Look at me! I’m Handy! I’m padding my post count!
I don’t hate handy, even though I pitted him not too long ago. I just wish that he had it in him to understand that his knowledge base is extremely limited. So is mine for that matter; I know a lot about a few things, a little about many things and bugger-all about most things. The differences between handy and me are that I don’t post to threads where I have absolutely no idea of what the correct answer is and, should I post incorrect information and get called on it, I will either acknowledge the error or at the very least not try to defend my error, thus compounding it. What has particularly irked me in the past is his continued posting to legal threads when he hasn’t the foggiest notion of legal issues, legal concepts or how to do basic legal research. Posting wrong legal information isn’t necessarily as immediately hazardous as posting wrong medical information, but both can have severe and long-lasting consequences. I wouldn’t mind a bit were handy to be banned from GQ but at the very least he ought to be banned from posting to legal threads (in any forum since he does it in IMHO too). I keep hoping that the resident lawyer Dopers will gang up on him and the mods will take note…
I’m willing to sign on to the disclaimer thread, but with that being banning-neutral and my being in favor of limited banning, I leave it to y’all to decide whether I should or not.
You folks are so sure he posts a lot because he like to see that big number under his name. Surely it’s at least possible he simply likes to post?
It’s also possible that because he is hearing-impaired, this type of communication is easier for him than a lot of other types, so he tends to use this medium more than others.
People have met Handy in real life at one of the dopefests a few years ago, and from all accounts he’s a nice bloke.
that said, I’d still think he could do with pausing before hitting submit sometimes.
You are a fucking moron, you know that?
It amazes me how rarely people are willing to admit their mistakes and apologize. Going back to the December debacle I remember hoping he would get it through his head that all he had to do was give an uncoditional apology and it would blow over. Same thing with handy, if he was willing to give a brief admission that he was wrong this stuff would be much easier to stomach.
For whatever reason there are many people who would rather go down in flames than retract some of their most outrageous errors or statements. I have always found that puzzling.
Computer peripherals and gnats are one thing, but handy posted unsound medical advice in a thread one week ago.
I admit it is a stretch, probably not actionable, but I want to point out to everyone defending him, handy is dangeorus.
If one wants to ban people because of poor advice or continually incorrect answers in GQ, there would be a lot more to go besides handy.
You have to look at a couple things - motive, intent, and effect.
Motive: is his motive to simply post for the sake of posting? He rarely references his own post count, although he did reflect on it quite a bit when he stayed stuck at “9999” for some time. Does he go out of his way to make mindless “me too” or “Hi there” or “bump” posts, like people do every single hour in MPSIMS and IMHO? The finger of guilt on that point can be directed at many, many people here.
Intent: is his intent to mislead purposefully? I’ve not ever seen any evidence of that, and I’ve been reading or in GQ since almost 1999. I’ve seen mistakes - repeated mistakes, true - but nothing with a deliberate attempt to mislead. In contrast, there are many popular posters on this Board who do intentionally make posts meant to mislead and obfuscate the truth, especially in GD and the Pit. So the finger of guilt can point to them as well.
Effect: What is the actual negative effect of his postings, when incorrect? Does it create liability for the Reader? Does it “harm” the community and the Board? I think these are very arguable - I can think of a multitude of people and topics and threads that caused more “damage” to the Board than handy ever did. Is his negative effect then just to irritate?
Well, that’s a problem. The SDMB Staff have not really that I’ve seen gone after someone for just being irritating without the intent to be irritating , where they have not really broken the Rules. They have stepped in when the advice he posted did lead to a situation where there could have been some potential liability and/or harm.
IMO only, I don’t think the SDMB Staff need get involved at this point. There are plenty of other people on here who are more deserving of their negative attention, and who should be thrown out the door.
And ahem. The link.
How about a gold star beside his name for each correct answer?
He’s been warned against it, though, and told to absolutely NOT do it. So he’s gone.
Lynn