There’s no rule about the quality of anyone’s contributions. He gets warned when he breaks the rules in his interactions with other posters.
But okay, the mods agree that he is dishonest, routinely hijacks threads and should not actually be engaged with, but he’s kept around as our pet troll. Sometimes I wish the mods would clean out the troll gallery from time to time, but as we’ve seen, things need to get really bad for that to happen.
Wasn’t there a practice a few months ago, instituted by tomndebb, that all of lekatt’s hijacks were moved into their own dedicated thread so as not to derail legitimate discussions? What happened to that? Too much administrative overhead?
I don’t think he’s necessarily being dishonest. He’s not capable of honest debate, but that’s because he’s an idiot who fails to understand anything that doesn’t confirm what he believes. So I don’t think I would agree that he is knowingly posting anything inaccurate.
There was one thread where that was done, but I don’t know if that was intended to be a regular thing.
The rule was that if posted non-science as science or that if he posted that NDEs were scientifically supported witrhout providing scientific evidence, his posts and any responses would be moved to an existing thread established to contain them.
In the case of the recent thread that propmpted this one, he demonstrated (again) that he has no clue that he actually understands the issues on which he posts, but his responses were straightforward displays of ignorance and the thread settled down (and then appears to have died) before he actually stepped over the line. I have no intention of corralling every post he makes in GD into a single thread. (I would actually have preferred to simply ignore him and have everyone else ignore his silliness, but since some number of posters cannot see the name “lekatt” without posting furious responses and derailing threads, I set up the rule to keep such threads from self-destructing.)
The really sad thing is, if you do that, you’ll see he has no interest other than NDEs and the like. Nothing else.
OK, first, I don’t see why that’s sad. Lot’s of people might only post on the internet with one specific interest.
Secondly, he’s not dishonest, or at least there’s no evidence of that. he seems to really believe in NDE’s and other woo.
Finally, and most importantly, I can’t believe people seriously believe that by enabling Lekatt’s hijacks you’re striking some mighty blow in the battle against ignorance. I can’t believe people seriously and honestly believe that if they don’t respond to lekatt’s hijacks, massive numbers of people will abandon science and reason and turn to new age mumbo jumbo. That’s stupid. It’s not going to happen, and it’s really not the reason you’re responding to Lekatt’s posts. You’re responding because it’s fun, it’s easy, and it lets you blow off steam. That’s it. That’s fine if it’s in a thread he starts, but again, I beg of you, don’t do it in an otherwise interesting discussion. Science and reason will survive Lekatt.
Also, he shouldn’t be banned, there shouldn’t be a special rule about him, people should just stop enabling him. Damn.
That’s more irritating than sad, in my book.
He means what he says as far as I know. What I said, and I think a few others, is that he is not an honest debater, meaning he misrepresents cites and moves the goalposts and so on.
I don’t agree that he’s honest. He honestly believes his crap, but he’s not honest in debate. For example, if you corner him with a question that he can’t answer without his head asploding, he will not answer but when pestered will (after a few pages have gone by) simply lie and say he’s already answered. If you pester some more he will rinse, lather, repeat. He lies about what is in cites.
Alternatively, he actually believes that he has answered questions to which he has not responded and actually believes there are words appearing in cites that aren’t there. That is, he is insane.
Larry, your desire will never come to pass because there is always someone new here who hasn’t locked horns with **Lekatt ** before. Unless something is said in reply to him that makes his nature known, a newbie will always respond.
But again, notice:
Aldeberan was, finally, banned for much the same offense. So it isn’t like we don’t have a perfectly good precedent set.
And let’s not forget his version of a “cite” is an anonymous anecdote from his website. Probably from someone yanking his chain.
But again, “we’ll understand someday.”
If he’s that interested, I suppose we could arrange that he experiences one firsthand. (just joking)
His “NDE” was just a bad dream anyway, that’s the pathetic part. It wasn’t a near-death experience by any sensibly definition. How are you planning to send him a bad dream? 
There was a spell in D&Dv3 that could do it.
Or maybe we just need to feed him heavily-peppered pizza with anchovies. I hear that works to trigger bad dreams in some people.
I’ll admit to being a hypocrite for responding to something lekatt said in GD just now. It’s an example of one of those dishonest debate tactics I referred to: when questioned on a claim, he said “I will not try to change your mind.” This is passive-aggressive and lazy in addition to being dishonest, since his previous post just contradicted ITR Champions and made the assertions that people don’t need animal products to survive anymore and medical tests on animals are unneccessary.