I think you got Frank’s answer.
The mods didn’t have to come to a consensus of what to label him, they apparently came to a consensus about what to do about him, and that was suspension. How they arrived at that decision evidently varies, and I don’t see why it can’t.
Try again, you begged the question. Your comment predicated my supposed kneejerkness and/or gullibility on whether he is, in fact, a troll.
This last comment was already shown to be either simply wrong or lie. Try again. And I acknowledged—and do again acknowledge—that there is a broad range of opinions on the SDMB. I also have no doubt that there is a range amongst the mods. That does not mean that that range mimics that of the general populace. And I’m pretty sure it doesn’t. Not from what I’ve seen.
You’re kidding, right? So, the only proof of bias and unfairness would be if there was even more bias and unfairness? Uh…okay. And being pitted doesn’t equate to being viewed as being unreasonable AND being too far to the right as a poster. A simple peek into Obama’s ball-lapper that was recently pitted is an obvious indication of that.
Pay attention this time: that it plays a part. I think it plays a part with all of us. And that’s one of the problems when the thinking of a group leans one way.
I didn’t say it couldn’t. Colibri is the one who claimed consensus in order to show “proof” that 2.5 was a troll. When at least one mod and other posters who don’t even like him have already expressed disagreement. another poster pointed that out.
There is a simpler explanation, of course, and that is, in the course of free exchange of ideas and argument, the conservative slant has become so discredited that reasonable minds have abandoned it. It doesn’t require conspiracy or collussion, simply a function of an argumentive dialectic.
Simple. Occam’s Phazer.
I agree that is a possible explanation. As is that a group of like-minded people start agreeing that those who disagree are without reason. Once that happens, the true value of their positions don’t matter much, as they are automatically—by the “reasoned” thinkers—discounted out of both desire and self-preserving necessity.
Not at all. You are well known as a knee-jerk right-winger on the board. Those like you who are extremely biased themselves are apt to expect others to act due to bias themselves.
I’ll allow Frank to clarify his own remarks. But if you insist, I can settle for most of the moderators judging 2.5 to be a troll and a jerk, and one opting for just jerk.
Irrelevant to the question of whether the moderation staff makes judgments on the basis of politics. Basically you are saying that a Republican judge will necessarily find against a Democratic defendant.
Again, irrelevant to the question of whether the moderation staff makes judgments on the basis of politics. The question at hand is not the relative political orientation of the board, but whether we moderate unfairly.
Pay attention yourself. You are accusing the moderation staff of making decisions on the basis of political orientation, without producing any evidence except your own extremely biased opinions. This is bullshit. I personally consider it slander.
Oh, please. 2.5 was invited to explain the true value of his position on legal castration and felony execution repeatedly. He either ignored such requests or found (or claimed to find) hairsplitting semantic justifications for his position. Though some users did label him “troll”, many others (myself included) did not, and made the effort to give his arguments serious analysis, even far more than deserved.
Psst, “libel”. Easy to remember; it’s close to “liberal”.
if however, magellan01 reads aloud as he’s posting, it’s both. 
I repeat, you were begging the question. If you as a mod seriously can’t see how you were, you have more serious problems than simple bias.
Actually, if you wanted to adopt a stance of fairness and logic it would be, *at least *“one”. And that’s twice now you nudge Frank to "clarify’ his own remarks. Tell me, what is it about his statement that you think needs clarifying. It seems rather clearly put to me. Why invite him to be complicit in the mistakes, or lies, you craft.
You know, I haven’t really dealt with you much, and while I often disagree with the mods, I have been of the mind that most, if not all of them, were fairly smart. You’re causing me to rethink that kneejerk position. And, no, “basically” (nice weaselly recasting of my position) I’ve said no such thing. Of course, feel free to show me where I did. And how about we substitute “actually” for “basically”?
Nice try. It’s whether this board tilts left, the moderators with it. And if “fair” can fairly be defined from the consensus of the board members. Especially when it comes to things political.
