favor of what TVeblen did.
I find the absence of TVeblen in this thread telling.
– Twin (anxiously waiting for Merijeek to post another non-sequitur response to this post. Please don’t disappoint!)
He must be, he banned me.
I think he was calling Stephe96 an ‘inflammatory idiot’, not Shodan. A sentiment I agree with.
It tells that I work for a living. You know, like a full-time paying job?
FTR, my comment was not intended as a potshot at anybody though I can see how it could read that way. It’s amazing how often posts–and posters–get reported as ‘trolling’ when the primary problem is disagreement with the viewpoint. We’re getting quite a few reports on Stephe because his/her presence in a thread pretty much guarantees a flame war. That could be deliberate or just a symptom of a very rigid point of view, but it’s incendiary in board terms either way. My point was that you might think people are idiots but that doesn’t make them trolls.
As for a vast conspiracy against conservatives, quit frothing at the mouth and use some common sense. Two days ago I recinded a warning and apologized to Scylla, the notable fava-beans-and Chardonnay quasi-Marxist.
What a flap about nothing. I’ve heard less outraged whining from toddlers.
Veb
FWIW, I am neither a conservative, nor a believer in any conspiracy, nor a fan of Stephe. But IMHO the potshot was kinda inapporopriate.
It’s all an act. When you roll your eyes at disgust after the righties go through their Nth iteration of “woe is us” whining, that’s when they’ll knee you in the nadgers.
Cite (to you and others) for mods needing to appear aloof when closing threads?
Do you see any good reason why they should, or is this just a case of how you would prefer things to be baised soley on preference.
On preview, what rjung said.
It’s merely my preference. My opinion is that official mod statements shouldn’t have potshots in them, or at least be limited to potshots against the person getting the warning/admonishment.
Well, I’m a left-leaning liberal Dubya-basher. (Just thought I’d state my position so everyone will know that my position is probably biased).
I think TVeblen acted appropriately even with the moderator hat on. If I state why, I know l’ll get a warning.
Maybe this thread should just be closed.
Thanks for responding. I see your point, but that isn’t how I read it. I read it as you calling Stephe96 an idiot while acting in an official capacity.
Well, I already retracted my comment about this being a liberal’s club. I made the mistake of posting while angry.
I will repeat the question I just asked Revtim. Even if he was, why would this be a problem?
Psycho Pirate, I’m fairly certain Veb was referring to Shodan’s post, not yours.
Exactly. That’s why Reeder got banned. He was just being too damned obvious. Subtle migration towards Bush-bashing is encouraged. Unsubtle Bush-bashing might give the game away so you get banned for it.
No, it’s been a gradual process, corresponding with the gradual inability for them to support their titular head using facts or logic.
To Psycho Pirate and anyone else who thinks Sudan offered Clinton Osama on a stick:
It was not the president of Sudan who offered to turn over bin Laden to Clinton. It was Mansoor Ijaz, a Pakistani-American who claimed to speak as a middleman between the U.S. and Sudanese governments. Ijaz met with the National Security Advisor at the time, Sandy Berger. Ijaz wanted terrorism sanctions lifted from Sudan and said that Sudan was ready to hand over bin Laden. But the U.S. Government doesn’t do diplomacy through self-appointed spokespeople. When contacted, the Sudanese government didn’t know anything about the offer. And it just so happens that Mansoor Ijaz was an investment banker with a large stake in Sudanese oil.
By the way, Ijaz is into broadcasting now. He’s a foreign affairs and terrorism analyst for the FOX News Channel.
To me, this would be a problem because I feel that a moderator (when acting in their official capacity) should have an air of impartiality about them. I feel this way because moderators have more powers than a typical poster. Much like Revtim, this is a personal preference. It seems tacky to insult a poster while enforcing board rules that another poster has broken. How about waiting until Stephe96 breaks a board rule before he/she is insulted in an official capacity?
To Tentacle Monster, thanks. I didn’t know that about Mansoor Ijaz.
So saying that his actions were due to idiocy is not intended as a potshot?
That is a steaming load of hogshit.
You did notice, did you not, that the first sentence above demonstrates that you are attempting an argument by false dilemma in the next two?
You note, no doubt correctly, that many accusations of trolling are driven entirely by disagreement with a viewpoint. You then immediately go on to accuse Stephe of being incendiary, either deliberately or because he is stupid and has a 'very rigid point of view" (meaning, it seems, flaming any American President other than Bush).
The fallacy being, of course, that disagreement with a view point is also what makes a thread “incendiary”, just as it underlies the accusations of trolling, tu quoques, ad hominems, and flame wars in this thread. I imagine it also underlies the semi-official designation of a moderator that any bashing of Clinton instead of Bush is inadvertently incendiary at best, and idiotic at worst.
Sums up my feelings rather well. Thank you, Twin.
And the most realistic response to complaints about bias has already been posted:
I suppose I should be surprised.
Regards,
Shodan