He claimed to be pitting people who get married, not marriage, although that’s not exactly what he did. And 50% of marriages in the US do not end in divorce, nor have they ever. You may find this New York Times article interesting. It includes this statement:
If I may speculatively expand on this, his behaviour in the marriage thread (and in this thread as well, actually) demonstrates that he is not choosing to alter his behaviour from that which got him suspended and Lynn’s patience has worn out.
Perfect!
To keep with the Rush theme of my screen name, I’d have to be DrHentor2112 or maybe DrHentor1001001.
Of course, it’s a norm among psychologists that one not employ the title “Dr.” outside the context of our professional work, leaving that to physicians. drmark2000’s ignoring this norm suggests he is either not aware of it (further casting doubt as to the veracity of his claim) or that he is in need of excessive validation from others, or both.
Heck, I’ll start it myself once I think of a good “hook”, unless someone beats me to it.
Perhaps the best response is to configure drmark’s posting ability so he can only make new threads, but not post in any of them. Seriously, he comes up with some pretty interesting topics, ones I actually tend to agree with a lot of the time (the “having children is the greatest cruelty” one comes to mind); it’s his continued presence in the posts that makes them suck. Especially his condescending “tis the glory of these boards!” type talk. Even when I agree with him, I have the feeling that he’s jerking me around somehow or making fun of me behind my back.
But yeah, I do like a lot of the topics he posts. I just can’t help, though, that we’re all being used for some kind of psychological experiment.
Oops, I realize that sounds ambiguous. By “hook” I mean an interesting opening statement, not “hook” in the sense of trolling.
Actually, I think I should steer clear of fishing metaphors altogether.
Poppycock. Next thing you’ll try to tell me that this pellet that I’m reaching for is rigged to deliver an electric shock.
So, what line do you intend to use?
Quit baiting him, tomndebb.
If only we could. drmark could pay all our memberships for the next decade. 
What part of his OP was trolling?
His statistics where off, but if that is trolling I pity a lot of dopers.
Using information he “heard” is probably idiotic to base an argument on, but it is commonly used on the board. But still not trolling he is stating his belief. Show me somewhere else where he has said he believes in marriage. That’s trolling.
Valid questions. I disagree strongly with his opinions, but I also strongly disagree with other posters opinions, can we work on getting all of them banned?
***** I Just Grabbed The First Pit Thread I Saw*********
Wow comparing the IRS to Nazi’s and storm troopers, that’s fucking inflammatory material. Better lock that thread and talk about his posting priviledges! Sure seems like that is trolling for some responses. If he wasn’t he would have written it like this
You know because if I offend a lot of people I am considered a “troll” so from now on better watch what you say. I may be new, and my opinions may not matter but this mentality displayed by majority rules, other opinions get called “trolling” doesn’t bode well for my 15$ redo. You shouldn’t ban anyone that is expressing there views no matter how badly they are disagreed with. Unless and until you can show (Like with a recent poster) they are LYING to garner attention.
From what I have read, he may be a jerk IMO, his views differ greatly from mine, he is consistent in his dislike for various things others may like. That doesn’t make him a troll. You don’t like him ignore him, don’t open his posts do not reply to his posts, to make it an “official” banning is just utter bullshit.
But tom’s a master!
As others have said, it’s not the OP but rather a pattern of behavior:
That thread was clearly heading in the same direction, one which he has been instructed to avoid.
I don’t think drmark2000 should go. I’ve argued with him, and I think he’s an arrogant man (or woman) hiding behind a shield of even greater arrogance. And he does have a tendency to ignore requests for cites (certainly strange for a clinical psychologist, as referencing other research/articles is pretty much essential when doing any of your own work). But these are just attributes of an idiot, not a troll. Of course, I could be wrong.
AH HA HA HA
I love that joke!
[
](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/rules.php?)
CMC fnord!
Everything you say is basically true but read through his other threads and the one I reference above and tell me there isn’t a consistent pattern in line with what Lynn said.
Besides I don’t think many posters fall into this category. I never seen you get raked by most of the board over a post, but maybe I missed something.
On Preview as Lute said.
Mindfield: I guess that was a Freudian slip on my part. 
Jim
What? A joke? Dang, now Lynn’s going to close this thread!
So, two nuns walk into a bar …
Yeah it’s nice to see that rule, who decides what a jerk is? The majority? Exactly.