That Whack-a-Sock banhammer is getting pretty bloody looking…
You should have seen the one with the spikes. Nobody wanted to clean that thing.
Anybody have a guess as to who’s sock it was?
According to the mod I pm’d, he made up a sock immediately after getting suspended.
That’ll do it.
He’s gone for four years, now he wants to participate – to the point of immediate banning? Sure sign of a troll, despite protestations to the contrary.
I can’t really recall any such case recently. It’s extremely rare for someone to stockpile socks. Usually they just make new ones when the previous one is banned.
In case I wasn’t clear, immediately upon his suspension today he created a sock account.
Yeah, I got that. He wants to participate so much that he created a sock and immediately got banned.
@discobot, with this comment, you have won the Internet along with my heart.
Why won’t you love me back?
Without leaps of imagination, or dreaming, we lose the excitement of possibilities. Dreaming, after all, is a form of planning. — Gloria Steinem
Outlook not so good
A dagger! A dagger through my heart!
An “innocent” question from razordance goes south fast.
Yeah, that guy does a lot of JAQing off. I should probably just avoid his threads going forward.
I have no experience of this particular poster, and RitterSport might be right that he does a lot of JAQing off, but there’s nothing particularly trollish or even unreasonable about the issue that he raised in that thread.
Activists on both sides of the abortion issue, as well as legal scholars and political scientists, have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about how the abortion debate and abortion politics in the United States would change if and when Roe gets overturned by the Supreme Court. And some have made arguments quite similar to those made by razordance: that removing the constitutional protection for abortion would have significant consequences for the debate, and might lead to a rather dramatic reorientation of priorities, as people who had previously taken abortion legality for granted are forced to confront the issue in the political sphere, and as some politicians are forced to take a more explicit stand rather than simply mouth some platitudes about Roe v. Wade being the law of the land. Poll after poll shows that the majority of Americans favors the right to abortion in at least some cases, and if Roe disappears, they will be forced to confront these issues at the ballot box rather than leaving them to the courts.
I truly don’t know how this would actually shake out in practice, and it would doubtless be a political landscape that develops very differently in different states, and that takes some considerable time to become clear. But whether razordance’s question is “innocent” or not, it gets at an important issue, and one that we might have to confront sooner rather than later if the Supreme Court continues in its current direction.
How about, “You rape ‘em, we scrape’ em”?
Does that ping your troll detector any?
Seems to me, he’s more interested in creating his own opportunities to post what he thinks are clever and edgy abortion jokes. How droll!
He’ll burn out of he doesn’t pace himself posting these highly controversial ideas that he just can’t contain inside his ADHD brain.
Fair enough. I didn’t read the whole thread. I read the OP, which is what was quoted for this thread, and which was relatively unobjectionable. If someone wants to give an example of trolling, then quoting the actual trollish posts, or describing the actual trollish behavior, would probably be a good start.
You’ve been around long enough to get a feeling about posters. You know the type. They rush in all abuzz with a dozen hot topics they just can’t wait to dump on a whole new audience just so he can follow up with edgy, juvenile commentary, thinking anybody is going to be impressed or amused because what’s new to him must be new to everybody else.
His ban countdown clock has already started. Only a matter of time before he runs out of material and resorts to full on trollery.