@meric@n wom@n

[The Hen]

The inevitable Board decline.

Frankly, we aren't big enough to lose members. We have done nothing to increase membership either.

[BoSoxGal]

Have I called anyone nasty names since I came back?

I hope that @meric@nwom@n returns. We have never got along well on this board or at The Other Place, but she was quite nice to me when I was ill from a potentially fatal medical condition (a condition which will never go away but attacks only occasionally).

Did you utter a word of apology for the vicious personal attacks you made which had nothing to do with the substance of the ongoing debate?

No.

You acted like an ass of the worst sort, resorting to ugly name-calling and baseless smearing when your assertions were challenged, and you do not even have the requisite character to own up to your behavior by issuing the apologies that are deserved.

Why should it matter much that you've momentarily refrained from name-calling, when the record establishes the likelihood of you resorting to such tactics in future?

[Lord Jim]

I am more than a bit dismayed by the defense/tolerance of Andrew D's late actions by some here, including some posters I previously greatly admired. That he has been outrageous in his attacks is plain as the nose on anyone's face; I don't understand the tolerance for that sort of incivility.

I'd like to comment on this...

I too have been very disheartened by those who actually came to Andrew's defense (except of course for Quad; I would have expected nothing else from a man of his character) I think they saw what they were doing as defending some specific point rather than his general appalling behavior, (behavior which continues to this very day) but they should have looked at the broader picture of his words and actions. (And also as I noted before, their comments were not constructive, in that Andrew used those comments to try and legitimize his behavior, and it also provided encouragement to him to continue on with it...in fact when he came back, he used one of those comments as a prop to launch a new round of attacks)


But as far as people who have "tolerated" his behavior go, (if by "tolerate" you mean not say anything to condemn it) I'm perfectly understanding of that. A lot folks don't want to involve themselves in condemning a vicious bully if that means that as a result they themselves are likely to become the targets of the vicious bully....

I understand that...I also think that Andrew's sudden lunge into full troll mode left some folks puzzled and surprised and not sure of how to respond to it. I'm sure the hope was, (and I think this is what was reflected in all the "welcome back" posts) that this was a temporary abberation on his part....

And not the new defining quality of his participation here, which at this point is what it has clearly become.

[Andrew D]

I have invited several friends to post here. One did, I think, but he does not enjoy debate, so he rapidly lost interest. Another friend -- a police officer, by the way -- checked it out and said to me "I just don't have anything to say to these people." Others have expressed no inclination at all to post here.

We are an eccentric group. Unmoderated boards are not for everyone.

[BoSoxGal]

We are an eccentric group. Unmoderated boards are not for everyone.

That may be so, but until your actions of the past week+, this board survived more than a year without that kind of ugly, vicious and entirely unnecessary personal attacking - because the rest of us were able to restrain ourselves out of courtesy. And, I suspect, a good measure of actual affection for one another.

I hope you are proud of your exercise of 'free speech' on this unmoderated board, and of what it has wrought.

[Andrew D]

I think that you overestimate my influence. I am not really that powerful. Anyone who contemplates leaving here because of me can simply put me on "ignore" (or "foe" or whatever). That person will never have to suffer the torment of seeing anything that I write. Someone who chooses to stop conversing with all of us has bigger issues with this board than just what I write.

[BoSoxGal]

Deflection.

You acted the insufferable ass. You should apologize to @w for the malicious things you said to and about her. You should apologize to Scooter not only for the despicable act of posting his name, but also for attacking him for not choosing to spend his time here posting on topics that you deemed he should.

As for me; I do have you on ignore and for the most part am ignoring you. You most certainly owe me an apology as well, but I have no hope that you will provide one, and it would not mean much, anyway, if it were as insincere as your current posts continue to be.

[Crackpot]

He did apologise to Scooter (a couple threads down in this forum)

[BoSoxGal]

Only for posting his name.

[Andrew D]

When is @meric@nwom@n going to apologize for having accused me of chronically abusing my wife? Or for portraying her as weak, shallow, and/or stupid enough to stay for twenty years with a chronically abusive man?

[Gob]

I can clear up a few points here.

I was requested to, and did, deactivate @-W's account. I was asked to, and did, do this with "no fanfare" as she didn't want it to become an issue. (Not even Hen was informed,.)

The reason she wanted the account deactivated, rather than just putting people on foe, is that the temptation to post when being attacked or vilified would be too tempting, (many of us know that temptation.)

I complied with her wishes fully, in the hope that she would return.

I will also respect her request and not post her reasons for leaving, (anyone PM'ng me to try to find out why she left will get my displeasure fully expressed to them.)

I would like her back, though I do not agree with all of her views, and I do not consider her a friend in the same way I do some of you here.

I do hope her friends here can return her to the fold, I hope that those here who disagree with her can be polite enough not to interfere in that or try to prevent it.

I think we should be aware of people trying to manipulate this situation to their own destructive ends.

Nuff said?

[Crackpot]

I will also respect her request and not post her reasons for leaving, (anyone PM'ng me to try to find out why she left will get my displeasure fully expressed to them.)

Now that sounds like an invitation

[The Hen]

Well, she is a far stronger woman than I'll ever be.

[Sean]

@W and I haven't always seen eye to eye... in fact it's fair to say that we've had a couple of full on 'disagreements' but I have a lot of respect for her as a poster. Her honesty and take-no-prisoners style will be missed and I do hope she decides to return.

It's typical of her that she would leave with out fanfare. There are a few members here who we could afford to lose (and a few whose loss would benefit the board greatly) but @W isn't one of them.

[SisterMaryFellatio]

Mustard mitt I didnt know she had gone either with is bad bad on my part.


Come back @W....us sisters of Plan B have to stick together.

[BoSoxGal]

Come back @W....us sisters of Plan B have to stick together.

Ditto.

[The Hen]

Thritto.

[loCAtek]

I'm sure she'll follow her own advice;

Oh give it up BSG ya know you love all the abuse and annoyance too much to go for good.

[Jarlaxle]

Mustard mitt I didnt know she had gone either with is bad bad on my part.

I agree with the sentiment...though the words in italics are a new one on me.

Thritto.

(Err, I don't think that's actually a word, Hen.)

[BoSoxGal]

I sure hope so, loCA.