Can we have higher standards than “They blowed up real good!!”?
And I’d prefer one where bigots weren’t allowed free play. Because almost all of your “interesting” posters were bigots of one stripe or another - racists, misogynists, often both and more.
“Diversity of opinion” here seems to equal bigotry. Hell no, we don’t want them back.
And “thin skins” is some disingenuous bullshit when used to refer to women, POCs, other minorities and their allies not wanting to put up with bigoted trolls.
So … report them.
The explosions were the best part of Mythbusters - I’m happy with a standard that allows them.
That is not a “standard”-That is a desperate plea for attention.
One thing about this place is that it attracts quirky and unconventional people. It’s like the Star Wars Cantina or the Island of Misfit toys. But even if someone has personality quirks, they can’t be so disruptive that they overwhelm the culture of the place. I agree that they made the place more interesting, but they also added more chaos. Sometimes they added so much chaos that it made the place overall worse.
I think that’s sometimes the yin and yang of interesting people. One reason they’re interesting is because they aren’t just another generic person. They are innovative and inventive in ways that stand out. But sometimes that gets expressed in ways that rub people the wrong way. I don’t know that they can always tone it down but still preserve that thing that makes them unique. Sometimes people in entertainment are like that. For instance, Stanley Kubrick made some great movies, but he sounds like a jerk to work with. But if he wasn’t a jerk on set, maybe his movies wouldn’t be as good. I enjoy watching his movies, but I wouldn’t want to work for him. I wouldn’t be surprised that if he was here, he’d rub people the wrong way with his discussions in CS and get banned. The board would lose an interesting member, but if he was too disruptive and overwhelmed all the discussions, then it’s probably better for the board that he’s not here.
Counterpoint - they did not. They made it less interesting, by driving away the people who actually were interesting. You can’t seriously tell me you think shodan was more interesting than Una_Persson ?
You mean “giant fabulists”?
Not just “giant”, but “giant, losing, unoriginal, BORING fabulists.”
If there were any chance a troll could be interesting, they might survive here. But all the bannees were BO-RING. Dullards in wit and wisdom, jerking the same boring chains, acting out in the same predictable ways, BO-RING.
Ain’t nobody got time for that. Banned they are, and banned they stay.
We have plenty of interesting people here, with a range of views.
People do not cease to be interesting when they don’t pick fights and disrespect other people. Just the opposite.
The banned poster i sometimes miss is zpg zealot. She earned her ban and i don’t think the board ought to tolerate posters who do what she did.
if you want to be reminded why she was banned
She bragged about her skill in using the n-word to hurt people. It’s hard to imagine a clearer case of “hate speech” than that.
But when she wasn’t being vile and hateful, she had a very different perspective from … Pretty much anyone I’ve met.
We lost more by Una Perrson leaving than from any of the banned posters, right, by a large margin.
And there are a lot on people of this board that throw out allegations of bigotry, trolling, etc. because someone doesn’t hold the same opinion they do. (or even for just being a Republican.) Immediate case on point, I don’t think any of the posters I listed were trolls, defining a troll as a person who makes a post in a thread with the sole purpose of disrupting the thread. Disagreement <> trolling. For that matter, bigotry <> trolling.
Furthermore, you just referred to my post as “disingenuous bullshit”. That’s not very nice. Good. I’m going to tell you you’re wrong, you’re going to tell me I’m wrong, maybe one of us will win the argument; probably not but we’ll give each other things to think about, and possibly be interesting to people reading our disagreement. I greatly prefer that to threads where the same opinion is uttered over and over, repeating the same sentiments of earlier threads with almost exactly the same theme.
Why would I do that? I’m the one advocating allowing controversial posters. I’d be a hypocrite if I reported someone for being a jerk just because their jerkiness was aimed at me.
No, it’s an enjoyment of spectacle. Think of it in terms of contact sport. You can have a friendly game where both teams are trying to avoid injuries and allowing the other team to score without putting up an physical defence. Other than individual flairs of brilliance, it’s boring. It’s a lot more interesting when opposing teams are fighting tooth and nail and dealing violent blows against their opponents.
That sounds a lot like “I’ve got my lawn chair, beer and popcorn-Let’s you and him fight!”.
You mean like Shodan who literally admitted to doing that?
Yeah. It is clear some posters follow others in order to refute, argue or report.
Yeah, "why report a poster you agree with? ".
FYI there is a whole lot of internet outside this message board.
Saying that the listed posters were the same is ridiculous. I don’t think any of the five had similar sets of opinions. They may have been jerks, but none of them were stupid jerks and at least a couple were unique sources of information and perspective. Not boring to anyone with an open mind.
I’m not disagreeing with you.
If he did, I missed it. I remember that he stated he was using his Regards, Shodan as a way of annoying SDMB posters who didn’t like him. He meant it as a “Fuck You” to those posters. But he also did the Regards, Shodan more or less 100% of the time, even if he was agreeing with someone. I believe he had thousands of posts and know many were on point to the conversations of the thread he was participating in. And from what I can recall, he wasn’t banned from being a troll.
Having said that, I’m not going to discuss individuals further. I answered a question that was on-topic to the thread. I think it would be off-topic to debate each individual’s worthiness for their banning.
Very few people here hold the same opinions as me - I’m not liberal, or atheist, or in favour of free speech, or many of the other traits most of the board subscribes to. Doesn’t make me call those people "bigots’
I call racists, homophobes, transphobes, misogynists bigots, though. Because they are. And that includes almost every poster you listed.
Openly posting your bigotry in public, on a non-bigot-majority board, is.
You didn’t specify who they were jerks to. Just that they were jerks. I wasn’t accusing you of hypocrisy, just inaction.
And I don’t believe they are jerks. I believe they’re not jerks, I believe you know they’re not jerks, and that’s why you don’t report them.
But if they are, and you don’t report them, you don’t get to use their existence versus those who are reported as some kind of indication of board or moderator bias, as you were insinuating. The only bias here is yours towards inaction.
He was banned for blatant misogyny in a political discussion. That’s trolling.
Given the individuals you chose, that’s a good thing. I mean, picking Shodan, of all people to use as an example of who to bring back…
If your side can’t make the case for particular individuals as worthy of reinstatement, the general case is even less supported.
You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.
If you are a misogynist and post misogynistic stuff that you believe- you are not a troll.
Unless your definition of “troll” is 'someone I do not agree with".