Bullshit yourself. How can you put a mod cap on over that dunce cap? Being influenced by one’s political bent does NOT equal making decisions on that basis. Sheesh. You may want to ask a fellow mod to help you with the logic of this off line. And if your notion of being guided by pure reason and fairness is being shattered, you should consider it a good thing. Ignorance being fought and all that.
and if you think it’s libel, or slander, or “ohh, he’s being mean to me”, sue me. I’d buy ticket to see you explain to the judge why you filed suit. So get off your high fucking horse. You’re one of the guys who moderates a discussion board on the internet. You want to do a good job? Great. You want to try to leave your biases at the door, Terrific. To insist that you do is idiocy.
I’m waiting attentively for some actual evidence that the Mods suspended 2.5 for his politics, other than “because magellan01 says so”. Otherwise, that particular argument is somewhat less than convincing.
(bolding mine)
It appears that you, too, should reread what I wrote. Show me where I said what you conclude here.
Apparently, some think that if you call him a troll and I call him a jerk, it is a sign of dissension in the mod ranks, and therefore his suspension must be unfair. This is, of course, nonsense.
Tomato; tomahto; who fucking cares? He needed suspending, and he got it.
I can’t be bothered reading the whole thread to see if anyone has done this.
I am only doing it because I paid for Two and a Half Inches of Fun to become a member because I thought he was a strange guy who was going to end up being hounded to the point we are at now and I wanted him to feel welcome.
Listed below are the first page of the search of threads he has started with the number of views and the odd editorial comment for context. I love the way people can choose to characterize him as a remorseless troll supposedly playing some fiendish mind game with us, his intellectual betters. Yet most threads he starts receive polite interest.
So which ones are trolling?
Louisiana passes law to castrate rapists 2,175
Some questions about scotch and water 998
Your 5 favorite short stories 1,079
Death for any felony: Let’s bring it back 2,435
Why do athletes smack each other on the ass? 643
Dead Poet’s Society: Wasn’t the stuffy headmaster right? 3,048
The last nine minutes of The Apartment―Unboxed spoilers 422
Does the Roman Catholic Church have a trademark on its name? 311
Can an Army officer shoot a soldier for refusing to follow orders? 1,610
Help me increase my carbon footprint 1,415 (presumably a joke. At least the respondents think so)
I would like to have this explained 947 (simply asking why next thread was closed. Others queried the same thing in another thread)
Set your dance card for T. Kennedy’s Grave―Here’s to his rape in Hell by his brothers 1,562
Can you get a Caesar salad in a restaurant? 1,297
It will be hilarious when Obama loses 1,120
Do human rights exist beyond the law? 716
You know what would be fun? If we all got pregnant after midterms. 5,205 (references a recent news story)
Do scooters get stolen a lot? 639
Cindy McCain is truly an awful human being 6,400
Advice on a cheap finding a CD drive/Would this CD drive work for my needs 221
Can oil companies cut consumers a break? 303
Will White Sox ever go back to wearing shorts? 209
Miller High Life―Why is it cheaper than Miller Genuine Draft? 1,358
Did Vincent Gallo ejaculate in Chloë Sevigny’s mouth 4,200 (I didn’t even know what the thread referred to but plenty of others did)
Are apes our evolutionary comrades? 273
I appreciate the tendency to circle the wagons, but question had to do, specifically, with his being a troll or not. You clearly stated you though he wasn’t. Colibri recast reality by saying the mods were unanimous in that position.
Let him take the hit he deserves without sacrificing yourself to no end. Maybe next time he’ll be more careful with the truth.
Y’know, there were a lot of mods involved in that. It’s hardly surprising that Colibri would assume we all had the same reasons; I think I might be the only mod that holds my opinion.
But, again, what’s the big fucking deal? What does your stalwart investigation hope to prove? What effect do you expect it to have? In other words, so what?
Same for VCO3/randomletters, and look what happened to him.
I don’t think this list, on it’s own, is conclusive to a verdict of sub-bridge-denizen, but once you start posting his OPs . . . One of the reasons he’s such a successful troll is because he’s obviously very careful about toeing the line. It’s easy to see through, when you break it down into patterns, but a single observation of him in his natural habitat can appear relatively harmless.
It’s not just the threads he starts-or at least, not the names of said threads. It’s HOW he posts them, how he posts to any thread, and how he acts.
Basically, the way he presents himself.
I guess you would know, the original pre-internet trolls being Norse and all. 