So would anyone object

[Beer Sponge]

You should be humble Gob, you're Welsh!

[Gob]

I know, I do try, but it's so difficult to maintain when this board is full of Americans.

[Beer Sponge]

True, we need more Canadian content here!

[Miles]

I will not be one to question Strop's integrity. Over the years we have gone from adversaries to friends over his anti American views which he finally realized were anti American government rather than anti Americans. I know him to be rather impetuous and tenacious and his manner can be sometimes, well, reactionary. That said I still maintain any sort of restrictions are a slippery ride to places we may not really want to go. I still think in the long run the membership would be the best solution to the problem.

I will watch with great interest how this situation plays out and trust Strop to make a fair and honest decision.

[Gob]

Thanks Miles!

[quaddriver]

[I don't know that I have seen Quad troll anyone, I can see that he follows the prime directive here.

...

Bravo for stating the obvious. As I have always responded to these accusatory posts - simply show it. No one has ever.

In this thread as well in fact. Gob stated I said something. I have never talked to Gob in person, on phone or via mail so I had to have said it here.

If you read the string of posts Andrew recently quoted about me, it was me asking the same of an accuser: show me the evidence.

I stand by my assertion: Gobs idea (and Hens) of trolling is disagreeing with one of their proclamation and proving them wrong. How dare I.

[Sean]

So answer me this if you can Quad...

Why do you want to be banned?

[quaddriver]

So answer me this if you can Quad...

Why do you want to be banned?

When did I say that? I merely agreed with him: go ahead, do it. The deconstruction of his integrity is complete. Banning, is just getting the after dinner mint.

Like it or not, he proved the 3 people who do not post here, right, especially one admin who locked horns with his wife stating explicitly the reasons she would never hand over the keys.

".....if you want to test a mans character, give him power"

There was a reason I once told Gwen I'd give her a job where I am. Its a small exclusive group, but it is nonetheless a group.

But alas, Im still waiting for ANY answer to ANY of the posts I ever made here of simply 'show the evidence'. That no one else has ever chimed in "yeah, where is it...." what is one to make of that?

[Sean]

That nobody gives a fuck about your attempted martyrdon and incessant bleating perhaps?

[quaddriver]

That nobody gives a fuck about your attempted martyrdon and incessant bleating perhaps?

what is so martyrish about insisting people be honest? Is it THAT much of a foreign concept for the non-americans here?

If you dont care, then you dont care. but like I have also insisted, that sets up the difference between 'here' and reality.

[Sean]

So answer me this if you can Quad...

Why do you want to be banned?

When did I say that? I merely agreed with him: go ahead, do it.

now will you please get on with the banning.

This is a quote from you posted two days ago. That's not an agreement, it's a request.

But alas, Im still waiting for ANY answer to ANY of the posts I ever made here of simply 'show the evidence'. That no one else has ever chimed in "yeah, where is it...." what is one to make of that?

Well, now that I have 'shown the evidence' would you be so kind as to answer my question:

Why do you want to be banned Quad?

[Joe Guy]

what is so martyrish about insisting people be honest? Is it THAT much of a foreign concept for the non-americans here?

If you dont care, then you dont care. but like I have also insisted, that sets up the difference between 'here' and reality.

Hey quad!

In the real world - the one in which Timmy is not your boss - most people here who pay any attention to what you write - see you as one of the most dishonest people who has ever posted here.

You make outrageous claims and not only can't support them, you are often exposed as an outright liar.

However, I'm strongly opposed to a suspension of any amount of time for anyone. The 'ignore' feature that many argued for (but not me) should be sufficient.

If quad wants to continue to be the fool, let him - or don't read his posts.

Besides, his motivation for posting here has always been to get himself banned and then claim that he was right - about something?

The only people that should be banned are the spammers.

Use the ignore feature. If that doesn't work for you, then you must really not want to ignore them.

The reason is that - we come here for - above all - to argue.

If that's really why we're here - Why would you ban or ignore people you can argue with?

[Sean]

That's fair enough Miles but I've said it before and I'll say it again: It's easy to tell somebody to ignore that type of constant harassment when it's not happening to you. It's not so easy to do when you are the one subjected to the harassment. It's even more difficult when you have a vested interest in the board that is being undermined by certain posters.

That's some pretty weak sauce, Sean. No one forces you to read anyone else's blather. And if you do, so what? Do you really care what a troll on the internet says? Do you think no one else can evaluate such comments for what they are? And if you really MUST respond, don't you think that some eyerolling would be enough? Doesn't doing anything more simply validate the offensive remarks and gratify the offender by showing your buttons have been pushed?

With all due respect Sue, and at the risk of repeating myself once again...

It's easy to tell somebody to ignore that type of constant harassment when it's not happening to you.

You may see that as weak, that is your prerogative of course. I honestly don't think that you would be able to respond to the same treatment with some eyerolling and nothing more. I sincerely hope you never have to find out whether or not you could.
Are those who are targeted not supposed to stand up for themselves? If somebody attacks me I attack right back. I'm not running for Gandhi here. I don't believe that anybody should be reasonably expected to tolerate the kind of crap that our admins have been subjected to lately.

Here's a thought though. Maybe if others didn't stand on the sidelines and condone the baiting it might be possible to put a stop to it...

[Sean]

A page or so back Sean asked me if I had a solution to the trolling problem. Perhaps I have. Way back when on the DAF there was a poster who was so disruptive that his name coined a phrase, 'russing'. Everyone simply ignored him completely and he finally gave up and went away on his own. It does work. If you feed a troll they are fat and happy, if you starve one they find somewhere else get what they want/need.

I agree with Guin, free speech is not free from consequences. The best response may well be to ignore the trolls there is nothing to lose and much to gain from that.

Miles, see my post to Sue above...

[Miles]

Sean,If in RL someone slanders or libels you you have an obligation to respond, here on the other hand you have the choice to ignore them. Why, because this is a community where some of the patricipants are figments of their imaginatins. They proport themselves to be something they are not. They are able to be what they would like to be in RL but can't manage.
Strong, forceful, asertive and rude because if they did someone may just hurt them.

Allowing them to annoy you is just there way of gaining an edge and feeling surperior. It is my opinion that they have needs that can olny be supported by baiting and getting a response.































rs

[Sean]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one Miles. Otherwise I'd only be trotting out the old "It's easy to say..." line ad nauseum.

I'm beginning to wish though that I hadn't talked Strop out of banning them immediately.


Damn my pert buttocks!



ETA: Of course I should have used the word 'suspending' rather than 'banning' above. We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that nobody is being threatened with a ban, rather a two week suspension.

[Miles]

Well Sean, we have had our disagreements in the past and I certainly respect you views. I will always respect you opinions as I value you as a responsible member of this community. I agree that we can always agree to disagree.

[Sean]

I concur Miles.

[loCAtek]

A number of people have told me via PM that I should have just gone ahead and suspended Lo and Quaddy for the two weeks, as no one would particularly care about their exclusion for that period, and no one would miss their destructive effect on the board, and we would still be having the same debate.

Did that number exceed those who publicly objected? Honestly?

I'd ask people again, please see Lo's reaction to this over the past few days. No reflection, no acceptance of responsibility for her actions despite people accepting that she is out of order, no let up in her stupid spamming.

I'd ask people again, please see Gob's reaction to this over the past few days. No reflection, no acceptance of responsibility for his actions despite people accepting that he is out of order, no let up in his stupid spamming.

[Jarlaxle]

to a two week suspension for Lo and Quaddy?

Yes, unless one of both of them posted inappropriate (illegal) material or private personal information.