[QUOTE=badchad]
Also I would like add that those who are describing my behavior as all that stuff, come from a group from whom a disproportionate number who are “self admittedly” (as that term is being used most frequently at this time) irrational.
PS. Thanks for the kind words Ogre.
[/QUOTE]
Sure. Just don’t go making a chump out of me.
[QUOTE=Arnold Winkelried]
From the I thought the only thing forbidden was personal insults, not the insulting of “public” figures.
[/QUOTE]
Trolling is also illegal. Shit like calling Jesus a cunt is trolling just like if I called Obama a “N-word”.
I just do not get why badchad isn’t banned. He went far over the line with his behavior, then after much grumbling from the trenches he was given a slap on the wrist. He has since returned and continued the exact same behavior. He even brags about his harrassment of Polycarp here in post #83.
It even looks like he admitted being a sock during his suspension:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8353744#post8353744
*“It was that easy when I was suspended. I’d bet money it would be just as easy if I get banned.
*”
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
Trolling is also illegal. Shit like calling Jesus a cunt is trolling just like if I called Obama a “N-word”.
[/QUOTE]
If that were true you would have said the “C-word”, instead of “cunt”. So I guess it’s clear to both of us it’s not quite equivalent.
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
It even looks like he admitted being a sock during his suspension:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8353744#post8353744
*“It was that easy when I was suspended. I’d bet money it would be just as easy if I get banned.
*”
[/QUOTE]
You are a stupid fuck DrDeth, it only looks like I was able to read the board while I was suspended. Which is exactly what I said I did. Why on earth would you say it looks like I admitted to being a sock?
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
Trolling is also illegal. Shit like calling Jesus a cunt is trolling just like if I called Obama a “N-word”
[/quote]
So why are you feeding a troll?
Bullshit. You are a fucking liar. This is deliberately misleading. He was explicitly referring to reading the boards, not posting. You don’t need an account to do that.
[QUOTE=Cisco]
So why are you feeding a troll?
Bullshit. You are a fucking liar. This is deliberately misleading. He was explicitly referring to reading the boards, not posting. You don’t need an account to do that.
[/QUOTE]
Not against the rules to feed trolls.
Not the way I read it. Clearly you read it differently.
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
Not the way I read it. Clearly you read it differently.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Cisco reads it correctly. Just like I wrote it.
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
Not against the rules to feed trolls.
Not the way I read it. Clearly you read it differently.
[/QUOTE]
You clearly need better reading skills.
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
Not the way I read it. Clearly you read it differently.
[/QUOTE]
Whatever point you’re trying to make would be much better served if you didn’t have to blatantly lie to make it.
[QUOTE=Ogre]
This is an old argument, and one which fails simply because this is not the real world. People who come to the Dope should not expect to be given a philosophical pass. All is fair game.
I see what you’re thinking here, but the premise is flawed. There is no universal agreement on whether his behavior is awful/idiotic/whatever.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not saying anything should get a “philosophical pass.” I’m saying that, no matter how subjective it can be, we DO have the “Don’t be a jerk.” rule. Somehow, somewhere, that must’ve been applicable because we’ve seen people banned for reasons other than being a sock or deliberate troll. Since that’s been the case, wouldn’t everyone agree that apparently something constitutes being a jerk? And that’s whether or not there is a “universal” standard, just one that the mods have agreed upon before.
[QUOTE=CarnalK]
Hey, I just brainstormed! Maybe we should ban all the posters who have admitted to getting arrested or fired. Also, the people who WOULD be fired if we sent their boss a link. Obviously, in real life, they are jerks. Who wants them around here?!
[/QUOTE]
And hey, I just brainstormed too and understand that if that behavior is considered across the line in real life, I’m not sure why it doesn’t apply online. Also, for the billionth time, I’m talking about the specific actions of one poster that falls under the umbrella of breaking a rule instituted here on the board. I’ve yet to say that I wanted to see anyone banned, but I’d love for more cracking down on egregious acts when possible. Kinda like the ‘no big deal’ (in an overall context) it is to move a thread, warn someone for hijacking, not allowing personal attacks in GD, joke threads in the pit or any questions in GQ that can’t be answered factually. What’s so wrong about that? It’s not censure because anyone can rock along freely and still do the things I mention above and deal with the consequences. If bc wished to persist in things that can get him warned, why again would that be different than the others? Or is it not acceptable to have that happen over just being a jerk?
[QUOTE=badchad]
Ask Polycarp if he thinks my arguments are stupid and weak.
[/QUOTE]
They are. As well as lacking in logic.
[QUOTE=Quiddity Glomfuster]
They are. As well as lacking in logic.
[/QUOTE]
Your not Polycarp
QG, I get the impression if you were in charge, you would ban the whole Pit. :dubious:
[QUOTE=badchad]
Also I would like add that those who are describing my behavior as all that stuff, come from a group from whom a disproportionate number who are “self admittedly” (as that term is being used most frequently at this time) irrational.
[/QUOTE]
This is a lie. Given your obvious use of “irrational” to indicate theists of some sort, the reality is that there is no disproportionate participation by theists among those who condemn you–a position shared equally by a very alrge number of atheists.
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
This is a lie. Given your obvious use of “irrational” to indicate theists of some sort, the reality is that there is no disproportionate participation by theists among those who condemn you–a position shared equally by a very alrge number of atheists.
[/QUOTE]
And an agnostic or two. 
[QUOTE=faithfool]
And an agnostic or two.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, I don’t know about that.
[QUOTE=Klaatu]
QG, I get the impression if you were in charge, you would ban the whole Pit. :dubious:
[/QUOTE]
Notice I just pitted badchad. I know it’s late but it’s not that hard to grok.
[QUOTE=Quiddity Glomfuster]
Notice I just pitted badchad. I know it’s late but it’s not that hard to grok.
[/QUOTE]
That doesn’t count. You have not hurled flaming insults, willy nilly ad homs, or cussed like a sailor. Plus, chad is always being pitted.
You must start a Pit thread yourself with all of the above-mentioned requirements.
I do however hold out hope for you.
Grok that.
[QUOTE=Klaatu]
That doesn’t count. You have not hurled flaming insults, willy nilly ad homs, or cussed like a sailor.
[/QUOTE]
I try to be logical. Most of those things aren’t. I also don’t waste my time and energy getting frustrated to the point of fury over - well, pretty much anything. Life is too short. I am angry about what Bush & Co. have wrought but plenty of other people do a spectacular job of pitting all those sinners thoroughly so I sit back and enjoy the vicarious brain-purge. Jon Stewart, the Dope’s Pit, and Mark Morford are my catharsis in that regard.
Come on, you can’t summon up the vitriol for one good “Dammit, this shit is fucked up!” Pit rant? Come over to the dark side, you might like it. Rather cathartic actually.