Tomndebb is one weaselly mother fucker…

The BBQ Pit
41

[QUOTE=hr_realist]
If Badchad wants to be a literalist and ignore the possibility of a higher power, why not simply ignore him?
[/QUOTE]
Because the mission of this board is the opposite of that. Ignoring what idiots have to say is what led to our indifference as Iraq was invaded and Bush took a second term. We don’t ignore Badchad for the same reason we don’t ignore White Separatists who come here to advocate their bigotry. Ignorance is our enemy.

Badchad is the 800 pound gorilla dancing on the coffee table. He is a believer in God who is also pissed at Him over something or other, and expresses his anger by accumulating lists and pasting them here in the guise of debating. He has one and only one cause: liberal Christianity. He has only one target: Polycarp. Lately, he has been distracted by Tomndebb, but only to the extent that Tom’s enforcement of board rules have interfered with his trolling mission. If Tom were to leave him be to taunt, hijack, and stalk in our debating forum, he would not be complaining about Tom.

Me, he ignores. With one interesting exception. Just this morning, he came out of that years-long policy to post this list. It is a list he has pasted (spelling intentional) many times before. But for the first time ever, he addressed me directly (albeit parenthetically). So I posted this response, addressing every item in his list.

Did he defend his pasted list? No, he called Jesus a misogynistically conceived pejorative, insulted me personally, and declared that he would resume ignoring me. Ignoring the gorilla and all its hissy fits would leave a filthy table for our guests like you. Welcome to the Dope.

42

Well, this thread’s been hijacked away. Mostly it was hijacked by the jerk who started it. Apparenlty because he figured out the thread shows how much of a jerk he is.

On edit: Liberal has it exactly right. The OP of this thread is a troll, pure and simple. Why that troll hasn’t been banned is the actual question.

43

[QUOTE=hr_realist]
That is a fair enough comment, and I won’t ask the question of you again. Although I would like to pick apart your reply a little. You say, that this is a forum for facts, by implication this means (to me) that beliefs, religion included can not be justified or substantiated by facts.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not sure how you draw that conclusion. I discuss the facts underlying beliefs on many occasions: the historical record, the nature and methodology of styles of writing, the evidence for positions held or expressed by various writers, the science that does or does not support various beliefs and the matter of whether a particular expression is a belief or a statement of (perceived) fact. Those facts make up a substantial portion of my postings. I even discuss the factual rendering of beliefs as held and expressed by various groups and individuals. I simply stop short of interjecting my personal beliefs–or seeking the personal beliefs of others–into the conversation.
(For example, it is irrelevant to any discussion whether any poster believes in Transubstantiation, Consubstantiation, some other belief in the Physical Presence, spiritual-only presence, or mere symbolism in Holy Communion. I have participated in many discussions regarding the facts regarding which group holds which belief and explaining their understanding of their professed belief without wandering out and staking a claim for which one–if any one–is “true.”)

44

I’m an atheist, but seeing what Badchad thinks debating is makes me embarrassed. Why do these wallies bother to post?

Carry on Tomndebb!

45

Meh. He’s yet another person who doesn’t realise that his opinion doesn’t equal everyone else’s opinion. “I’ve proved this!” = “People all agree i’ve proved this!” in his head. I really just find the focus impressive - he’s able to look straight past all the arguments why he’s wrong and, with a flip of the hand, ignore them completely to carry on his screed against his target du jour.

Sadly, I don’t think he should be banned, because i’m not so certain he’s done anything worth banning yet (except of course the Jerk rule, but if he hasn’t been banned already for that I assume for some reason it’s a no-go).

46

Or the twenty-ounce monkey dancing in his own feces.

Regards,
Shodan

47

Tomndebb’s posts display intelligence and consideration. No surprise that badchad has a problem with that.

48

[QUOTE=badchad]
Ha ha, Monty calls me stupid and irrational. Aren’t you a Mormon Monty?
[/QUOTE]
Wow. Any shred of credibility you had went POOF!

49

[QUOTE=badchad]
Ha ha, Monty calls me stupid and irrational. Aren’t you a Mormon Monty?
[/QUOTE]

I am non-religious, so can I call you annoying and whiny without being questioned for it?

Your complaint in this case about **Tomndebb ** does appear to be stupid and irrational. Do you want me to defend my non-religiousness?

[QUOTE=Shodan]

[QUOTE=Liberal]
Badchad is the 800 pound gorilla dancing on the coffee table.
[/QUOTE]
Or the twenty-ounce monkey dancing in his own feces.
[/QUOTE]

Very funny Shodan. Heck of an mental image.

