The worst of the worst (SDMB version)

The BBQ Pit
1

I may receive some flak for posting this but I’ve wanted to do it for some time now. There are a handful (maybe more) of regular posters here who consistently demonstrate profound idiocy. Many post in ways difficult to parse, but all are hard to read, for one reason or another. I want to start a list of the posters, well, just because they annoy me and I want to vent. Feel free to add your own entries to this list. And I’d have no hurt feelings if any of those entries are for me.

  1. JohnClay. No explanation is really needed. Whether or not he’s a troll is irrelevant to his inclusion in this list.

  2. Aceplace57. Again, not much need for explanation. And again, trolling is irrelevant to inclusion. He sucks either way.

  3. Shagnasty. Yea. Just a Class-A blowhard. And liar.

  4. Urbanredneck. He’s gotta be related to ole acey. Just ignorant as possible, with essences of racism and misogyny.

  5. Charlie Wayne. I throw up in my mouth just a little bit every time he posts. Troll or not, he’s like nails on a chalkboard. In the special-ed classroom.

  6. CCitizen. The board isn’t a good place for cyborgs.

  7. DrDeth. WTF??

  8. Guinistasia. Seriously, does she ever contribute to anything? Anything, that is, other than as a late-comer (when it’s safe) to a group pile-on?

  9. lance armstrong. I just don’t like him/her.

  10. SlackerInc. I’m not sure what it is about this dude but even when he says something I agree with, I want to punch him in his mouth. Every single thread he’s started has at least the undercurrent of “I’m so much smarter than you”, if not the outright theme.

So ok, there’s my Top 10 worst dopers. Feel free to add your own. Feel free to tell me what an asshole I am. Feel free to say whatever you’d like. But, imo, the absence of these 10 posters would make my time here better.

2

Take this FLAK you asshole!
Actually, I don’t have a problem with you or your list. I just felt free to say it.

3

adaher deserves some kind of honorable mention, for being wrong so often. There have been entire threads where you could safely bet the farm against whatever it was that he was claiming to be factually true.

Bricker is the single most dishonest person in the entire SDMB. No one even comes close. He knows what he’s saying isn’t true, but he says it anyway.

And, in the spirit of Walt Kelly’s Pogo and the Jack Acid Black Book, I’ll mention…

Trinopus, who’s callow, weak-willed, petulant, wrong an awful lot, a regular poster boy for whatever it is the name of that syndrome where you think you know more than you really do, and he has execrable tastes in cuisine.

4

Meh. Adaher at least jokes about it. He doesn’t bother me.

And Bricker in my experience is not dishonest, and I think this is a major misunderstanding of where he’s coming from. I disagree with him vehemently and often; there are aspects of his posting style that get under my skin; I occasionally have to rewrite posts in GD in order to make the GD-appropriate, after he does something that irks me. But dishonest? No.

Edit: as for the original list, strike Guin (who also doesn’t bother me), and I agree. There’s a pretty big cluster there of people who loudly and repeatedly overestimate their own brilliance. I could do with fewer of them.

5

Sorry Trin -

adaher is still wrong a lot, but is capable of laughing at himself which counts for something in my book. He’s also wrong less often than he was 4 years ago. There still remains too much dross in the ore, but occasionally there are traces of actual content.

Bricker is under-rated. He brings knowledge of the law to this message board as well as conservative positioning. Many of the accusations of dishonesty sound like sour grapes to me. Or maybe petulance. Most don’t have the legal background that he does and IMHO feel frustrated and outgunned. In recent years Bricker has usually taken care to draw a careful line between legal and non-legal issues. Given that, I think too many of his critics are butthurt.

Bricker does, however, deserve all the jokes directed at him. That’s what you get for being the straight man. Liberals do it too! :smiley:

ETA, reviewing LHoD: Yeah, strike Guin off the list. ETA2: As for those who have a problem with the others, the scroll wheel is your friend. The inventor deserves a medal.

6

Agreed on both points. He isn’t just a right-wing talking-points echo-machine (although now and then he falls into that trap.) There’s really a person there, and that person has some good aspects.

He has a very consistent habit of substitution definitions of words adroitly. He’ll suddenly jump from colloquial usage to strict formal legal usage…and back again. He’ll alter phrases slightly. (e.g., I said, “That’s all I’ve got,” and he taunted, “So if that’s the best you can do…” Not quite the same thing. That’s dishonesty.)

I do agree there’s some petulance involved, but if someone deliberately misquoted you some ten or twenty times, wouldn’t you feel a little bitterness?

Agreed. Should not have been nominated.

And we can take some comfort in a number of names that could have gone here, but who have been banned. It would be poor etiquette to name any names, so I’ll just say, “Good riddance to bad rubbish.”

7

Haven’t seen him around much lately, but that a-hole jamiemcgarry was a blight upon this board with his aggressive attitude of entitlement. So, GOOD RIDDANCE. :stuck_out_tongue:

8

What, no hate here for Smapti?

