Doc’s latest missive reminds me a lot of Liberal’s exercises in logic with a side of stream of consciousness.
Can we just save the time and ban him now?
Dan, why did you leave out the first part of my quote, noted above? It’s very important to the clarification of my meaning and intentions! Why did you leave that out?
You have, very conveniently, provided me with three examples of the “type of responses” to which I refer above, and you have done so in a distinctly “typical and predictable manner.“
First, you have attempted to misrepresent my intentions by very selectively choosing only part of a quote to respond to. Although, I can’t see how saying that I’m going to point certain things out would be a cause for the banning of myself or any other member.
Second, you attempt to rally other posters to your own cause, and in an extreme manner, by implying that there is some “we” around here of which I, at least, am not a part, and from which you think I should be permanently excluded. You can pretend to create and maintain your little cliques all you like, but the only real “we” around here is all of us. You need to remember that.
Third, you take on the role of a moderator. They are the ones who determine bannings, not you nor any other member, “Charter” or otherwise. Why don’t you just apply for the job and see if they deem you fit for inclusion? Please let me know how it turns out.
And you manage to pack all this into so little space! Awe-inspiring, in a way.
I would ask, drmark, what you hope to accomplish with your posts. Are you just fighting folks for the sheer joy of the fight? Are you trying to persuade the person you’re talking to that they’re in the wrong? Are you trying to persuade the audience that you’re right and your opponents are wrong?
I’m not sure what your goal is, but I’m not sure that you’re sure, either. It might be worth reading over the thread, considering what you’re trying to accomplish, consider whether you’re succeeding, and considering whether you could change your posting style in a way that would increase your success.
Daniel
drmark2000: You do appear to be getting more enjoyment out of responding to the dumber posts. Is this what you set out to do or has it just developed as the thread has moved along? 
Jim
The exchange of information.
There can be some “sheer joy of the fight,” but that’s not my aim.
No, not really.
Nope.
Clearly.
The exchange of information.
I’ve read over the thread, several times. I’m delighted. Exchange of information accomplished, with full success. No need to change my “posting style.” Everything is working out fine.
Does that mean you’re finished?
I’ve responded to a lot of posts, here and in other threads. If a disproportionate percentage of posts in this thread are what you would consider “dumber,” that’s your judgement, not mine.
Not necessarily.
Which means that you’re getting information from us, and you’re giving information to us?
I’d be interested, first, in hearing what significant information you’ve gotten from us. Keep in mind that you began the thread expressing serious contempt for other Dopers, so information that confirms this doesn’t strike me as especially significant.
Second, I’m probably your most sympathetic reader in this thread. I’ve gotten zero significant information from you; the only significant information I’ve gotten is about you. Remember how I said that I’d form my opinion of you based on your conduct in this thread? So far, it’s not a positive opinion. Rather, I’m forming a picture of you as someone who is not at all self-reflective, who enjoys expressing contempt about other people, and who has very poor listening skills.
Unless I see a change in you, this will be my last post in this therad: you just haven’t shown me anything interesting, and I’m not likely to give you further chances after this last one.
Daniel
Yes, that would be an adequate definition of “exchange of information.”
I have received, repeatedly, absolute and irrefutable confirmation of the observations I made in the OP, and which you deem as expressing “serious contempt.” It’s not contempt; it‘s an unwelcome cornering and a demand to do better, by me. And I think it is the most significant information that must be passed on these boards. Without ridding ourselves of these phenomenon, we have very little in the way of a useful board, at least on other than strictly practical and factual matters.
Um, I don’t think so. Aeschines in post #59 was not only sympathetic but supportive, and this was much appreciated by me. His response took guts. I wish he’d add some more input.
If you have gleaned “zero significant information” from this thread, that is your responsibility, not mine. Maybe you don’t want to take in the significant information that is there. Such would be understandable. Reality can be unpleasant.
Hey, I’m a psychologist. My listening skills are very well refined. So, I’ve listened, reported back, and there’s been an awfully intense reaction from some. What does that say about them?
And then you would complete the process to which I refer in my OP. Look, if you’re going to ignore me from now on, why not do so in the most disreputable way you can, and use your “Ignore Poster” feature?
Why are all you people responding to this condescending prick? Seriously, what are you trying to accomplish? I’m really curious, since most of you are intelligent enough to realize that responding to this sanctimonious asshole only gives him the attention he craves, and you must know that you’re not going to get any real response from him.
(And yes I’m aware of the irony of my posting in this thread in order to denounce it. So you don’t have to point that out.) 
I’m done now; I just had to establish that your assessment was right.
Daniel
This is interesting. Now we get a poster referring to other posters as “you,” rather than “we.” Same intent; different approach. Cleverly done! But aren’t you being condescending, to the other posters, I mean?
Again with the “you,” and more than thrice in a single paragraph, now! And a pretty brief paragraph, at that.
“Sanctimonious asshole?” Why, you’re being condescending, again !
Where is the irony here? You have every right to say what you want in these threads, without any threat of having your thoughts declared ironic, and having it pointed out.
Denounce away, m’boy. Denounce and denounce and denounce.
So, you had to rely on someone else’s “assessment” in order to make your final determination. Lazy, lazy, lazy. Typical.
What’s wrong with that? Is there something wrong with that? Why, why, why is that something wrong to do? I don’t understand that. Why are you pointing the finger at other people all the time? Why don’t you point the finger at yourself? Do a little more reading, maybe? Some time in court - maybe that would be effective for you!
To be fair, there is something wrong with it: namely, it’s the exact opposite of what I said I was doing :). But if it amuses him to believe otherwise, there’s little I can do to prevent his amusement.
Daniel
You, my friend, have been whooshed. I was illustrating how the good dr’s typical Pit posts echo Martin Short’s “Nathan Thurm” schtick. 
Indeed I have. D’oh!
Daniel
Oh, that is spot on, and too funny! Well done.