Was the GeorgeJetson thread deleted?

I was just reading one of those threads in the Pit where the OP is so jam-packed with hateful bigotry, that you just know it’s gonna be fun (until of course it’s locked and the OP banned).

I figured I’d get in on the action and reply, but when I tried I got a “you do not have permission to access this” or something. So I went back to the Pit index, and magically, the thread was gone. Now you do not dream up bigotry of this magnitude, so I’m pretty sure it really happened.

Still, as offensive as it was, I see no reason why it would have been deleted. What’s up?

The same thing happened with a screed by **yourmother ** about, um, I guess Americans in general. Disappeared as I was drafting my scathing reply.

I was surprised to see the thread disappear, although neither surprised nor unhappy to see the asshat banned. The guy’s post stank like a fart in a spacesuit, but it’s not as though he was advocating that gays should be shot and turned into soap and lampshades. Still, I’m not planning on mourning.

I didn’t see those threads, and I can’t speak for the mods, but generally when a thread is deleted in its entirety, the OP was

(a) a troll, and most likely a returning troll; or

(b) a spammer.

In either case, it’s probably best just to go about one’s business, and not give them any further attention.

Oh, definitely a shit-stirrer – his first post, in the Pit, and aggressively offensive.

No loss, and I have stored in my memory banks the clever one-liner I posted, for future use. I’m sure it will come in handy sooner or later. :smiley:

But should such a thread be deleted? Bigotry exists. By deleting any record of it, it seems like an attempt to simply pretend it never happened. Is this fighting ignorance?

For the sake of completeness in the search for truth, it seems more beneficial to keep such stuff available for all to read, both the ignorant hateful bigotry, and the responses it generates.

I won’t miss it terribly, but something about this just feels so Fahrenheit 451 IMHO.

Anyway, glad you got to hold onto your zinger ETF for another day. May it be used wisely.

Damn, I got a cold soda and rushed through some work files for that one.

I also amused myself by asking if the poster’s real name should be Fred Flintstone. Of course, all subsequent posters would have quoted me and put a :smiley: in their response.


I hear you Philster

I hope you got to see my “HizBoi L Roi” comment. When their first album goes platinum I’m sure the smilies will fly my way.

I see your point, but IMO we’ve got quite a… er, shitload of examples in other threads and their links. This thread to me came across more as a troll looking for some fun, and Og knows we already have plenty of those in the archives as well.

I’m storing it in my smartass file for the day when the well of inspiration runs dry.


Yes, Master, I will use my powers only for good.


It wasn’t simply bigotry. It was a troll. And as a general rule, we DO remove troll posts and threads started by trolls. Trolls desire attention, and keeping the thread open and in view would have given the troll attention. Even keeping the closed thread in view would have given the troll the satisfaction of reading responses.

Besides, anyone surfing the web can find plenty of instances of bigotry. I direct you to the comics of Jack Chick, or the rantings of Fred Phelps. We don’t really need to have examples of such things on our site, however.


What exactly is a “troll”? Is this just a term for a pointless instigator or something? I’ve seen people called “trolls” in other forums, but sometimes they were just people who persistently bad-mouthed something everybody else liked (for instance, a guy who posts repeatedly about how Macs suck and PCs are great in a Mac forum). In the latter case, it seemed more like “troll” was synonymous with “one who holds widely unpopular views and takes on the roll of gadlfy”.

Well, a mod may come in soon with a more official definition, but you were generally correct the first time (“pointless instigator”). A troll comes on a message board simply to disrupt it.

Unfortunately you were also correct in the latter part of your post. Sometimes the word “troll” is flung at a poster, unfairly IMHO, who has stuck to a minority opinion, though they likely are less than tactful in the way they go about arguing it. They may argue something foolish, become frustrated that they can’t seem to sway the crowd, and then resort to poor debating tactics which leads them to appear “trollish”, though their initial intent was never simply to disrupt things.

Loopydude: We have plenty of respected gadflies around here. Look in Great Debates to see them in action: They defend their views against all comers, even if they’re the only ones standing on that side of the debate. They don’t give up and they don’t flag in their convictions. They can find cites and they can argue with logic, or else they wouldn’t still be here.

We respect gadflies like that.

Trolls, on the other hand, don’t believe in what they’re spouting. They simply stir shit to see the reactions, and they will take any position because they aren’t interested in the debate, merely the reactions to the debate. They don’t give good cites and they are allergic to logic.

Trolls don’t last long around here.

Of course, some gadflies are jerks. Collounsbury, a poster who has since been banned, was a gadfly who was also a jerk a bit too often for his own good. He was intelligent and could debate with the best, but he couldn’t get a grip on his attitude. Hence, a banning.

You ask, the Staff answers.

To further clarify the distinction: A gadfly would praise PCs on Mac boards and PC boards alike, while a troll would praise Macs on the PC board and PCs on the Mac board. The troll doesn’t care about the issue itself, he just wants attention. Which is why the mods will generally delete threads like the one mentioned if they come from trolls, while they’ll usually leave the threads of genuine bigots in place.