He’s a fine, generally liberal-minded poster except . . .
when he gets on the subject of police misbehavior, or any governmental authority behavior in general.

And doctor-assisted suicide.

9

Like the Ringwraiths, neither dead nor alive, he just keeps coming back in different guise.

10

And here I sit, relieved that my name isn’t on the list.

11

raventhief, for so blatantly trying to make this thread all about him.

El_Kabong, for being an embarrassment to cartoon horses everywhere, and for crappy poofreading.
Names I would have thought might turn up in a thread like this (not that I’m suggesting anything, you understand; hell, they’re the salt of the bloody earth as far as I’m concerned):

doorhinge

Clothahump

Starving Artist

D’Anconia

12

Regarding Bricker:

Well with Bricker you have to bring your A game. My problem is that I tend to quickly get jokey when having a discussion with him. So if he said “That’s all I’ve got,” I’d say, “We are both in full agreement that that is the very best you can do…” Because if you’re going to engage with a sophist, why not turn it up to 11? In my defense, it’s generally my intention that Bricker stays in on the joke.
Hovering in the background is the fact that the law isn’t as yet properly understood in the broadest sense. There is no General Theory of Legal Interpretation. I suppose that what we’re left with is expert opinion. Which isn’t bad, but isn’t exactly science.

13

Yet.

14

Not really. I’m starting to feel like I’m beating up a child in the voter ID thread.

It might be worth doing, but I don’t feel as good about it as I used to. :smiley:

15

[Checks list]
[Backs out of thread.]

16

Fucker probably pissed off the wrong guy.

17

Too bad it’s my list. :frowning: She’s not actively offensive or a jerk, she’s just annoying. To me. Her posting history consists of "Me too!"s and, once she’s checked which way the SDMB wind is blowing, attacking a minority viewpoint.

18

You forgot self-centered.

19

But I’ve got big hands. Really big hands.

20

Nice list, and I agree, though one or two of them I haven’t dealt with all that much.

But I would like, if I may, to take a slightly more political tone, mainly because I’ve been reading the GOP vote-suppression thread, and also because I just read a missive from your illustrious #9, lance strongarm, on his perennial hobby horse of what he thinks is “free speech”.

So I’m motivated to either vent in the GOP vote-suppression thread, start a new thread, or make a few comments in this one. This one seems to have arrived at just the opportune moment.

To start, let’s face it, Bricker is an impassioned advocate of vote suppression for the understandable reason that blacks and poor people are at high risk of having liberal ideas and therefore voting for the wrong party. Simple. Why not just come out with it and be honest?

And it occurs to me that the vote suppression argument follows the same pattern of illogical claptrap that we see in other subjects from this same crowd. Consider these star players and some of their favored arguments:

Bone is a fine poster as far as the veneer of civility goes, no problems there. Bone also seems to have a gun fetish and seems strongly aligned with those who are quite concerned about the gun problem in America, the problem in his opinion being that there are still some Americans without guns. School shootings, workplace shootings, and general gun carnage is clearly related to the lack of sufficient guns, and the clear solution to a peaceful society is for everyone from adults to school children and infants to be armed to the teeth like Israeli commandos. As the NRA has so well established, when you shoot at school children the whole affair comes of a lot better if the children shoot back, and the same goes for everyone else.

lance strongarm and ITR champion recognize that the key to a strong functional democracy is for the super-rich like the Koch brothers to spend all possible money to tell everyone else what to think, so that eventually everyone thinks just like Bricker and Bone. Mr. Strongarm further informed me just now in the Elections forum that my advocacy of campaign finance violates the First Amendment, so one presumes he is asserting that all the campaign finance laws that the US has had for more than 100 years and most of which are still on the books are all unconstitutional, an asinine position with which even the present wingnut Supreme Court disagrees. Also, one must presume that all the constitutional scholars who strongly objected to decisions like Citizens United are idiots. The alternative to these bizarre conclusions is to assume that perhaps it’s Mr. Strongarm himself who is the idiot here. I leave the final resolution as an exercise for the reader.

D’Anconia and Doorhinge are priceless, and are more in the line of generalists, and their role is to be completely wrong about absolutely everything, always, which is actually quite an achievement and makes them useful idiot savants if you merely invert everything they say to its logical opposite.

But there is good news for the nation because I firmly believe that the problem is self-correcting over the long term, in the classic Darwinian sense. Bricker’s vote suppression will ultimately assure the equivalent of a President Trump or President Cruz actually being elected to the presidency, with consequences that will span the gamut between high comedy and deep tragedy; Bone’s gun policy will result in a rapid Darwinian population reduction, and the “money is speech” crowd will produce a wonderfully dysfunctional anarcho-totalitarian plutocracy in which government eventually ceases to exist. Really, the problem will take care of itself.