I, for one, can definitely understand how someone posting unpopular opinions could get under Guinastasia’s skin.
I say we adopt a policy of watchful waiting.
Any time it starts looking like people get banned here for simply having unpopular opinions, just think to yourself, “Is lekatt banned? Der Trihs? brazil84?” As long as the answer to any of those is no (although brazil84 did say he was going to leave), then it’s a faulty premise.
Further, some posters mature over time. I have committed enough gaffes here that I try to be indulgent with others.
Yesterday I looked through a list of threads 2½" has started. Some titles are obviously provocative, but others are not (tho’ I must admit I didn’t examine the contents). I note that a number of threads are on sexual topics. Looks to me like he’s a young pup with far more testosterone than common sense. So he could grow out of it. But I doubt we’ll ever see it. I can’t imagine him twiddling his pe–, er, thumbs for four weeks. He’ll find some other place for his effluvium.
The greatest troll the Devil pulled was convincing the world he wasn’t a troll…
This does not bode well for this board. The castration thread was discussing a law that was just passed. The death penalty thread, as I took it, was to argue an extreme position in order to shift when is considered the middle. Yeah, I thought that some of his OPS and posts were strange, but no stranger to me than those of Der Trihs. I think he was banned not so much for his strange and extreme positions, but because they were strange and extreme that was too far to the right. I think calling him a troll is wishful thinking. There are those who cannot fathom that someone would have a position so far from their own. If they do, especially if it deviates wildly from the groupthink that can occur here, that person MUST be posting to just cause others angst, not because they have a position they sincerely want to explore.
This reflects as poorly on the SMDB as some think 2.5 does.
I wonder if it would be cool to be one of those people who can’t see a troll when it’s posting right in front of him for months. On the one hand, you probably wouldn’t get annoyed like a normal person would by a troll. On the other, it could drive you to use words like “groupthink” and “hivemind” and make ridiculous posts like the one above mine.
Hey, genius, it is not even a point of agreement that he is a troll. So, let’s see…yeah, you got nothing. Other than a little attitude. I’m shocked.
That was kinda my point - that you can’t tell that he’s a troll.
And you’re wrong - he was cheering for a law that just passed and was not interested in the least in debating the implications or the application of such a law, nor that it would inevitably face constitutional challenge. In fact, such a challenge would merely be another opportunity for “activist judges” to “pervert” the system.
If we’re going to use 1984-inspired language, I’d describe his actions as stopthink. The law had been passed, therefore it was a moral decision. Challenges were therefore immoral, stop.
Sorry, this is just a load of absolute bullshit. It is more a reflection of your own typically knee-jerk approach to politics than the actual situation with 2.5. (Not to mention extreme gullibility with regard to 2.5’s sincerity. ) You can’t seem to imagine that others might make a decision on the basis of anything but politics. This is due to your own mindset, not that of the administration. I assure you that the specific political orientation of the threads were not a significant part of our discussions about whether **2.5 ** was trolling or not. (In any case, since when are questions about vaginal lubrication in prepubescent girls and whether Vincent Gallo ejaculated in Chloe Sevigny’s mouth conservative issues?)
I also have to question the objectivity and simple observational capabilities of anyone who refers to “groupthink” on this board. You can find posters who will dispute virtually any proposition, including whether or not the sky is blue.
Also with regard to your observational capability, it should be noted that 2.5 has been suspended, not banned.
There is, however, a nearly unanimous consensus.
That doesn’t make someone a troll. Nor is it a reason to ban someone. If someone brings a strong opinion wrapped in faulty logic, that’s kind of what this board is good at fixing, isn’t it? And what is wrong with “cheering”. That’s done all the time. There was even a recent OP where someone was “cheering” the death of a U.S. Senator.
Not as far as I can tell. And that’s from a pool of posters who don’t like him and are not wont to give him the benefit of any doubt.
I’m not accusing him of being a troll. I will gladly accuse him of being a jerk, though. The board made several good attempts at “fixing”, to no avail. It seemed to me that he enjoyed resisting the attempts solely because it proved he had the will of a warrior, or some such thing.
As for dancing on Helms’ grave, that thread was in the Pit, not Great Debates. In fact, had 2.5 started his castration-law thread in the Pit, I doubt this would be an issue. It’s the disingenuous claim of inviting debate while in practice steadfastly ignoring it that earns him disrespect.
In my opinion, of course.
“If one could be banned simply for being unlikeable, you and I wouldn’t be having this discussion,” said Vinyl Turnip to magellan01, ambiguously.
Kind of begs the question, don’t ya think?
Speaking of bullshit, there it is. I can imagine that very well. And it even happens on this board. That does not mean that political persuasion does not play a role in someone’s acceptance here or the board’s moderation.
I’m sure they weren’t. I’m also sure it needn’t have been said. I’m also sure the clamor raised by the populace played a role on how he is viewed.
While the pre-pubescent girls thread registered a WTF from me, others seem to participate. I didn’t see the other one and have no desire to. But it did strike me as odd the a somewhat mainstream actress would do a scene like that. If that was the point of the discussion, I could see it.
I agree that there are posters to reflect a wide array of views. That does NOT mean that there isn’t a majority who tend to agree about most things. Whenever that happens, people can get too comfortable with their positions, mistaking popular agreement with strength of position. If you don’t think that happens on this board, or any board with a strong leaning in any direction, it’s time to question your own objectivity and simple observational capabilities.
Which just shows that there would be considerable upside to being banned.
Nope. Believe it or not, we’re able to come to conclusions on our own.
Unfortunately you’re making this about the guy’s politics when it’s about his posting style and jerkishness, which was consistent whether he was talking about politics or anything else.