Someone could have easily opened a pit thread wishing Lib his speedy Banning. This is what I meant. Considering how many people don’t like Lib, it is amazing no one did. I don’t hate Lib but his Drama Queen act deserves the banning he requested.
Jim
was this thread moved from ATMB?
if not, then even a positive ‘please don’t go, lib’ thread opened in the PIT has the natural effect of becoming, well, whatever this thread is.
I don’t think we understand each other. 
Some of us just don’t understand the enormous and sometimes malign force that is the SDMB, and how difficult it is to withdraw from it voluntarily.
It’s reminiscent of that Far Side cartoon where the fat lady is desperately clinging to a parking meter, trying to resist the invisible force pulling her towards a nearby bakery.
Lib must be saved before he fatally stuffs himself with jelly donuts.
Um…that would be…ah…oh, yeah. Lib. Bout a year ago. And before that, Lib. I only know about the two times, I’ve only been here since '03.
Damn, if you’re going to have a regular hiatus, why not just schedule it in advance? That way, the admins can use it as part of the resubscription drive. “Don’t forget! Time’s coming to renew your subscription and annual Liberal self-flagellation thread! Don’t miss it!”
Seems to me that the whole truth is not being told here. For example, I know that at one point the swan song thread was hidden. I assume that the act of un hiding it was a deliberate one. So, if the Administration really wanted to take the high road they could have left it at that and it wouldn’t be such a big deal (my apologies if the software somehow spontaneously hides and un hides threads by controversial posters).
In short, please spare us this “you should take the high road” bullshit.
Pfft.
Drama Queen begs for drama, complains about drama. Story at eleven.
Wooptie shit.
I was actually thinking about making a comment that Liberaltarian’s latest “I’ve been to the mountain and purified myself” schtick actually seemed to be legit. After all, none of his self-aggrandizing/pitying/promoting posts had happened for quite some time. As someone who loudly and frequently predicted that he’d go back to his typical bullshit, I was actually quite surprised.
Then, of course, this comes up. So, looks like the ol’ prostognation organ is still working just fine. The temporal calibration is just a bit off.
-Joe
Well, that’s what I’m ironizing about. If even the fanatical exponents of liberty are yelling, “Help, save me from myself!” what hope is there for the rest of us?
Don’t worry. I would never suggest that you should take the high road.
As long as a decision has not been rendered regarding Lib’s request (and I am unaware that such a decision has been reached), he is a poster in good standing and is subject to a Pitting, just as anyone else. Making his request for recusal publicly and cryptically certainly lends itself to many of the comments that have been posted, here.
It is simply my personal opinion that there is little point–nothing to be gained–by attacking him as he claims a desire to leave. I am not going to invoke Moderator powers to tell anyone to quit; I just expressed my personal view that such actions are not worth much.
Since most such requests have been sought and answered privately, I am not going to discuss them publicly. As to whether any have merit, that is clearly a judgment call. It is hardly a lot of work to simply set a suspension in place for either a fixed or indefinite period, then change the status line one time to avoid the label BANNED. As long as the matter is not one of constant effort, we will probably continue to exercise that option on request. I would agree that avoiding a message board would not be that difficult for me. I do not presume to speak for others who might find the pressure different.
If the issue bothers you, start a thread asking for anyone who has done so in the past to provide their reasons.
I’d imagine not paying the annual dues would be one quick way of “banning” yourself, no?
No because then some asshole would just pay his fee for him.
I’d agree with this, except there’s a limit to how quietly you can keep it. I know vB supports custom user titles, but I’m not sure if one can be placed in the ban list and still have his original user title displayed. I do agree that if Lib had just kept it to email and if the staff felt like going ahead and holding his hand, then fine, whatever. But, making a public scene out of it…well, off with his 'ead, I (figuratively) say.
