I think you can make comments in a thread and assume they will be interpreted in the context of that thread. In addition, I was following up (and referenced) my earlier post in the ATMB thread (post #9) which quoted from the OP of the ATMB thread and addressed these quotes, which makes the context even clearer.
I am under no such misapprehension, and I apologize for giving the indication that I was. I don’t see any evidence that SlackerInc got a rise out of the ATMB topic, as I wrote in the original post. You do, and it’s your judgement that counts.
I also don’t agree with your giving him the benefit of the doubt on content-based viewpoints rather than good faith as a poster. Here on the internet, and especially on a message board, nothing is more sacrosanct than your word. I would much rather be written off as a horrible bigot than a troll. I can counter arguments against me being a bigot, but once the presumption of good faith is gone, there is no hope.
Trolling is potentially an instaban offense, and doesn’t require further documentation. However, SlackerInc had eight previous warnings, including for trolling, being a jerk, insults, and failure to follow a moderator’s instructions. He actually should have been suspended last year, when he had four warnings within only a few months.
Some months ago I did have an extended exchange with him by PM, discussing some of his behavioral problems. He was completely unrepentant and gave no indication he would change his behavior.
Very well. I’ll drop my objections to SlackerInc’s banning.
For whatever my opinion is worth, I stand by the second paragraph of my post #22 in the more general case.
I have no objections to his banning- he was a jerk, had always been a jerk, and would continue to be a jerk.
However, I do object to attaching the label “anti-Semitic” to his criticisms of Ultra-Orthodox Jews. I would feel the same labeling my views anti-Semitic, or anti-Christian in the case of any fundamentalist Christian group, or anti-Islamic in the case of any fundamentalist Muslim group.
Bigoted? Sure, I’ll accept that, by definition, I tend to be “bigoted” toward what I feel to be anachronistic cults, because I feel their views are antithetical to human progress. There is plenty of room to blend religious faith with modern life, and I have no problem with those that do so.
Oh I’m 100% sold on trolling. I’m even more sold on Slack being a troll than I am on sold on him being an authentic racist, antisemite, or whatever. I do suspect he has prejudices of some sort, but I am not going to get into the weeds in that sort of debate/discussion here and now.
He’s definitely a troll, though. Always the same predictable schtick: "Hey Dopers, I watched this 3-hour long YouTube video documentary series or Podcast. I agree w/ YouTuber or Podcaster that blacks have lower IQs but I can’t really articulate why - you just need to take 10 hours out of your week to see what I saw. Then you might see what I saw or hear what I heard."
Then comes the ensuing shit storm, which then typically led to self-congratulatory horse shit and making it clear that we all took his bait, which is what he wanted. Slacker strikes me as just really bored and lonely and in need of attention.
A troll’s troll, that guy.
Never mind. I had totally forgotten about that scientific racism thread.
See the scientific racism is bad enough, but if someone were actually bringing it, I’d accuse that guy of having his facts fucked and being a racist prick, but I would not accuse said racist of being a troll.
There’s nothing that precludes someone starting a scientific racism thread on its own, but more realistically, if someone wanted to sell me on the authenticity of the thread ‘thesis’ (if I can use that term), I’d probably expect a scientific racism thread to grow organically from an existing thread of discussion. IIRC (and maybe I’m not), however, Slack just threw a pile of loose, wet, runny dogshit into the fan just to see if it would fly all over the place - and to give him “credit,” it did.
I think @asahi has a good read on him, and on why the trolling accusation is fundamentally justified. I’m not convinced that he was a nasty person who sincerely held some of the distasteful views he espoused, the content or offensiveness of his claims was almost incidental to projecting an image of who he was. I think his schtick was always to put himself out there as someone with insightful views, the open minded and perceptive challenger of orthodoxy, the guy with the ruthless intellect to cut through platitudes and bullshit and speak the truth, even when the truth is unpleasant. I think he saw himself as fundamentally a decent person and enlightened liberal, but - unlike the feeble-minded lesser mortals - brave enough not to ignore the truth when it contradicted liberal platitudes. Projecting this image was really what was important to him. If some people thought he was a bigot, that was something he could live with provided the fuss drew attention to how smart and insightful he was.
Actually, we didn’t use “anti-Semitic” in the reason for his banning.
My complaints in the pit thread was a “broad brush”, but others did use the label.
So do not think he was banned for being “anti-Semitic”, he was banned for being a jerk and a troll over a long time with a history of warnings for being a jerk.
I disagree here, since he didnt show his worse side until fairly recently.
And what’s the #1 rule here? “Don’t be a jerk.”
Correct, we have plenty of other rules but it is the most important one. It works pretty well too.
I feel this is a pattern we’ve seen several times. We have posters who are always “difficult” but they seem to be making an effort to stay within the limits of what’s acceptable. But at some point they get triggered and decide “Screw this. I’m going to let loose with all the stuff I’ve been holding inside.” The result will be them getting kicked off the board but they get to go out in a blaze of glory.
As for the specific charges, I think it’s fair to call it trolling. These guys know they’re going to get a harsh reaction when they start out on this death ride.
I think this is generally right (including the praise for asahi’s take), though I’m more inclined to believe that S genuinely held the bigoted beliefs he posted about than Riemann is.
My read on SlackerInc’s repeated introduction of bigotry-laden topics is not that he was getting off on angering or upsetting readers, but that he thought he might genuinely convince others that his views were correct.
Maybe the recent ATMB posts strayed into trolling; I won’t argue about that. But on the whole he wasn’t a classic troll, who posts in order to rile people up. For the most part he posted with sincerity (so in this I agree with Max S.).
But Colibri’s list of attempted interventions convinces me that the moderation staff did try to save SlackerInc from himself. So I agree that their ultimate decision was reasonable:
It’s a shame that it went down this way; I always hoped that SlackerInc was rational enough to take in the counter-arguments people would post in response to his deplorably-bigoted stuff, and possibly change his views. (Over-optimistic of me, no doubt.) Also, he’s one of those who miss the massively-comprehensive-on-movies-and-television IMDb boards; we have that in common.
I do commend the mods for letting this thread exist. This banning wasn’t the garden-variety type; discussion of it can be useful.
Maybe he just pleaded down to a lesser offense?
Not charged- convicted and executed.
As I said, I’m a man of process. You charge someone before convicting them, and you convict before execution.
I took issue with the conviction, which means I imagined being presented with the charges.
We really are not in court here.
“The mods” are of the opinion that he’s a troll. That is all the evidence needed. I already think they are overthinking the process: We are talking about an account on a message board. If the person in question is not an obnoxious troll by nature (a.k.a. “innocent”) they can create a new account after clearing their cookies and nobody will ever care. Invariably in these cases their obnoxious personality/bigotry will get them found out in short order-- They just can’t help themselves.
I have no idea why you would imagine this. Mod discussions are private, and we may take a lot of factors into consideration when deciding on a banning. We don’t make all details of our discussion public.
In this case since trolling is a one-strike capital offense, we had no need to go into detail on other factors. If you’ve convicted of murder, there’s no need to document assault and battery as well. But yes, if a poster persistently behaves in a jerkish fashion that will be taken into account. That was the case here.
Very true. In fact, a lot of socks are identified by their behavior. I’ve said before, “You can change your name, but you can’t change who you are.”