He’s trying to make himself feel morally superior to those who were doubtful of umkay’s legitimacy. It’s the same tactic as the evangelicals’ “liberals are tolerant of everything but my intolerance; they’re so hypocritical!” whine.
I’m sorry but it doesn’t mean that someone is an asshole or a mean person to have that kind of hunch. It doesn’t mean you are an asshole if you mention that hunch without absolute proof when the bullshit starts getting piled up. Look here is reality, there are places on the Internet that people gather to make fun of us. There are people who were kicked off of here that may not be 100% stable and want to come back here to stir things up. And there are people who just crave attention. You don’t have to be around here long to figure out what topics will agitate a large number of people. It does not take much to figure out what kind of persona it would take to get people raining puppies and rainbows on their posts. When someone joins just to push the Dopes well known buttons it’s pretty obvious to me and to others. It’s not about being an asshole. It just means we are paying attention.
fifty-six, thanks for the post explaining the gift subscription. Although receiving a free subscription anonymously probably added to the troll’s enjoyment of the game, I am glad that there are people like you here who will act on generous impulses.
Personally, I think fifty-six should start putting his charity towards, you know, real charities. fifty-six, I understand you are flush with success and gratitude about it, but there are real charities that help the downtrodden; you shouldn’t be randomly handing it out over the internet if you really want to “pay it forward”.
He already said he had kind of an ulterior motive. IMHO, one doesn’t get to question other’s contribution to charity, whatever it may be. There is always something more “worthwile” to donate to. You’re giving money to cancer research? What about AIDS? What about all those starving kids in Africa? What about the flood victims in Bangladesh or the earthquake victims in Haiti?
But he started with “This is exactly what I mentioned in the Pit thread.” Which was in response to my post and mine was quoted. And it was nothing like what I posted or meant. And no, I don’t agree. Its the opposite of scepticism. Kind of like saying that its OK to not believe in evolutionary theory because its just a theory. Thats not scepticism. Its blind faith (and not the good kind with Clapton).
Good on you man.
Not exactly. Evolution is backed up by hard, scientific facts (and besides, the word theory is misleading in this context anyway), the accusations against umkay were not, up to a point.
I cannot believe, even after all of this, people are STILL bitching about this chick’s banning.
The thread is barely 24 hours old.
How do we know she was really a chick?
Me too! 
Seriously, Dopers demand cites for stating generally known and accepted facts, but claim to be a quadriplegic object of sexual desire from your earliest posts, and they’re taken at face value.
Extraordinary claims should require extraordinary proof. I’ve been suckered by “Ask the …” threads in the past. It’s embarrassing to the participants, and a violation of trust. No more.
For that matter, was sentience ever established?
It was based on the fact that it was obvious trolling.
I get that you didn’t see it. I get that others didn’t see it. For those of us who have been paying attention for the past 15 or so years of internet culture, the entire fake death and resurrection thing was like neon, 15 foot tall writing on the wall.
You keep banging this drum of, "well, you could have been wrong! and then - you would have been wrong!!’ Well, we weren’t. If she had been innocent, she wouldn’t have been accused, because then she wouldn’t have been ***an obvious troll. ***
For god’s sake, let it go, dude.
Who is bitching about this chick’s banning? All I see is everyone yelling at each other saying everyone else is either gullible or an asshole.
Nobody is bitching that “she” has been banned.
Why don’t you go over to the “For the 203rd time, a newbie asks why no avatars” thread and drop the same astonishment there?
There is a good post by someone in the pit thread adressing this- there was a window of time where the circumstantial evidence of Umkay being a troll was already so overwhelming, but only to people with vast experience of encountering such trolls. But to many others without as much experience, it seemed callous to jump to conclusions without more, “harder” evidence.
I’m one of those who was fooled and only was skeptical after the fake death. But I believe that many people, based on their experience, were justified to make accusations long before I and others would have been. That some people were acting dickish and smug about it is irrelevant- the accusations themselves were in fact justified long before they may have seemed justified to others.
(removed double post)
This, thank you.
Let me remind all of our combatants that if you’re going to beat on one another there’s another forum for that and the name of that forum is NOT About This Message Board.
If this thread continues to be people yelling at one another we’ll close it. Or move it to the Pit, one.
If you have a problem with another poster – on this issue or any other – take it Pit-ways, please.
I’m sure I’ve used the term “kablooey” somewhere in the past out there in internetland. Guess I must be this same person as well. :rolleyes:
Then again, I’ve never said “KWIM” and don’t even have a clue what that stands for (nor do I care, so nobody tell me) so maybe I’m not. 
I have, in the past, mistakenly thought someone here was someone I knew at another board. They had the same location, and both had a similar style of posting and liked to recommend the same book. Yet it turned out they weren’t the same person at all, and the one person had never even heard of SDMB before.
I’m not saying the mods/admins are wrong about these people being the same, I’m just saying I hope they had a hell of a lot more proof than using some of the same terms (and I’m sure they do have more, so they don’t need to respond to this post saying “oh we do” or anything of the type)
Is there a better search function for members or something, because I’m not having any trouble using the existing search function as a mere guest. (Of course, google sometimes can turn up better results, I’m aware of that option as well)