What would be a nice feature is a “hiatus” button. The user could click it and select whatever length of hiatus he feels appropriate and would be unable to post here until the period has elapsed. It would have the same result, but puts the control squarely in the user’s hands. If he comes to regret the amount of time he chose, tough titty. You sow your oats in the bed you lie in. Or something like that.
I wasn’t expecting you to discuss private matters, nor would I ask that you do so. I was more interested in a general example of the sort of reason you might find appropriate–either you, personally, or the staff in general.
It doesn’t really bother me enough to start a thread about it. If people wish to weigh in here with their thoughts, that’s fine; otherwise, I think I’ll survive. Like you, I would have no trouble walking away for an extended period should I feel the need arise; I have, in fact, done so in the past.
Honestly, I’m guessing that any example would work. Are you in a busy time at school and don’t want the temptation of the board? Is your unrequited crush on Lynn too painful to bear? Are lieu’s posts making you laugh so hard that your colostomy bag keeps shaking loose? Did the transdimensional Kuvlians order you through a series of secret messages on highways signs to stop posting?
I have trouble thinking of a reason that they shouldn’t honor.
Daniel
Mods, to prove my point, would you ban me for exactly twenty-three seconds, after which you should dance like a monkey?
Okay, maybe I can think of a reason they shouldn’t honor. Although the monkeydance would be rad.
I’m dancing like a monkey right now.
Daniel
lol… now that would be funny. 
Well, I’m willing to give John Mace’s effort a 9.5, and it would have been a ten if he could’ve kept the other leg wedged behind his head a second or two longer. Last time I checked*, it was a central tenet of Libertarianism that it is neither necessary nor desirable to impose the constraints of an outside authority on an individual in order to get him to act in society’s best interest, let alone his own. These constraints and coercion are supposedly equally noxious whether they issue from a government, a private group, or another individual. The point being, I guess, that the authority of the self is all that’s necessary to control one’s own behavior. To concede that that control is unreliable even to the extent of acting in one’s own best interest could raise all sorts of problems.
Anyhow, I’ve been thinking about this (the thread, not Lib. apologetics) and I think I’ve come up with a solution that should please everybody.
First, someone needs to ask Liberal which he wants: suspension or banning. These are very different things. One is dramatic and attention-getting and permanent, the other is a short unremarkable hiatus that’s really nothing special. Nobody would drag both into play unless they were hoping for the consequences of one and the theatrical fireworks of the other. Which would be just silly. No reason not to be perfectly clear about this; let the choice be his without interference or input or the opportunity to change his mind later. Then, give it to him. Do it today.
Second, open a betting book on which he’ll pick. Close it, returning all wagers, when one side is running at ten million to one odds or better.
Third, while Liberal is gone, for whatever length of time, get the technicians to work up a function that mines his considerable posting history and randomly inserts his words into threads. This will please his admirers, and shouldn’t much affect the operation of the SDMB. Heck, I couldn’t prove that it hasn’t been happening for several months or years now.
This solves everything. Liberal gets what he wants, his detractors get what they want (at least part of it), his friends get what they want. Win-win-win!
*I know, the definition of Liberalism changed again while I was typing. Happens every time.
Oh, come on. I think one of the major problems in the world today is that people don’t want to take responsibility for their own actions. Look, I’ll say it again: if participating in the boards is getting in the way of your life, then stop posting. If the staff want to honor private requests for voluntary suspension, well, whatever. But in no way, shape or form should they be obligated to do so. Personally, I don’t think they should at all, but it’s not my call to make.
As did the word itself, apparently. Libertarianism, of course.
First, although you might be on a responsibility jag, I couldn’t tell it from your post here: it appears that you want people to take responsibility in a very specific, QED-approved style. If he’s making a request to the mods as a way of helping him avoid temptation, that IS taking responsibility. He’s not said anything in this froufarole that denies responsibility.
Second, neither I nor anyone else appears to be saying that the staff are obligated to honor such requests; I’m just saying it’s silly to chastize them for doing so, or to chastize Lib for asking (although I think his asking publicly was silly).
Daniel