Jim

50

[QUOTE=NurseCarmen]
Wow. Any shred of credibility you had went POOF!
[/QUOTE]

I’m sorry - badchad had credibility? Really?

Stalking people whose personal opinion he disagrees with in any and all threads they participate in only to attempt to hijack those threads to continue discussions those people (most notably Polycarp and tom) do not wish to engage in with him is jerk behavior in one of its purer forms.

It doesn’t really matter what the topic is, if a person does not wish to discuss it (or simply doesn’t want to discuss it with you), badgering them (in inappropriate threads, no less!) to discuss it = being an asshole.

51

[QUOTE=Gary Kumquat]

You seem a bit angry about my question
[/QUOTE]

Nah, that’s just our badchad! It’s adorable.

52

[QUOTE=Aangelica]
I’m sorry - badchad had credibility? Really?

Stalking people whose personal opinion he disagrees with in any and all threads they participate in only to attempt to hijack those threads to continue discussions those people (most notably Polycarp and tom) do not wish to engage in with him is jerk behavior in one of its purer forms.

It doesn’t really matter what the topic is, if a person does not wish to discuss it (or simply doesn’t want to discuss it with you), badgering them (in inappropriate threads, no less!) to discuss it = being an asshole.
[/QUOTE]

The thing is, does anyone doubt for a moment that being an asshole isn’t badchad’s one and only purpose here? He’s not even trying to contribute in any other way. No one - at least no one with half a brain cell - could behave in the way he does on this board without fully intending everyone to read “asshole” into every word. Being an asshole is, at least in the context of this message board, just what he is. It’s his role. People argue with him and try to get him to see that he’s being an asshole, but he knows that. That’s quite the point. It’s all he has, here, right?

Look, this can be a very intimidating message board. The people who post here are by in large very intelligent, very articulate, and very short on patience for stupidity. Having a role in this community is, in its own way, sort of an honor; it means you have something to contribute significant enough for this collection of very smart people to notice you. If you have a wide range of knowledge on a lot of subjects, and quite a bit of confidence, you wade in everywhere and make a reputation. If you have a special interest and know a lot about it, you establish yourself in that way. If you have an unusually pleasant personality, if you have a particularly good way with words, if you have a large collection of funny stories to tell, you use those things.

If you have only a pile of poop, you throw it. That’s badchad. He throws the poop because poop is the one thing he can do. He’s not smart, or articulate, or pleasant, and he knows it; he has no point, or at least no ability to present it in a way that will interest people. He has the poop, and the poop will make you notice him where the quality of his thought and expression will not.

It’s really sort of lame, and too bad it gets so much attention, but hell, here I am feeding into it, too. Ah, well.

53

Add me to the chorus. Why hasn’t badchad been banned?

54

Some of the peripheral discussion in this thread has inspired me to start another thread in GD. Why do you believe that Jesus was physically resurrected?

55

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
If you have only a pile of poop, you throw it. That’s badchad. He throws the poop because poop is the one thing he can do. He’s not smart, or articulate, or pleasant, and he knows it; he has no point, or at least no ability to present it in a way that will interest people. He has the poop, and the poop will make you notice him where the quality of his thought and expression will not.
[/QUOTE]
As they say at the Pentagon, “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”

56

Tom, I’ll just say one thing. This “Caesar’s wife” crap is getting old. Just ban badchad already, for crying out loud. Yeah, you’ve gotta go the extra mile to avoid the appearance of impropriety, but that extra mile was reached ages and ages ago.

57

I propose that if badchad’s focus was republicans instead of christians, much fewer people would be calling constantly for him to be banned.

58

[QUOTE=samm]
I propose that if badchad’s focus was republicans instead of christians, much fewer people would be calling constantly for him to be banned.
[/QUOTE]

I propose that if badchad’s focus were black people instead of Christians, he’d be more ancient history than the Pyramids.

59

At the risk of seeming like a sycophant, let me just say that tom I think your moderating is excellent and that your tolerance for trollery in an effort to remain impartial is astounding. I propose that we oppose badchad like Meg Murray opposed the brain IT in A Wrinkle In Time. Let’s use love.

Aw badchad let’s not fight! C’mere, you! Group hug with tom, c’mon!

60

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
I propose that if badchad’s focus were black people instead of Christians, he’d be more ancient history than the Pyramids.
[/QUOTE]

I propose that if badchad’s focus were orangutans instead of the Maginot line, he’d be jetskiing down the Yangtze River as we speak.

Am I doing this right?